|
Post Game Comments: Part 3.2
Individual Players: Town/SK
Thrawn: Good active play. As we discussed, focus more on mafia-mentality (as opposed to simple inconsistencies) in your scum-hunting. You almost pulled it out in the end. I'd comment more, but we exchanged soooooo many PM's.
Dandel Ion: Good active play, especially as a replacement. As marv mentioned earlier, your play was a bit unfocused. You were too caught up in trying to theorize scumteams - take down scum one at a time, and then make connections when they flip red. Tunnel vision is a really good thing as town - tunnel one player, decide if they're mafia/town, then move onto the next target. You'll get a lot more done that way until you start to become good enough to nail scumteams in a post =D
Sonic Death Monkey: Good D1 play, and I wish we could have seen your play in the later days. You're very well spoken and logical, and you got killed N1 for a reason. Good stuff, and hopefully you'll stay alive longer next time xD
Sharrant: You're well-spoken and calm, which are huge assets to have as a townie. You have a taste for making "list" posts of players which I'd advise against. You don't have to make your opinions known on every single player in the game - listing your top scumread (or two) is enough unless requested otherwise. Focus more on questioning your top scumreads and scummy players.
Everyone Else: If you want specific comments, PM me, but overall, just waaaay too lurky. None of you were nearly active enough for the town to succeed. Make sure you post more and be open with your thoughts. Remember, it's not enough to pop in the thread and vote someone - you need to convince everyone that you're town and hunt for scum yourself!
|
Post Game Comments: Part 4
I wanted to post an exchange that Thrawn and I had from coaching PM's. I think it illustrates very well the importance of finding mafia-mentality when scumhunting. Focusing on inconsistencies, without considering alternative explanations, can lead to some flawed cases.
If you object to this Thrawn, let me know and I'll take it down.
...pressure is good, but I think you need to give more thought to alternative explanations:
Here's what I see on atreides:
D1, Comes in after the vote deadline but before the flip to tell us all how he didn't like the drazak lynch. Feeling guilty because he's scum and so he tries to gain town cred 1? N1, Sonic and I both go after him for that, sonic gets nk'd and I get roleblocked 2. D2 he avoids drama concerning the main lynch candidates (here) and decides to safely cast his vote on me who had no chance of being lynched that day 3. N2 I FOS him and yet again I am roleblocked 4. D3 Debears votes for me, then atreides comes in and votes for me while trying to manipulate others into doing so 5. (kush who I think is town and could easily vote for me as I've been one of his main suspicions, and sharky who has shown that he really isn't capable of making his own reads)
1) This isn't a case of post-lynch guiltiness. You could argue that he's trying to distance himself from the lynch, but that can be townie or mafia. Both alignments have incentives to distance themselves from a bad lynch, be it ego or mafia-objectives.
2) Analyzing mafia NK's is a very bad idea. Plus, scum roleblocking you for going after Atreides makes no sense - it's not like you were acting like a blue role or anything. I'm surprised that you haven't considered that SDM jailed you (considering the last newbie game).
3) Interesting observation - mafia can distance themselves from townie lynches by attacking third parties. However, you need to consider his genuinity here. Read over his case against you again - is Atreides going after you because he think's you are mafia? How does his case look like, and does it show any townie traits (confirmation bias, etc.)?'
As a casual observation, why would Atreides go after you on D2 from a mafia-perspective?
4) Again irrelevant. Don't speculate on mafia roleblock actions. Mafia roleblocking you for attacking Atreides makes no sense. They could have role-blocked you for other reasons, but certainly not for attacking scum.
5) To be honest, this isn't scummy at all. "Manipulating others to vote" is a bit of spin-doctoring on your part. Atreides is just pushing his case, which can be done as mafia or as town. What you should be looking into is how he pushes the case. Is he loaded with confirmation bias (townie)? Is he soft-pushing your case (likely mafia)? How aggressive is he? How is his logic? Ask moar questions.
Conclusion:
I think you're suffering from a bit of confirmation bias on this one. You should pay more attention to alternative explanations for his actions. I know I told you to try and think about mafia-mentality more, but that doesn't mean you should spin every one of his actions to some mafia-motive. On another note, you also need to also take a look at your "townie" list - if you mislynch, it's game over, and you need to be damn sure that you have your townie-reads straight.
Also, you need to pay much more attention to concrete evidence, like voting patterns. You have two days worth of votes to look through. Look for people with scummy voting actions, or people pushing mafia objectives around the voting deadline. Compare people's votes with their cases and suspicions throughout the day. There's tons to sift-through.
|
|
|
no post whatever you want. the thing that made me originally click on debears was when at some point you were talking about various mafia tells and one of them was that town people are suspicious of everything and mafia aren't. I don't know when exactly you said that but as I was reading one of the mafia guides I came across something similar... remembered what you had said.... then I went OH SHIT DEBEARS IS SCUM
|
On September 26 2012 14:10 thrawn2112 wrote:
no post whatever you want. the thing that made me originally click on debears was when at some point you were talking about various mafia tells and one of them was that town people are suspicious of everything and mafia aren't. I don't know when exactly you said that but as I was reading one of the mafia guides I came across something similar... remembered what you had said.... then I went OH SHIT DEBEARS IS SCUM
Yeah this is actually a really important tell. Often, a lot of newer-townies get mislynched because they are suspicious of everyone and are not well-spoken. Behavior like this can be a huge town-tell with the right context, because these townies often post exactly what's on their mind and demonstrate a townie thought process.
On the other hand, people who are very confident in their reads for suspect reasoning can very well be scum, just like debears this game.
|
|
|
lol I recommend that everyone should have to read guides between their newbie games. I've noticed something happening in each of my games... there is often a dominating type of "scumhunting" that everyone in town starts using even tho it's not the best way. In this game it was talking about inconsistencies. (I did it a lot especially with arteides and remedy) But there is always something that somebody gets accused of... such as being defensive, having slight inconsistencies, and stuff like that which could be attributed to town or mafia. (especially since we're in newbie games) Once somebody makes a case saying "player X is scummy because he does Y" then another person makes the same type of accusation: "player Z is scummy because he does Y" and then the rest of the game is people searching for other people doing Y and everyone gets tunnel vision focusing on Y and they become oblivious to all the more reliable characteristics of mafia mentality. For mafia that's great. All you have to do is make cases based on people doing Y and it looks like you're scumhunting as well as anyone else... when in reality nobody is doing a great job of it.
|
And thanks hosts and coaches!
|
@thrawn
On September 26 2012 14:29 thrawn2112 wrote:
lol I recommend that everyone should have to read guides between their newbie games. I've noticed something happening in each of my games... there is often a dominating type of "scumhunting" that everyone in town starts using even tho it's not the best way. In this game it was talking about inconsistencies. (I did it a lot especially with arteides and remedy) But there is always something that somebody gets accused of... such as being defensive, having slight inconsistencies, and stuff like that which could be attributed to town or mafia. (especially since we're in newbie games) Once somebody makes a case saying "player X is scummy because he does Y" then another person makes the same type of accusation: "player Z is scummy because he does Y" and then the rest of the game is people searching for other people doing Y and everyone gets tunnel vision focusing on Y and they become oblivious to all the more reliable characteristics of mafia mentality. For mafia that's great. All you have to do is make cases based on people doing Y and it looks like you're scumhunting as well as anyone else... when in reality nobody is doing a great job of it.
This hit it right on the nail. Our whole game was inconsistencies lol.
|
lol it's happened in all my games. as the game progresses there is always one thing that people like to include in their cases more and more as the game continues until it reaches the point where reads get pretty awful. I guess it happens because A) everyone is a noob so they don't know exactly what to look for when catching scum and B) mafia pick up on it and start including it in their cases
|
Hapa wanna guess how many pms I sent you? The answer is: + Show Spoiler + Thanks for responding to those I know it must have been a lot of work. You may as well have played in this game for all the words you had to write about it.
|
On September 26 2012 15:06 thrawn2112 wrote:
lol it's happened in all my games. as the game progresses there is always one thing that people like to include in their cases more and more as the game continues until it reaches the point where reads get pretty awful. I guess it happens because A) everyone is a noob so they don't know exactly what to look for when catching scum and B) mafia pick up on it and start including it in their cases
I think this is pretty spot on.
I almost JK you n1. You were townie to me, so good job on that. I still think JK anyone except for Sharrant would be pretty bad. At first I thought Dandel made a decent point for JK thrawn, but now I'm pretty decided it was a weak argument.
Still not decided on who the best n1 NK was from scum's perspective. I was pretty sure they'd kill thrawn, Sharrant or me though.
|
I've been following the thread from the start. I tried to come up with good arguments against possible scum, but didn't really see much that convinced me. Sometime before he started making his "cases", I realized that Jakob's posts didn't seem to contain much valuable content. According to the guides I read, this is something that can definitely be mafia-motivated. Interestingly, Hapa doesn't really mention this specifically in his analysis. He only seems to focus on the cases themselves and what Jakob did after posting the cases. He actually seems to suggest that some of the cases were good enough for him to push them. I didn't really study the cases closely, they seemed to contain as little valuable content as his earlier posts (not much useful analysis). Maybe I overlooked something because I was so focused on him being scum.
There is one other post in particular that I thought was interesting. If KillingTime can comment on this, it'd be great:
+ Show Spoiler +On September 19 2012 22:41 KillingTime wrote:As far as "My" case (not really "my" case - but my vote) on Debears goes I still prefer him slightly over sharrant. see Debears as more scummy than sharrant because he led with stupid play and then tried to explain it away, whereas on my reading the Sharrant case seems more "bad towny" than a strong scum read, he started trying to help town and then made a dumb mistake. Show nested quote +
also why are so many people already voting sharron? His play is really stupid with the roleclaim call, but stupid play doesn't make you mafia. you think first time mafia would really be so confidently retarded like that?
Isn't sharron's roleclaim call as stupid as my defense of thrawn early on? You could make the same argument for me.
So for me it is kind of similar - but yours looks worse. That said, this game still has too many lurkers - I am not sure at the moment whether debears is strong enough to justify not shooting one of them, hopefully I won't need to make that decision because they will all come in with plenty of useful posts (fat chance).
The thing I focused on initially, is that there's some unconventional wording in this post. When I hear the word "lynch", I don't really associate it with shooting (even though that's one lynching method). I'm thinking more about hanging. Yet Killing seems to use shooting as a synonym for lynching. I asked myself if this was intentional, so I'd like his input on this. I was thinking that it might be some sort of breadcrumb or hint about his role (but I don't see how it can hint at DT). Now I see a motivation for him to push for the lurkers. Since he's DT, he had probably planned to investigate Debears at night, so lynching a lurker would give him an easy target for his investigation. How ironic that this plan got foiled by the framer. Because of the way D1 had transpired, I guess it's very understandable that the mafia chose to frame Debears.
|
On September 26 2012 12:59 thrawn2112 wrote:
lol hapa, by the time I made that case, all town thought I was scum. and the basis of my case was that I'm town so.......
dandel lon when I claimed vig did you still think I was sk?
Yes, I was pretty sure you were.
But it didn't matter, we needed a KP role to still win this, or for people to switch to debears. Both would've been fine.
Unfortunately, Killing trusts his DT check blindly, and the rest of town was not even there...
On September 26 2012 16:29 Sonic Death Monkey wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2012 15:06 thrawn2112 wrote:
lol it's happened in all my games. as the game progresses there is always one thing that people like to include in their cases more and more as the game continues until it reaches the point where reads get pretty awful. I guess it happens because A) everyone is a noob so they don't know exactly what to look for when catching scum and B) mafia pick up on it and start including it in their cases I think this is pretty spot on. I almost JK you n1. You were townie to me, so good job on that. I still think JK anyone except for Sharrant would be pretty bad. At first I thought Dandel made a decent point for JK thrawn, but now I'm pretty decided it was a weak argument. Still not decided on who the best n1 NK was from scum's perspective. I was pretty sure they'd kill thrawn, Sharrant or me though.
Hm, I said that before I knew Sharrant was JK'd, when thrawn was the only one that claimed.
But I still think that usually, it would be bad play to JK a mason in that situation. I guess it didn't matter since you can't JK yourself, but I think my logic is solid:
Scum won't kill just 1/2 of the masons if there is still a JK/medic in the game. He will camp the confirmed town, forcing scum to shoot relatively blindly for the JK/medic instead of the confirmed town, all the while leaving a confirmed town in the game.
Which would usually spell disaster for the scumteam, but the confirmed town this game was Sharky, so in the end, I guess it really didn't matter.
But there was no real way for you to know sharky would be useless. I think your decision was wrong. It practically did not matter, because scum shot you (bad luck there), but it COULD have mattered and I stand by my opinion that you did not play your nightaction as well as you could have.
Eh, as I said, not really applicable in THIS very game, but remember for the next time you roll JK 
|
United Kingdom36156 Posts
Thanks go to my co-hosts, and to Hapahauli for providing a large chunk of analysis there, good job.
Lots of comments I could make, but for now I disagree strongly with this:
On September 26 2012 19:56 Dandel Ion wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2012 12:59 thrawn2112 wrote:
lol hapa, by the time I made that case, all town thought I was scum. and the basis of my case was that I'm town so.......
dandel lon when I claimed vig did you still think I was sk? Yes, I was pretty sure you were. But it didn't matter, we needed a KP role to still win this, or for people to switch to debears. Both would've been fine. Unfortunately, Killing trusts his DT check blindly, and the rest of town was not even there... Show nested quote +On September 26 2012 16:29 Sonic Death Monkey wrote:On September 26 2012 15:06 thrawn2112 wrote:
lol it's happened in all my games. as the game progresses there is always one thing that people like to include in their cases more and more as the game continues until it reaches the point where reads get pretty awful. I guess it happens because A) everyone is a noob so they don't know exactly what to look for when catching scum and B) mafia pick up on it and start including it in their cases I think this is pretty spot on. I almost JK you n1. You were townie to me, so good job on that. I still think JK anyone except for Sharrant would be pretty bad. At first I thought Dandel made a decent point for JK thrawn, but now I'm pretty decided it was a weak argument. Still not decided on who the best n1 NK was from scum's perspective. I was pretty sure they'd kill thrawn, Sharrant or me though. Hm, I said that before I knew Sharrant was JK'd, when thrawn was the only one that claimed. But I still think that usually, it would be bad play to JK a mason in that situation. I guess it didn't matter since you can't JK yourself, but I think my logic is solid: Scum won't kill just 1/2 of the masons if there is still a JK/medic in the game. He will camp the confirmed town, forcing scum to shoot relatively blindly for the JK/medic instead of the confirmed town, all the while leaving a confirmed town in the game. Which would usually spell disaster for the scumteam, but the confirmed town this game was Sharky, so in the end, I guess it really didn't matter. But there was no real way for you to know sharky would be useless. I think your decision was wrong. It practically did not matter, because scum shot you (bad luck there), but it COULD have mattered and I stand by my opinion that you did not play your nightaction as well as you could have. Eh, as I said, not really applicable in THIS very game, but remember for the next time you roll JK
I thought his Night 1 JK was absolutely the right action. What happens if mafia actually DO hit Sharrant, and you just let them kill the only useful confirmed townie?
There are several threads of this through my own games that I've played here. My first and most 'ouch' memory was from Magic Mini - I had almost singlehandedly pushed through a scum lynch day 2, and then I called out 2 of the remaining 3 scum during Night 2. I was the only viable protection target. Except for the doctor thought "they'll never hit him knowing I'll protect him" and protected some random townie. Mafia took the chance shooting me at night, and town ended up losing the game.
Basically protect your assets. Which SDM did.
Edit: just while I'm thinking about it, there was also quite a bit of totally incorrect setup speculation going on, about numbers of mafia, SK role, number of blues etc. It seemed to hurt town at some stages because there were incorrect assumptions. Never assume about the setup unless you know for sure.
|
|
|
On September 26 2012 20:13 marvellosity wrote:Thanks go to my co-hosts, and to Hapahauli for providing a large chunk of analysis there, good job. Lots of comments I could make, but for now I disagree strongly with this: Show nested quote +On September 26 2012 19:56 Dandel Ion wrote:On September 26 2012 12:59 thrawn2112 wrote:
lol hapa, by the time I made that case, all town thought I was scum. and the basis of my case was that I'm town so.......
dandel lon when I claimed vig did you still think I was sk? Yes, I was pretty sure you were. But it didn't matter, we needed a KP role to still win this, or for people to switch to debears. Both would've been fine. Unfortunately, Killing trusts his DT check blindly, and the rest of town was not even there... On September 26 2012 16:29 Sonic Death Monkey wrote:On September 26 2012 15:06 thrawn2112 wrote:
lol it's happened in all my games. as the game progresses there is always one thing that people like to include in their cases more and more as the game continues until it reaches the point where reads get pretty awful. I guess it happens because A) everyone is a noob so they don't know exactly what to look for when catching scum and B) mafia pick up on it and start including it in their cases I think this is pretty spot on. I almost JK you n1. You were townie to me, so good job on that. I still think JK anyone except for Sharrant would be pretty bad. At first I thought Dandel made a decent point for JK thrawn, but now I'm pretty decided it was a weak argument. Still not decided on who the best n1 NK was from scum's perspective. I was pretty sure they'd kill thrawn, Sharrant or me though. Hm, I said that before I knew Sharrant was JK'd, when thrawn was the only one that claimed. But I still think that usually, it would be bad play to JK a mason in that situation. I guess it didn't matter since you can't JK yourself, but I think my logic is solid: Scum won't kill just 1/2 of the masons if there is still a JK/medic in the game. He will camp the confirmed town, forcing scum to shoot relatively blindly for the JK/medic instead of the confirmed town, all the while leaving a confirmed town in the game. Which would usually spell disaster for the scumteam, but the confirmed town this game was Sharky, so in the end, I guess it really didn't matter. But there was no real way for you to know sharky would be useless. I think your decision was wrong. It practically did not matter, because scum shot you (bad luck there), but it COULD have mattered and I stand by my opinion that you did not play your nightaction as well as you could have. Eh, as I said, not really applicable in THIS very game, but remember for the next time you roll JK I thought his Night 1 JK was absolutely the right action. What happens if mafia actually DO hit Sharrant, and you just let them kill the only useful confirmed townie? There are several threads of this through my own games that I've played here. My first and most 'ouch' memory was from Magic Mini - I had almost singlehandedly pushed through a scum lynch day 2, and then I called out 2 of the remaining 3 scum during Night 2. I was the only viable protection target. Except for the doctor thought "they'll never hit him knowing I'll protect him" and protected some random townie. Mafia took the chance shooting me at night, and town ended up losing the game. Basically protect your assets. Which SDM did. Edit: just while I'm thinking about it, there was also quite a bit of totally incorrect setup speculation going on, about numbers of mafia, SK role, number of blues etc. It seemed to hurt town at some stages because there were incorrect assumptions. Never assume about the setup unless you know for sure.
It was okay in THIS game, because there were no townier townies.
I'm saying usually scum would avoid hitting just one of the masons (unless they have 2 KP to kill both or something), and if both masons are even approx. equally useful, there's no knowing which one will get hit.
I'd have thought that's pretty logical, but apparantly not...
|
United Kingdom36156 Posts
On September 26 2012 20:41 Dandel Ion wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2012 20:13 marvellosity wrote:Thanks go to my co-hosts, and to Hapahauli for providing a large chunk of analysis there, good job. Lots of comments I could make, but for now I disagree strongly with this: On September 26 2012 19:56 Dandel Ion wrote:On September 26 2012 12:59 thrawn2112 wrote:
lol hapa, by the time I made that case, all town thought I was scum. and the basis of my case was that I'm town so.......
dandel lon when I claimed vig did you still think I was sk? Yes, I was pretty sure you were. But it didn't matter, we needed a KP role to still win this, or for people to switch to debears. Both would've been fine. Unfortunately, Killing trusts his DT check blindly, and the rest of town was not even there... On September 26 2012 16:29 Sonic Death Monkey wrote:On September 26 2012 15:06 thrawn2112 wrote:
lol it's happened in all my games. as the game progresses there is always one thing that people like to include in their cases more and more as the game continues until it reaches the point where reads get pretty awful. I guess it happens because A) everyone is a noob so they don't know exactly what to look for when catching scum and B) mafia pick up on it and start including it in their cases I think this is pretty spot on. I almost JK you n1. You were townie to me, so good job on that. I still think JK anyone except for Sharrant would be pretty bad. At first I thought Dandel made a decent point for JK thrawn, but now I'm pretty decided it was a weak argument. Still not decided on who the best n1 NK was from scum's perspective. I was pretty sure they'd kill thrawn, Sharrant or me though. Hm, I said that before I knew Sharrant was JK'd, when thrawn was the only one that claimed. But I still think that usually, it would be bad play to JK a mason in that situation. I guess it didn't matter since you can't JK yourself, but I think my logic is solid: Scum won't kill just 1/2 of the masons if there is still a JK/medic in the game. He will camp the confirmed town, forcing scum to shoot relatively blindly for the JK/medic instead of the confirmed town, all the while leaving a confirmed town in the game. Which would usually spell disaster for the scumteam, but the confirmed town this game was Sharky, so in the end, I guess it really didn't matter. But there was no real way for you to know sharky would be useless. I think your decision was wrong. It practically did not matter, because scum shot you (bad luck there), but it COULD have mattered and I stand by my opinion that you did not play your nightaction as well as you could have. Eh, as I said, not really applicable in THIS very game, but remember for the next time you roll JK I thought his Night 1 JK was absolutely the right action. What happens if mafia actually DO hit Sharrant, and you just let them kill the only useful confirmed townie? There are several threads of this through my own games that I've played here. My first and most 'ouch' memory was from Magic Mini - I had almost singlehandedly pushed through a scum lynch day 2, and then I called out 2 of the remaining 3 scum during Night 2. I was the only viable protection target. Except for the doctor thought "they'll never hit him knowing I'll protect him" and protected some random townie. Mafia took the chance shooting me at night, and town ended up losing the game. Basically protect your assets. Which SDM did. Edit: just while I'm thinking about it, there was also quite a bit of totally incorrect setup speculation going on, about numbers of mafia, SK role, number of blues etc. It seemed to hurt town at some stages because there were incorrect assumptions. Never assume about the setup unless you know for sure. It was okay in THIS game, because there were no townier townies. I'm saying usually scum would avoid hitting just one of the masons (unless they have 2 KP to kill both or something), and if both masons are even approx. equally useful, there's no knowing which one will get hit. I'd have thought that's pretty logical, but apparantly not...
Sounds logical, but bear in mind a few things:
1) Scum do not know at the time there is a protective role;
2) In my experience (I could cite countless examples) mafia will often go for high priority targets, even with the risk that they will be protected
3) If you're not protecting the obvious target, you're taking a stab in the dark guessing who the mafia WILL hit, and chances are you probably won't get a successful save off anyay.
4) The risk of losing Sharrant, someone you know to be townie AND useful, is too high to NOT protect him
|
On September 26 2012 20:56 marvellosity wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2012 20:41 Dandel Ion wrote:On September 26 2012 20:13 marvellosity wrote:Thanks go to my co-hosts, and to Hapahauli for providing a large chunk of analysis there, good job. Lots of comments I could make, but for now I disagree strongly with this: On September 26 2012 19:56 Dandel Ion wrote:On September 26 2012 12:59 thrawn2112 wrote:
lol hapa, by the time I made that case, all town thought I was scum. and the basis of my case was that I'm town so.......
dandel lon when I claimed vig did you still think I was sk? Yes, I was pretty sure you were. But it didn't matter, we needed a KP role to still win this, or for people to switch to debears. Both would've been fine. Unfortunately, Killing trusts his DT check blindly, and the rest of town was not even there... On September 26 2012 16:29 Sonic Death Monkey wrote:On September 26 2012 15:06 thrawn2112 wrote:
lol it's happened in all my games. as the game progresses there is always one thing that people like to include in their cases more and more as the game continues until it reaches the point where reads get pretty awful. I guess it happens because A) everyone is a noob so they don't know exactly what to look for when catching scum and B) mafia pick up on it and start including it in their cases I think this is pretty spot on. I almost JK you n1. You were townie to me, so good job on that. I still think JK anyone except for Sharrant would be pretty bad. At first I thought Dandel made a decent point for JK thrawn, but now I'm pretty decided it was a weak argument. Still not decided on who the best n1 NK was from scum's perspective. I was pretty sure they'd kill thrawn, Sharrant or me though. Hm, I said that before I knew Sharrant was JK'd, when thrawn was the only one that claimed. But I still think that usually, it would be bad play to JK a mason in that situation. I guess it didn't matter since you can't JK yourself, but I think my logic is solid: Scum won't kill just 1/2 of the masons if there is still a JK/medic in the game. He will camp the confirmed town, forcing scum to shoot relatively blindly for the JK/medic instead of the confirmed town, all the while leaving a confirmed town in the game. Which would usually spell disaster for the scumteam, but the confirmed town this game was Sharky, so in the end, I guess it really didn't matter. But there was no real way for you to know sharky would be useless. I think your decision was wrong. It practically did not matter, because scum shot you (bad luck there), but it COULD have mattered and I stand by my opinion that you did not play your nightaction as well as you could have. Eh, as I said, not really applicable in THIS very game, but remember for the next time you roll JK I thought his Night 1 JK was absolutely the right action. What happens if mafia actually DO hit Sharrant, and you just let them kill the only useful confirmed townie? There are several threads of this through my own games that I've played here. My first and most 'ouch' memory was from Magic Mini - I had almost singlehandedly pushed through a scum lynch day 2, and then I called out 2 of the remaining 3 scum during Night 2. I was the only viable protection target. Except for the doctor thought "they'll never hit him knowing I'll protect him" and protected some random townie. Mafia took the chance shooting me at night, and town ended up losing the game. Basically protect your assets. Which SDM did. Edit: just while I'm thinking about it, there was also quite a bit of totally incorrect setup speculation going on, about numbers of mafia, SK role, number of blues etc. It seemed to hurt town at some stages because there were incorrect assumptions. Never assume about the setup unless you know for sure. It was okay in THIS game, because there were no townier townies. I'm saying usually scum would avoid hitting just one of the masons (unless they have 2 KP to kill both or something), and if both masons are even approx. equally useful, there's no knowing which one will get hit. I'd have thought that's pretty logical, but apparantly not... Sounds logical, but bear in mind a few things: 1) Scum do not know at the time there is a protective role; 2) In my experience (I could cite countless examples) mafia will often go for high priority targets, even with the risk that they will be protected 3) If you're not protecting the obvious target, you're taking a stab in the dark guessing who the mafia WILL hit, and chances are you probably won't get a successful save off anyay. 4) The risk of losing Sharrant, someone you know to be townie AND useful, is too high to NOT protect him
But scum didn't shoot sharrant, so I was right!
h4h4h4
|
United Kingdom36156 Posts
Well, that's one of the bitches about being the highest priority target and having the protective role 
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
