Newbie 1768: Party Mafia - Game over!

[tojam2]

@Revan: We don't want to be in a position where we've lynched a town IC and the first reason we suspected them is that they are IC and most capable of appearing Towny when they're scum.

[Titus]

also Titus if you're going to make this point, I'd like you to directly address EL's response to me in

89

82 and Agent Sparkles in 140. Those posts read genuine to me.

sorry, this should have been 82, not 89

No. EL seems awfully obsessed with talking about you and busses there.

mixing up post numbers left and right

[Titus]

^^My response wound up in quote. EL just seems far too obsessed with not throwing GL under the bus.

As for you JaeReed, awkward =/= town. Many caught scum look for reasons to attack a read. That's what she was doing by saying we're too far along for gut. Her ISO isn't focused on determining alignment of anyone. There's a litter of ADD scattershot pushes.

[bowdown]

I guess I'm content with your answers Revan. Was seeing if you'd respond differently to the "I don't like being sheeoed" part of 143 in Jae. Still bugged that you didn't notice nobody responded to Jae's questions when you said they didn't follow up.

[bowdown]

tojam, what are your reads/thoughts on where we lunch?

[Revan]

If you guys need some suggestions, I know many good restaurants for lunch.

[bowdown]

@Jae According to what I understand about this game, I find your comments re Lemon wagon to be scummy. You don't seem very confident in your TR on her, I'm certainly not, and you've previously stated that L-2/1 is a great way to force people to prove themselves. Please explain to me why I'm wrong.

I somehow find myself agreeing with bowdown's earlier assessment that pressure on Lemon won't do much good. Regardless of alignment I think votes piling on her will just cause her to flail more, which isn't helpful if she's town.

Come on, there's a huge difference between piling votes on someone at the start of D1 for pressure and then later in the day as lynch time nears. Plus we have some unpressured Lemon hunting to assess now. Piling votes on anyone isn't helpful if they're town, and is very helpful if they're scum. I don't like how you don't even consider that possibility.

I think I want Jae or Revan lynched.

[Revan]

Bowdown let's lynch Jae so then you know I'm town when they flip red. It will make the rest of the game a lot easier for you.

[JaeReed]

In that context (voting for pressure) it's not helpful. Voting to lynch is a different ballgame.

[bowdown]

Right, and those votes earlier were much more for pressure (e.g. Titus's naked vote). Votes now on Lemon are votes to lynch.

[bowdown]

Thinking about it Revan. 287 really bugs me.

[JaeReed]

Yup, which is why I want them off. I think Lemon is awkward town. My response to nancy was in the context of her saying pressuring Lemon by putting her at L1/2 gives a chance to better read her.

[SirCakez]

Votecount 1.7

EccentricLemon (2) - Titus, nancy
Revan (2) - bowdown, GuiltyLion
tojam2 (1) - EccentricLemon
JaeReed (1) - Revan
nancy (1) - tojam2

Not voting (2) - Agent Sparkles, JaeReed

With 9 alive, it takes 5 votes to lynch someone.

nancy is V/LA through Sunday.
EccentricLemon is V/LA through Friday.

(expired on 2017-01-16 11:14:00) remain until day end

[bowdown]

Just to make sure I have everything timelines right on this:

Jae says (somewhere, I can't find it actually, but Nancy refers to it in 224) that putting people at L-2/1 is a good way to get a read on them.

Nancy wants to know why you're against running Lemon up in 224.

You agree with my way earlier reasoning that lemon pressure will actually hinder her hunting and getting a read. You also have a townread on lemon in that ridiculously long post replying to Nancy's ridiculously long post.

You are defending a townread from lynch, not protecting from pressure.

Think I got it. That is fine with me. The last sentence is still bugging me:

Regardless of alignment I think votes piling on her will just cause her to flail more, which isn't helpful if she's town.

Really couldn't give you a good reason. It feels slippy/more knowledgeable about lemons alignment. But I can't actually think through/articulate why.

[JaeReed]

Hmm... I'll try to rephrase that last bit then.

I believe Lemon is probably best read through her scumhunting attempts rather than her reactions under pressure, because I get the feeling from all her posts so far that she'll flail under heavy pressure (which tends to be read as scummy) rather than necessarily reveal her true alignment.

[JaeReed]

Partially, but I am also naked voting to see if I can trigger more of the funny speech patterns from Lemon.

If you want more funny speech patterns then why aren't you trying to actively engage with them?

@Titus I don't believe you answered me on this.

[JaeReed]

To bowdown: Explain why you followed Titus. (implies you think he could be partnered with Titus or scum sheeping Titus since she told him to do it)

Think I said this before, but to see what happened. I wanted to try najed voting (kind of) - learned a little but honestly not a big fan of the strategy. I do want to point out Revans soft defense of Lemon in case either flips scum (202, 204).

Quick thing: I find naked voting is best done without stating anything prior about your scumread on the person. What you're doing when you're naked voting is ideally looking for who will prod you on it, and who will go back and try to understand what you saw that prompted you into a vote. It's good for seeing if others are looking at the game in the same mindset as you are (some will say the more in sync you are the more likely you are to have the same alignment, though that's not necessarily always true, it can be a good sign).

So the way it was done there isn't quite how it's usually done. Though people will still call it out as a naked vote and call it scummy in most games (which amounts to lazy scumhunting, really). When you see a naked vote it's usually best to look back and see why. Has the person being voted said something recently that could have triggered that response? Did someone put forth a case that could have convinced the naked voter? Did they say something previously in their own posts that indicated they were likely to eventually place their vote there? Once you've done that is when you ask questions "Did you vote because of x thing? What's scummy about that?" "So you agree with y's case?" "I've looked and can't see any reason why you would be voting for z at this time, can you elaborate?" then judge if that person is full of shit/pushing an agenda or genuinely attempting to gamesolve based off their answers and your understanding of the gamestate to that point.

[JaeReed]

Jae, why is looking for scumslips a scumtell? 250 and GL

I'm just gonna answer you with a quote from a previous game because I'm lazy like that.

Dewy pointing out your "scum-slip" pings me majorly. Generally scum like to justify their votes with scum-slips that aren't really slips, so that when someone flips town they can fall back on that. Zyf's reaction to it was better (especially since it was following Dewy pointing it out, so he's already influenced by that). Your list having you in the scum pile in context was meant to be an obvious chuck off at your reads not matching LQ's (since you went with the "my reads are the antithesis of yours" comment).

Basically, by focusing on wording and potential slips scum feel like they can fall back on "but they scumslipped!" since scum

generally

like to have a solid case to push that won't backfire on them. Scum like to be justified in their pushes. That's not to say all scum act that way, or that town don't also end up pushing on scumslips. For example, here scum!GL tries to deflect me off his buddy by offering me a townie thinking about whether something was a scum slip, and here as scum I push on someone pushing my buddy as having slipped.

It depends on the type of slip being pushed, and the type of player the person is, though. Along with how it's being pushed.

[EccentricLemon]

^^My response wound up in quote. EL just seems far too obsessed with not throwing GL under the bus.

I have time for one really quick post

Titus: We're way past that. Last time that was mentioned was #82, and we're in the 300s now. Just seems a bit weird that you're pushing something that I dropped before the game gained momentum. Is there really nothing else that tells you that I could be scum?

nancy: I'd like you to please explain why your vote on me was so definite when you said at the beginning of your post that you were ambiguous about me.

You all already voted me up right at the beginning of the game, unvoted, and then started voting me up again. Just pointing that out.

[nancy]

Mm, I don't think you're 'just pointing that out'. Implicit in that statement is the argument that it's unreasonable of people to vote you a second time. Your question to me is unanswerable because it doesn't make sense. My vote hasn't changed because no one has said anything to change my read. A vote is just a word in code. How you choose to interpret it is your call. Addressing it requires addressing the read that led to it. Why is it relevant that people voted you before the game gained momentum but not relevant how you behaved before the game gained momentum?

What is going on with Revan? Did he really just lie to Titus?

[JaeReed]

Did he really just lie to Titus?

What do you mean?

[JaeReed]

tojam hasn't provided me with any new evidence and even made a claim to a role, which was quite uncalled for. I personally can't say that that's convinced me of his innocence.

Town.

My question to Jae:
Why are you being so harsh with Revan when he seems to be exhibiting the same patterns of behavior as I am?
Your commentary was also really helpful, by the way. It helps me a lot to see how someone other than I interprets my posts.

Not quite. Revan is seeming at times to be trying to work from a stance rather than genuinely hunting. A good example of this is his push on me, for instance. It seems more like he went through my posts hoping for something he could jump on as evidenced by bowdown pointing out that my questions hadn't even been responded to, yet after being shown the flaws in his reasoning he doubled down on it being nonetheless scummy. He's coming in with a decidedly aggressive attitude and I get the feeling that he was anxious to stop scumreading Titus (the flip from Titus to bowdown to me).
After nancy's case on you and looking at your posts more, you're pushing less of an agenda, unlike Revan. Which makes it more likely that you're town.

Hopefully that makes sense.

[JaeReed]

So what's next here? Does PR cc now? Wait until tomorrow? Something else?

I'll actually answer this with some quotes from the first game I ever read on the site. Partially because I'm lazy. Note that since this was during a game the situation is slightly different to our own. How someone claims matters somewhat, too. Every game is different.

Spoiler: PR ramblings from Nachomamma8

As far as prioritizing scumreads go, you should always always always prioritize your strongest scumread over any others. The only time when you should be prioritizing someone based on threat level is if you have personal experience with someone (meaning that they could shoot you and drift through the rest of the game much easier); in most other cases, threat level is high on a player because you can't read them very well, which should make you less willing to lynch someone, not more.

(PR rambling starts here.)

Basic PR theory tends to change based on the situation you're in. In this setup specifically, if you're a cop and there are two scum alive, you're looking to target someone who is likely living to endgame. The idea behind that is forcing scum to kill people that they didn't plan on killing OR giving a town a useful confirmed innocent somewhere down the road. If you take this route and scum doesn't kill you or your innocent, it's probably a good idea to claim Day 2; it will confirm you as town and it will confirm your innocent as town meaning if you have two solid town reads then you outright win the game (a townblock of 4 players allows you to lynch the remaining 3 in 7p).

If you're a cop/tracker and there's one scum alive, investigate who the town is planning on lynching. Either you end the game outright, or you give people as much time to reevaluate as possible. If the scum that was lynched was a roleblocker, then you out your role and your result immediately, take the game to no lynch and continue doing so until the doctor is dead; this results in a win in a majority of scenarios.

If you're a tracker/jailkeeper and there's two scum alive, follow your heart. In a two man scum team, there is generally scum in a weak position and scum in a strong position. Scum in the strong position are less likely to be tracked but are a greater loss to the scumteam when they are tracked. Scum in the weak position are more likely to be tracked but are a smaller loss to the scumteam when they are tracked. If you don't see anyone go anywhere, it is not an innocent; their scumpartner could have been the player who submitted the kill.

That being said, don't ignore your results; if you track a really, really scummy player and they didn't go anywhere, then they might be town; usually when scum are dealing with terrible partners they make them submit the kill.

If you are a Jailkeeper, you also have the option to protect your strongest townread: it's usually easier to block a kill this way although the results are not as juicy as if you block a scummy player. However, just because there's no kill after you protected your strongest townread it doesn't mean innocent; your strongest townread could have been scum submitting the kill. Just because there's no kill after you blocked your strongest scumread doesn't mean guilty; sometimes scum makes strange kill choices.

If you are a Jailkeeper and there is one scum left, claim immediately; if there is a one-shot bulletproof in the setup, they should claim as well. If a one-shot bulletproof claims, block them overnight; if they are scum they will be unable to kill, which means that if you are shot that night they are confirmed town the next day and if you aren't they will be unable to win (sometimes scum will no kill in this situation, which means use your best judgment). If no one claims bulletproof, block whoever you want to overnight but claim your target before you do so; that way, if scum kill you, that person will become confirmed town.

Spoiler: Counterclaiming from Nachomamma8

And remember the handy dandy when to counterclaim!

If someone claims cop, everyone should wait for a one-shot bulletproof (if it exists) to counterclaim. If no one-shot bulletproof counterclaims, then cop/tracker/jailkeeper should counterclaim.

If someone claims tracker, cop/jailkeeper/tracker should counterclaim.

If someone claims jailkeeper, doctor gets the opportunity to counterclaim first, then cop/jailkeeper/tracker should counterclaim.

If someone claims doctor, wait for a doctor or one-shot bulletproof to claim first, then counterclaim if you are a jailkeeper.

If someone claims one-shot bulletproof, wait for a doctor or one-shot bulletproof to claim first, then counterclaim if you are a cop.

People claiming doctor/bulletproof and not getting counterclaimed doesn't make them town, so sometimes

it's better to lynch them even though they are claiming PR.

In this specific situation, if Fragger claimed doctor/bulletproof, I'd probably be for lynching him anyways.
If Fragger claims tracker/cop/jailkeeper I wouldn't believe him for a moment, but I'd happily lynch Occ in his place; we wouldn't have enough time for a counterclaim anyways and it would allow the tracker/cop/jailkeeper to possibly snag an extra innocent/block a kill and he wouldn't be able to win if Occ was his scumpartners anyways (although tracker counterclaiming here would be fine).

Thanks Jae, real easy way for scum to lynch me.

I'd like to see them try, honestly, considering I don't think GL is stupid enough to go for it regardless of alignment, and I'm certainly not going to vote you after that claim. Your behaviour matches up too well.

Take for example your entry into the game. As 1-shot bp (or doc) you know there's a tracker or jk (or cop) out there in a newbie game, and jumped to warn the other PR to not claim. Didn't make much sense at the time, but does now after the claim.

It's all relative to the content in the game.

[JaeReed]

Let's imagine a hypothetical scenario for a moment. Assume EccentricLemon is scum. JaeReed asks me to question my TR of EL and afterwards begins to post very actively. In the midst of this they put their first vote of the game on tojam2 with little to no justification (his worst crime at that point was basically not posting enough content), and post their reads list/tier. After intimating that their preference was for wagoning to pressure players (demonstrated in practice by their vote on tojam2), they claim, in rather uncertain terms, that in light of a newbie's post they believe EL may be Town (am I really meant to believe that I pointed things out to them that they hadn't already seen?), unvotes, expresses the opinion that we should not focus on Lemon, and suggests to me that a conflicted read is fine as a null read (sounds like great advice, but it also greatly serves their rescue of Lemon). Their previous hesitance to scumhunt is gone, they begin dispensing advice and towncred freely, and are quickly directing Town in directions away from Lemon.

So yes, right now I believe that JaeReed and EccentricLemon are scum partners. Take a look at 168 again, too, or previous examples of Jae ignoring people's questions when they're part of a scumhunting effort directed against them.

Hypothetical being me and EL as scum partners.
Why would I question your townread on EL rather than just agree in much the same manner that GL did? By asking about your townread I opened up my hypothetical partner in that case to you re-evaluating on them, with me knowing full well they're too newb to defend themselves effectively. It would be a lot better for me in that situation to allow the townreads to amass on my partner and push a hypothetical town Titus to a lynch since she was voting my partner.

Sometimes it takes a different perspective, and it's important to consider others perspectives because they might have picked up on something that you missed. That's not to say you should follow them over your own judgement, but yes, I looked at your post about EL, thought about your reasonings, pointed out the things I agreed/disagreed with in it, and ended up agreeing with your original assessment.

Also yes, I became more involved with the game after a week of soft directing on the basics of scumhunting and doing my own poking at certain things. I really don't believe there was a hesitance to scumhunt though. A hesitance to push and give reads too early, certainly, but not to scumhunt altogether.

If I've ignored questions it's more likely I just didn't remember they were asked or hadn't gotten around to catching up to that point yet. Feel free to quote at me if you think I missed something.

[Titus]

Right, and those votes earlier were much more for pressure (e.g. Titus's naked vote). Votes now on Lemon are votes to lynch.

I do not vote "for pressure" as a rule. My votes are to kill or in rare instances as a warning to change behavior.