Micro 918: Doggos Among Us [TOWN WIN]!

[clidd]

Good evening, i was reading the setup specifications and thinking about how my approach would be in this match, especially with the established peculiarities about the absence of the night phase, and the premature mechanical death attributed to mafia, in case of an incorrect lynch. This, of course, creates space for unusual strategies more focused on morning turnover. With that thought in mind, i understood the first post 4 as a message with three possible interpretations:

1-

Random joke

,

2-

Instinctive statement

,

3-

Divergence of attention

, where his partners receive a window to ''safe'' vote, drastically reducing the possibility of them falling under the ''mechanical death hammer'', which appears to be more likely, compared to other possibilities. This basically implies that are 2/3 potential scums in

Dsjstr

,

Hectic

and

Espeonage

, in theory. But would everyone outside the wagon share the same indecision ? Is it plausible ?

Also, i would like to discuss this paragraph that I found in

Mini Normal 2098

, post

41

, referring to

NorwegianboyEE

:

It’s cool, i’m a bit of a kamikaze town so i don’t really spend too much time attempting to clear myself as i do trying to attack others i perceive as scum. When i’m scum it’s ironically the opposite, where i do all i can to avoid being seen as suspicious and trying to stay on the good side of the town.

(viewtopic.php?f=94&t=80889)

What do you guys think of this statement ?

[clidd]

I have little experience on the forum, so if something sounds absurd, i'm open to corrections.

[clidd]

Good evening, i was reading the setup specifications and thinking about how my approach would be in this match, especially with the established peculiarities about the absence of the night phase, and the premature mechanical death attributed to mafia, in case of an incorrect lynch. This, of course, creates space for unusual strategies more focused on morning turnover. With that thought in mind, i understood the first post 4 as a message with three possible interpretations:

1-

Random joke

,

2-

Instinctive statement

,

3-

Divergence of attention

, where his partners receive a window to ''safe'' vote, drastically reducing the possibility of them falling under the ''mechanical death hammer'', which appears to be more likely, compared to other possibilities. This basically implies that are 2/3 potential scums in

Dsjstr

,

Hectic

and

Espeonage

, in theory. But would everyone outside the wagon share the same indecision ? Is it plausible ?

Also, i would like to discuss this paragraph that I found in

Mini Normal 2098

, post

41

, referring to

NorwegianboyEE

:

It’s cool, i’m a bit of a kamikaze town so i don’t really spend too much time attempting to clear myself as i do trying to attack others i perceive as scum. When i’m scum it’s ironically the opposite, where i do all i can to avoid being seen as suspicious and trying to stay on the good side of the town.

(viewtopic.php?f=94&t=80889)

What do you guys think of this statement ?

Lul, now

this

is a galaxy brain play. You're suggesting Norwee is a traitor signalling to his other traitor to vote him early so as to avoid being the hammer? I think the main problem with your theory is that you're assuming we're not going to leash the hammers, so the order of the votes on Norwee right now are irrelevant. I'm assuming we're going to try and discuss who we want the hammerer to be just as much as who we want the lynchee to be.

The self-meta from Norwee there is interesting; how did you come across it?

I thought of a possible scenario for a self-hammer and then wondered what the conditions would be for it to work correctly for both alignments. In this case, in my view, it is more likely to be used by scum than town, what made me formulate the theory above based on that initial read. There is a margin of imprecision, if im wrong about the first impression, that's why i would like to discuss this further.

[clidd]

Also, why do you think scum would go for the strategy of town hammering scum from the get go? They could potentially win today if town hammers town.

I believe it would be due to a healthier late game, where his partners, for pulling a wagon in a scum early, would have greater credibility as the game progressed. They would rely on the fact that, judging the natural disadvantage of losing a partner early in the game, there would be no logic for them to do. Evidently,

wifom

.

[clidd]

Also, why do you think scum would go for the strategy of town hammering scum from the get go? They could potentially win today if town hammers town.

I believe it would be due to a healthier late game, where his partners, for pulling a wagon in a scum early, would have greater credibility as the game progressed. They would rely on the fact that, judging the natural disadvantage of losing a partner early in the game, there would be no logic for them to do. Evidently,

wifom

.

I disagree, if a town member lynches a wolf today then they are confirmed to be town. That is the only time we can 100% confirm anyone in the game. That would be a huge disadvantage for the wolves late game. Thinking more about it we should never have someone at L-1 for D1 because if we are on a wolf they will just lynch themselves so we can't get that conformation.
UNVOTE:

Actually, i don't think a hammer here would confirm anyone as town, unless my theory about two scums already in the wagon is correct. In another scenario, hypothetically, considering wolf didn't die if he hammers partner, only town, they can bluff easily.

[clidd]

But i agree about the unvote, we have time to talk before engaging in the voting phase.

[clidd]

To my understanding for D1 if a wolf hammers then they die even if they are hammering a wolf, I meant that if someone hammers D1 and they don't die they have to be town. Am I understanding the rule correctly?

" Reminder for day 1, if a Townsmember is lynched and the last vote on them were of the Werewolf Faction (Traitor or Werewolf Goon), then they will commit suicide as well. Day 2 follows all conventions of the game. "

[clidd]

You’re making it sound like you think i play with a motive in mind when i roll scum. As opposed to just coasting. Come on now. I read on the rules that if scum hammers on day 1 they die. So i started joking about it. That’s the problem with everyone who scumreads me, they think i have some kind of master galaxy mind motive with my play. When really i’m just being me.

Not every action has a meticulously premeditated intention, but that doesn't mean it can't nurture a biased motivation, even if small. I believe that making jokes within a game that uses only the typed communication channel as the main source for the suggestive diagnosis of alignments is unusual, especially if you are expecting a flexible read from others. Basically, this suggests that we should, as a rule, correctly predict the comic content of a comment and differentiate it separately, even if the same content has already been used in other matches, by scum players.

@NorwegianboyEE

''

When really i’m just being me

''

- Based on what information can i confirm this ?

''

I'M WILLING TO HAMMER! DO YOU HEAR THAT? I AM WILLING TO HAMMER

''

- In our place, how would you rate this sporadic attitude, considering that it came from a player you don't know ?

[clidd]

To my understanding for D1 if a wolf hammers then they die even if they are hammering a wolf, I meant that if someone hammers D1 and they don't die they have to be town. Am I understanding the rule correctly?

" Reminder for day 1, if a Townsmember is lynched and the last vote on them were of the Werewolf Faction (Traitor or Werewolf Goon), then they will commit suicide as well. Day 2 follows all conventions of the game. "

My interpretation was that if anyone is hammered by a wolf then the wolf who hammered dies along with the player hammered, so if one of the traitors hammer the other traitor then both of them die. I think.

@Mod - is this correct?

If a wolf were to hammer another wolf day 1, then they wouldn’t die. It’s only for an innocent getting lynched by a wolf that would result in them dying along side them. Only for day one of course.

Hum. I would like to hear from

Doctor Drew

and

Dsjstr

about their reads, now that we have updated information.

[clidd]

What gives you that impression?

The fact that you latched on to one thing i did and then fawned over how it's TOTALLY scum indicative and pretty much kept that read (and your vote) for the rest of the day so far.
Where are the posts where you have been actively trying to figure out the meaning behind my post? After reading my first post you pretty much went: "YEP, you're scum now.", then called it a day and went to go grab lunch.
Where's the solving? Where's the questioning? Where's the logic?

Actually, you gave him a reason to vote. You cannot simply demand that he change a safe read and replace it with an inaccurate one, considering that there was no event, apart from your first post, which serves as a clue to possibly determine the alignment. The most viable option, if you aren't scum (unlikely, but possible), would be to interact with the other players, looking for more than one point of view. Something im looking to do now.

[clidd]

@

AaronFrost

In your opinion, hypothetically speaking, how should a traitor signal if he knew his partner, but did not know who the werewolf is ?

[clidd]

The fun thing is that people can't refuse to hammer if we decide on someone, since we just lynch that person instead and have the hammerer be the person we originally planned to lynch.

You seem to have significant experience in this type of play. Have you ever played a similar setup ? What would be the best town decision considering that we are in lylo and scum can bluff by hammering partner ?

[clidd]

Problem is we have brought attention to it so now we are all gonna be chilling until end of day where we are forced in to action.

If we hadn't called attention to that, we would have played the first day with incorrect information. Imagine a scenario which a player realizes this detail, talks to the mod through PV, gets confirmation, but do not reveal it to the public. What do you think would happen ?

''

if a town member lynches a wolf today then they are confirmed to be town

''

-

This false premise would be accepted as true.

[clidd]

What is ''meta dive'' ?

[clidd]

This one:

Also, i would like to discuss this paragraph that I found in Mini Normal 2098, post 41, referring to NorwegianboyEE:

It’s cool, i’m a bit of a kamikaze town so i don’t really spend too much time attempting to clear myself as i do trying to attack others i perceive as scum. When i’m scum it’s ironically the opposite, where i do all i can to avoid being seen as suspicious and trying to stay on the good side of the town.

(viewtopic.php?f=94&t=80889)

In that sense, yes. I believe that human behavior maintains a pattern over time, so it is safer to determine what kind of game you will demonstrate from what you have accomplished in past games.

[clidd]

Also in what way did my post "signal to other traitor"? I have no idea where that read came from. Makes no sense to me.

It would depend if your partner managed to interpret the exclamation as a divergence of attention, precisely to attract votes and prevent them from having to enter the situation of the "mechanical hammer of death ''. So you intentionally attract votes to allow your allies to escape this condition (which was proven to be wrong later).

[clidd]

Clidd is honestly giving me deja vu of a person i played with in a newbie recently.
He was scum btw.

If you are viewing a frame attempt, it will not pay for the effort invested. More questions ?

[clidd]

Also in what way did my post "signal to other traitor"? I have no idea where that read came from. Makes no sense to me.

It would depend if your partner managed to interpret the exclamation as a divergence of attention, precisely to attract votes and prevent them from having to enter the situation of the "mechanical hammer of death ''. So you intentionally attract votes to allow your allies to escape this condition (which was proven to be wrong later).

That's a stretch. Silly reasoning at it's finest.
You seem to be very convinced of me being scum already, as evidenced by the language you are using. Even though you brought up something i said more than 3 months ago as a quote to "discuss", you still are evidently leaning on my alignment as being one side over the other as can be gathered from excerpts of your previous posts. (Shown further below)
Your playstyle thus far has materialized itself drastically from what was shown earlier with your introduction and has now become solely the gathering of information on another slot and then using it as your basis for the town to get on your side and see me as a evident scum player to lynch. Instead of considering other sides of the issue, such as considering Hectic's play or any of the other players, you have quite clearly locked me out as a scummy player by page 4 and have since been trying to convince other players of my play being an issue. I'm wondering if during the time between these two spots of acting, you were reading the general vibe of the town as in favor of lynching me and therefore changed your read from an unsure and questioning tone in post 38 (considering multiple alternatives, open to discussion)

With that thought in mind, i understood the first post 4 as a message with three possible interpretations: 1- Random joke, 2- Instinctive statement, 3- Divergence of attention, where his partners receive a window to ''safe'' vote, drastically reducing the possibility of them falling under the ''mechanical death hammer'', which appears to be more likely, compared to other possibilities. This basically implies that are 2/3 potential scums in Dsjstr, Hectic and Espeonage, in theory. But would everyone outside the wagon share the same indecision ? Is it plausible ?

to becoming slightly more hostile by post 76. (Claiming it is very unlikely for me to not be scum. Belittling of target by emotive language. Suggesting what town!me: "would, or wouldn't do" and using it to draw a conclusion.)

The most viable option, if you aren't scum (unlikely, but possible), would be to interact with the other players, looking for more than one point of view. Something im looking to do now.

Also of interest is post 88

It would depend if your partner managed to interpret the exclamation as a divergence of attention, precisely to attract votes and prevent them from having to enter the situation of the "mechanical hammer of death ''. So you intentionally attract votes to allow your allies to escape this condition (which was proven to be wrong later).

^Usage of words such as "Your partner" (Implicates intrinsic scum partnership, no room for negotiation.) "Allow your allies to escape this condition" (Same conclusion drawn out from very little actual development of read progression)

If you are viewing a frame attempt, it will not pay for the effort invested.

^Hostile tone. Combative. Shutting down of argument.

Your general tone reads to me as someone who is trying very hard to be townread and seem like a beneficial player that wouldn't be considered for the lynch. This preoccupation indicates a scum mindset rather than a town one.
VOTE: Clidd

You believe that my development throughout the game was meticulously dressed to facilitate a consensus on your lynch, and you consider my suspicion of you as fruitless, aggravated by small (emotional) chemical indicators that suggest that you quickly grabbed a line theoretically biased reasoning to the practical sphere, in order to try to transmit a read that justified my actions until then. Your text also seems to twist facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts, what i judge as a misinterpretation of my true posture (as town), or an arduous attemp to accuse me (as scum). Firstly, as i pointed out in post 59, it is extremely difficult to classify a joke by text, especially without the aid of sound or visual to support the comic content. This, in itself, already gives a suspicious attitude, considering that the situation we were in involved the mental game between scum and town when it came to the hammer. When you openly state that you wanted to hammer, there would be extinction, considering that your role was town, from the condition assigned by the mod, where the scum is penalized for hammering someone. Obviously, as we found out later, due to the observation i indicated in post 51, the general situation about scum being killed mechanically, regardless of the role of the target, was false and did not represent the proper interpretation that the mod expected us to have. By then, i was almost convinced that you were, in fact, scum. However, I chose to seek more opinions, in order to increase the accuracy of my own read about the possible motivations existing in the creation of your wagon and, of course, your initial post.
The fact that i did not deliberately pull your wagon, as i could have done, and engaged in conversation with the other players, instead of choosing the simplest route that would be to accuse you more intensely, as i could also have done, emphasize that i was and continue to be open to more suggestions. This, of course, does not mean that i should make it easier for you, much less that i should decrease the minimum pressure exerted. Incidentally, the bluff I mentioned in post 80 is something i could have done too, considering that the mod only corrected after my quote on the topic. I have not yet understood the reason for your effort, considering that the lack of evidence directly points out that we need to interact collectively, not to enter the scope of the dispute between two players.

You remind me of my last game

Newbie 1980 | Game Over

(viewtopic.php?f=11&t=81841), post 854, where I hastily but enthusiastically try to read a player. It was a capital mistake, but also a good experience. Interestingly, i empathize with this, and I feel that my concept of you has increased a little. I don't think you would go as far as scum, let alone consider that kind of view.

[clidd]

@

AaronFrost

In your opinion, hypothetically speaking, how should a traitor signal if he knew his partner, but did not know who the werewolf is ?

What do you make of this, Norwee? Possible townslip?

Why do you think it might be a townslip?

He thought there's a scenario where the traitor knows the other traitor but not the werewolf, which obviously can't be the case. Do you think it's real/fake?

@clidd: What did you mean here?

Subjective question, i wanted to see what his opinion would be.

[clidd]

Hectic am i alone in feeling real bad vibes from that dude?

I advise you to take a look at my messages menalque's lines. I had the same feeling about him.

[clidd]

I still want to see Doctor Drew posting or replaced.

[clidd]

Okay, i hope we can interact in a positive way. The last thing I want is for the attention to be on just the two of us, with no room for dialogue with others.

[clidd]

@Clidd
You wouldn’t happen to have any off-site games where i could see your scum!play do you?

I played Epicmafia and Mindnight(Steam) in the past, but nothing so relevant. I'm more used to face-to-face games, without the need for a virtual platform.

[clidd]

I still want to see Doctor Drew posting or replaced.

Sorry........was supposed to respond to this.

When you feel you are in a good physical condition, feel free to expose your read.

[clidd]

Good afternoon.

Yesterday, although I wanted to continue, the rest option was more pleasant for the moment, considering that my mind needed a ''refresh''. Today, upon waking, I enjoyed the opportunity to make a brief reading of the last comments, and did some additions to my notes. It is good to see that everyone managed to share a little of their own opinions and, consequently, demonstrate that they still care about the outcome of the match. But, as we all know, there are three players among us that need to be located and eliminated, in favor of our condition of victory. With that said and with a good cup of coffee in hand, I would like to introduce my partial read of the observations I wrote down throughout the game:

Setup Specific Rules
*There is one Wolf goon and two traitors.
*There is no scum chat.
*For day 1 only, if a member of the werewolves (werewolf Goon or 2 traitors) were to be the last person to vote to lynch a player, they would, themselves, be lynched as well.
*Traitors are only endgamed if they are all lynched. In other words, if the wolf is lynched, they still can win by being the majority.
*The Werewolf knows who the two traitors are, and the Traitors both know who the Wolf is, but they do not know who each other are.
*This game is nightless
*If you are confused about anything ingame, please don't hesitate to question me, and if I deem it worthy enough, I'll add your question to this wall of game specific rules.
*Day Phases will last approximately 10 days. If a consensus of who to lynch isn't reached, then the player that has reached the most amount of votes first will be lynched.


Le Roles
4 Vanilla Townies
1 Werewolf Goon
2 Werewolf Traitors

The first thing i noticed, after entering the room, were the specifications that characterize the setup, with five peculiar points:

1°

There is one Wolf goon and two traitors

- Unlike a conventional setup, as are those belonging to the scope of newbie games, it has three instead of two members belonging to the scum side. This impacts the game in the sense that, considering that town side does not have mechanical tools (prs), it becomes much more difficult to find associative evidence between the three individuals, if not impossible.

This context benefits neutral players much more significantly than aggressive ones

.

2°

There is no scum chat

- There is no private communication exclusive to them, which prevents more elaborate pre-day strategies. However, it does not completely stop the execution of more intuitive movements of common sense

(including self-vote too)

.

3°

For day 1 only, if a member of the werewolves (werewolf Goon or 2 traitors) were to be the last person to vote to lynch a player, they would, themselves, be lynched as well

- I believe that this rule, in isolation, suggests a generalized misinterpretation, if not complemented with additional information displayed in the messages along with the roles. Such deficiency opens up the possibility that i mentioned in post 80, where a scum can claim innocent by hammering a partner and not automatically die (which contradicts the initial interpretation of the rule).

Pointing this out in post 51 was essential

to clear up that doubt, but it was also strange not to have been mentioned by someone else before. I believe that not only me, but others were also aware of this disparity in interpretations, but they chose not to comment.

This also suggests the reasoning that the scum, as a rule, should vote early, to avoid the hammering situation later.

4°

The Werewolf knows who the two traitors are, and the Traitors both know who the Wolf is, but they do not know who each other are

- Considering this, signaling scenarios don't come into play.

This would make the misunderstanding described in post 91 correct.

5°

This game is nightless

- In addition to emphasizing the morning period and prioritizing the voting stage, there are two others characteristics: the fact that it is not possible to eliminate an active voice player, whose presence would be a threat to the late game, and the incentive to not do risky gambits, considering that the game can end at any time, if performed incorrectly. It is very likely that the approach by scums, given this scenario, would be more incisive, considering that they can win if they advance a player's lynch early in the day.

Based on that, they would jump at the first viable wagon opportunity

5.

Given the comments on the rules, i will proceed to the posts:

I'M WILLING TO HAMMER! DO YOU HEAR THAT? I AM WILLING TO HAMMER!!

The theory I created about the post above disregarded any interpersonal traits about Norwiegan's personality, considering the possibility of being a biased act. The use of caps lock further enhances this ''fabricated'' attention, allowing for a deliberate misread and providing a safe vote, without much contestation, as it delivers a plausible motivation to be suspicious. However, as i noticed in his response to my advances in 94. Unconsciously, he seemed genuinely uncomfortable with my pseudo-accusations, which i used as a tool of controlled pressure, precisely to get a sudden response. I don't think he is, in fact, lock-scum, mainly because of the empathy i had when observing his read about me, as mentioned in 117.

VOTE: Norwee

Vote: Norway

VOTE: Norwegian

Hectic, Espeonage and Dsjstr started a wagon, encouraged by the content that, to common sense, seemed justifiable to condemn, or at least, pressure. Judging by the time of execution of the votes, which took place from 7-6 posts, respectively, the information processing and decision making time was very similar, something that i consider as a sign of doubt about Doctor Drew's vote ( 13), which curiously, diverged from the common opinion and is present between posts 12 and 18. In other words, he was unaffected by the first comment because of a pre-established response, that guided his vote.

Probably a scum response.

(L-1 on Norwee)

I consider this post interesting, not only for his concern, but also for his veracity. If we look closely, there was a 13 minute delay to respond to the third vote (18), however, I noticed that he posted one minute after the announcement, progressing on a scale ranging from 3, 5 and 2, until he finished his sequence of posts 2 minutes before sending post 20 here. In other words, close to the time when the third vote was confirmed, he was already typing in another topic, where he remained until 2 minutes before his answer here, showing that this was the time he navigated from one topic to the other, confirming his concern about a possible accidental hammer.

S-sorry to bother you. Any opinion on Norwee's case on him?

I think Norwee has a valid point about clidd being a little too confident on his read and basing his solving around Norwee being scum. It doesn't really 'feel' intentional though or at least it feels non-malicious, I think it's more of a subconscious thing and I don't see his tone as hostile like Norwee said it was.

I think I'm also gonna go with a weakish townlean on Norwee at the moment just because I think town!Norwee has a tendency to take heat early like what's happening here.

Although i don't appreciate the explicit indecision present in Aaron's posts, and see his characteristic of impartiality, in this context, as a way to avoid having to take a side (a scum attitude), i believe that his questioning, partially puzzled, led to him to reconsider the aspects that structured his read, so it is still too early to definitively formulate an opinion on him. I hope that i can, effectively, determine his alignment next day.

To my understanding for D1 if a wolf hammers then they die even if they are hammering a wolf, I meant that if someone hammers D1 and they don't die they have to be town. Am I understanding the rule correctly?

I'm probably trying too hard to find the wolves slip up, it just seems like an obvious way to catch a mafia.

I'M WILLING TO HAMMER! DO YOU HEAR THAT? I AM WILLING TO HAMMER!!

Go ahead

I was thinking the werewolf has all the knowledge and the traitors have enough to be able to figure out who the other traitor is. I talked about the signal being between you and Drew the first time because I see RVS as the time to get away with signalling by voting. I could really look at any interaction and claim it is signalling but I like coming up with theories like that.

He seems to try, as far as possible, to actively engage in the development of the case. I do not consider him as an innocent newbie, mainly because of his doubts, suggestively forced, as if try to justify himself by the mantle of ''inexperienced'', lowering himself in the process to gain empathy for others. His town-slips are unlikely to be authentic.

I have two soft town reads, one soft scum read. So I am happy to vote within my unsorted pool bc if I am right it only includes one town and if we are voting on both we can't lose out day 1 with it.

So my Lynch pool is djester, DD, Norway, and aron.

I am willing to give a soft af town read to Aaron for caring my opinion.

So I am happy to get one of those three to hammer one of the others. Prefs for Norway to be included. Still feel his early game is scum indicative. Anyone got opinions about this?

I admire the inaccuracy in my read about you, considering that, naturally, due to your style of play, I tend to read it as null. You are vaguely well-intentioned, but i think that a slightly more aggressive approach would drastically change my opinion of you (early, of course).

With that said, this would be my distribution:

Dsjstr -

Scum indicative

Hectic -

Joker

(Can flip both sides)
Doctor Drew -

Scum indicative

NorwieganboyEE -

Town indicative

AaronFrost -

Town indicative

Espeonage -

Scum indicative

Particualrly, i would like to lynch

Doctor Drew

or

Dsjstr

today. If my partial read did not please the public, i am prepared for the case of being voted. But, obviously, im selecting the person who will hammer me. In both scenarios, we will lynch a scum.

[clidd]

If someone wants to argue something, or enter into a consensus, I am open to dialogue. Both of which I mentioned above, in the item ''lynch'', I await a positioning.

[clidd]

That was fun to read; I like how you go about your analysis. Why is AaronFF town? You say "too early to definitively formulate an opinion on him." on him earlier in your post.

Am I the Joker because voting for Norwee early is scum-indicative, but my concern for a hammer is town-indicative?

There are other reads that stand out in the item '' scum-indicative ''. Yes, that's exactly why I put you as a "Joker", because there is an oscillation in the read that I captured about you.

[clidd]

I was thinking the werewolf has all the knowledge and the traitors have enough to be able to figure out who the other traitor is. I talked about the signal being between you and Drew the first time because I see RVS as the time to get away with signalling by voting. I could really look at any interaction and claim it is signalling but I like coming up with theories like that.

I still don't understand what you mean here. I want you to elaborate on what you meant when you said "In this case I am talking about Doctor Drew, so would he be trying to signal Hectic is what I'm thinking."
Are Drew and I traitors in your hypothetical, are one of us the Main Wolf? Help me understand.

I did not understand the question, can you rephrase the question ? i am still overcoming the language barrier (I'm from Spain).

[clidd]

There are other reads that stand out in the item '' scum-indicative ''. Yes, that's exactly why I put you as a "Joker", because there is an oscillation in the read that I captured about you.

What about AaronFF? Why does he lean town-indicative? And is Espeonage primarily scum-indicative for his early vote?

Aaron seems more adept at indecision due to the earlier clash between Norwegian and me. Which gives the idea of ​​impartiality slightly inclined towards town alignment. Espeonage has a vague style, with considerations that, in my view, are basic and not very intuitive.

[clidd]

Ok, thank you. It doesn't really make sense, I even commented on one of the posts where I refer to your response in relation to that.

[clidd]

I don't consider Espeonage's vote as a major factor that determined my read. But statistically speaking, according to my analysis, there must be at least 1 scum among the three votes on the first page.

[clidd]

If you are using my vote on Hectic as a scum tell, then it really only makes sense if I am the werewolf. There is no way my theoretical traitor buddy would pick up on it when it is an rvs vote.

I could see werewolf doing it to signal a traitor, or even both with a vote(forget who brought this up first).

As I mentioned already though, was merely a call back to ongoing game rvs vote (I tend to rvs vote people I know and enjoy). Tbh, wanted to rvs Norwee but didn't want to put him at L-1 and risk a lol hammer in rvs.

Clidd.....can you elaborate more on you scum read on me?

Doctor Drew

, you are the player with the

lowest participation

rate and the

lowest number of posts

(

7

) among all players on the topic. I can highlight the expressive temporal distance between your posts 13 and 126, which suggests an

apathetic approximation to the game

, as i can also punctuate the post 132, where there is no quote, not even a single word used by me,

showing disinterest

to provide evidence that could confirm that you had, in fact, completed the full reading. If i had to make a summary of your activity, it would basically be that you appeared to be more concerned with your birthday and are using it as a way to justify any idleness practiced. The confession of the random hammer was also unsatisfactory in 151, much less the comic content of the second line. It is not just a single factor, but a set of elements that led to my read on your possible alignment. Participating 7 times out of a total of 171 is not normal at all.

[clidd]

VOTE: Doctor Drew

[clidd]

@Dsjstr

Do you prefer to be lynched instead of Doctor Drew ?

[clidd]

I am willing to hammer, if there is collaboration in voting.

[clidd]

What exactly was not clear to you ?

[clidd]

@AaronFrost

|

@NorwegianboyEE

Vote, i will hammer.

UNVOTE: Doctor Drew

[clidd]

Norwegian is out of the question today. For me, the effort he put in when he answered me was something that I identified with. Doctor Drew is the most rational choice considering the other options, something that I believe, or at least believed, that you would be able to observe too.

[clidd]

I agree with norwegian's 172, but I am worried about how convincing clidd is. When he shared his thoughts on the setup I saw that as NAI, any role could do that. The fact that I was already sussing Drew and then people started joining makes me

hesitant to join the wagon. If we did want to lynch Drew than I would want clidd to be the one to hammer. Right now I would have placed my vote on clidd if he wasn't already at L-2. I think part of my uneasy feeling is that you did vote for Drew rather

than me. What was the reasoning for that vote?

I think this might be indicative of a dsj/clidd partnership. The first bit looks like he's trying to distance by speaking about his hesitance towards the Drew lynch but then goes on to follow clidd's wagon on Drew despite the weak reasoning.

Not sure what this says about Drew's alignment unfortunately.

Hectic is now my strongest townread. I also realized that I have yet to play with scum!Hectic so I'm not entirely sure what his scumplay would look like

Norwegian is out of the question today. For me, the effort he put in when he answered me was something that I identified with. Doctor Drew is the most rational choice considering the other options, something that I believe, or at least believed, that you would be able to observe too.

Okay, but since Drew's only made 6 posts so far, are you not interested in hearing more from him first?

Also, could you explain why you gave in to Doro's demands for you being the one to hammer so easily? Most people have expressed a townread on you, so why not try to make someone else hammer instead?

It seems that the likelihood of defeat, from day one, is negatively influencing the read of the two of you, manifesting itself as a retroactive psychological barrier aggravated by the comprehensive parallel consideration, which is discriminated by the paradox of choice. This would explain the attitude of looking for answers that escape the present and try to structure a rational motivation to justify acts, which according to common sense, are considered illogical and can only be practiced if there is, as a rule, a premeditated intention, otherwise , it is suicide. As I have already explained, I intend to effectively execute the hammer action on the read that I consider the most plausible for me, not necessarily based on mechanical facts that prove it, but on interpersonal instincts that I used to determine my choice. I can't see, like you two, the weight of automatic defeat, in case I'm wrong, but I believe this is normal considering that Lylo's situation creates a more cautious atmosphere, where playing it safe is the most viable for the majority. I am aware of the consequences, but I intend to maintain my view of Doctor Drew, until there is definitely action on his part that changes that view. I agree that due to the absence of many members, today especially, it is necessary to wait until new comments are made and a common decision is taken, so that the mechanics of the hammer can be used intelligently. In fact, I considered the possible scenario of me being correct, Doctor Drew being lynched and confirmed as a scum, and the next day I would be suspicious for having encouraged, early, his sentence, featuring a buss that would take away my credibility as we progress from day 2 for 3, and weakening my position as a vocal antagonist. In that case, I would choose to use today's rule in reverse, with me being voted on and Doctor Drew hammering, so we would both be eliminated and all theories about a possible coercive coding on my part would be disregarded, making room for you to work in a more peaceful resolution of the match.


Logically, my conduct may appear to be a little atypical, but I consider that each one has their own playstyle. I will await a response from Doctor Drew.

[clidd]

If the double elimination scenario I mentioned occurs, I would like to suggest two names that will guide the outcome of the match.

[clidd]

And one of them is not you, Hectic.

[clidd]

If the double elimination scenario I mentioned occurs, I would like to suggest two names that will guide the outcome of the match.

Two names that are scum or town?

Town.

[clidd]

In that case, I would choose to use today's rule in reverse, with me being voted on and Doctor Drew hammering, so we would both be eliminated and all theories about a possible coercive coding on my part would be disregarded, making room for you to work in a more peaceful resolution of the match.

There's no nights in this game. You as town lynching Drew who is scum is always better than Drew as scum lynching town-you, which results in both of you dying.
This is because in the case where you're town who hammered and suspected the next day for bussing Drew, mislynching you still puts us in the same position as scum-Drew hammering town-you (5 players alive, 2 scum). The difference being it's not guaranteed we mislynch you, and we still get info if we do.

That was a pain to explain, but basically, I'm even more confused as to why you'd be okay with that suggestion.

Which information do you think is possible to obtain, and what would you think about my push on Doctor Drew ?

[clidd]

If you think there is information to be obtained, if I am alive, why don't you agree with the wagon I proposed ? I didn't see you commenting on the amount of posts Doctor Drew had, why do you think he would participate now ?

[clidd]

Maybe, but I've actually liked Doro so far. The paranoia there and random thoughts about slips/signals he's given so far feel genuine to me.

Who is doro ?

[clidd]

Ok.

[clidd]

1°

There is one Wolf goon and two traitors

- Unlike a conventional setup, as are those belonging to the scope of newbie games, it has three instead of two members belonging to the scum side. This impacts the game in the sense that, considering that town side does not have mechanical tools (prs), it becomes much more difficult to find associative evidence between the three individuals, if not impossible.

This context benefits neutral players much more significantly than aggressive ones

.

2°

There is no scum chat

- There is no private communication exclusive to them, which prevents more elaborate pre-day strategies. However, it does not completely stop the execution of more intuitive movements of common sense

(including self-vote too)

.

3°

For day 1 only, if a member of the werewolves (werewolf Goon or 2 traitors) were to be the last person to vote to lynch a player, they would, themselves, be lynched as well

- I believe that this rule, in isolation, suggests a generalized misinterpretation, if not complemented with additional information displayed in the messages along with the roles. Such deficiency opens up the possibility that i mentioned in post 80, where a scum can claim innocent by hammering a partner and not automatically die (which contradicts the initial interpretation of the rule).

Pointing this out in post 51 was essential

to clear up that doubt, but it was also strange not to have been mentioned by someone else before. I believe that not only me, but others were also aware of this disparity in interpretations, but they chose not to comment.

This also suggests the reasoning that the scum, as a rule, should vote early, to avoid the hammering situation later.

4°

The Werewolf knows who the two traitors are, and the Traitors both know who the Wolf is, but they do not know who each other are

- Considering this, signaling scenarios don't come into play.

This would make the misunderstanding described in post 91 correct.

5°

This game is nightless

- In addition to emphasizing the morning period and prioritizing the voting stage, there are two others characteristics: the fact that it is not possible to eliminate an active voice player, whose presence would be a threat to the late game, and the incentive to not do risky gambits, considering that the game can end at any time, if performed incorrectly. It is very likely that the approach by scums, given this scenario, would be more incisive, considering that they can win if they advance a player's lynch early in the day.

Based on that, they would jump at the first viable wagon opportunity

5.

Okies, I have issues with this bc I think your conclusions are all wrong.
1. I think given the mechanics and the need for traitors to not hammer each other that associative and reading in to information gathering allows for plenty of associatives later in to the game. I think fundamentally this game functions similarly to any other, just that some of the logic behind it changes. I don't think any play style is alignment indicative.
2. No daychat is common enough and has not been proven to change play styles a heap. I don't think there is likely any way to reliably signal traitor to traitor, however wolf could be signalling. Pre-day Strats tend to never go to plan in MS style mafia bc there is far too long required to hold up and any tenseness created by trying to illogically stick to a game plan gets scum read quickly. Over a few hours or 1 day, this can be expected to maybe work, but not here.
3. I kinda see your logic here but I don't think that the logic doesn't apply to town. We also don't want to hammer bc if we're wrong we lose flat out.
4. I think I covered this in point 2.
5. Given the small player list and that vocal people tend to be both strongly town read and strongly scum read, I think there is very little to be gained from looking at in thread charisma and presence as indicative of anything other than player skill neutrally.

Given that I don't really see your logic all together I think that any conclusions while potentially correct due to the near coin flip of any slot flipping scum, I think it would be purely coincidental.

Hum, no. I keep thinking the same.

[clidd]

Money atm is on Norway/clidd/djester

What is ''Money atm'' ?

[clidd]

Why are you so eager to hammer, clidd? Don't you want someone who could potentially be scum to hammer? I haven't seen nearly enough from Drew to be happy with lynching him. We have almost 7 days so let's use it. My current preference would be Espeonage hammering Norwee actually, but these aren't confident reads, and I need to hear more from both Espeonage and Drew especially. Clidd, AaronFF, and Doro are tentative townleans.

Aaron and Espeonage, what do you think of this Drew wagon, do you think it's justified?

No, also this is feeling kinda gambit-y from clidd.

Gambit would be if I rolled a dice. It is different when you see a read, in fact, as a potential scum.

[clidd]

I think looking for town reads over scum reads is viable in this setup.

Why you town reading Norway?

I agree, I'm not really scumreading anyone which now which is why I'm trying to work off of my townreads.

I'm leaning town on Norwee because I think as town he has a tendency to get pushed early when he's town and his play him mimics his town game decently well. I also need to look back and reevaluate Hectic's push on him.

Also I don't think clidd is new to mafia by any means so I think it's disingenuous to read him under the guise of 'he's a newbie'

By newbie I mean newbie to MS's way of playing. Which I think is reiterated by the hot garbage logic he has displayed. Like could be proven wrong tho. But I feel pretty happy with the level of effort I have seen.

Hum, ok.

[clidd]

I still don't understand Clidd at all, I don't even understand his case on me and what it's based on.

And Hectic, I wish I was nuanced enough to make that play.

What are your reads ?

[clidd]

Probably not, but imagine that lul. Anyway, I'm V/LA mostly for the rest of today.

When you come back, i want to see your read on Espeonage.

[clidd]

Like i understand why people want to wait and not rush a hammer, but i don’t think it makes Clidd scummy for it. Being eager to vote a scumread is one of those town behaviours that seem scummy on the purpose, but really isn’t.

In a world where we're playing a normal mafia game, this is true but with this setup scum can just win today if they can get town to hammer another town, which is why town should be a bit more cautious with who they're voting and why.

Also from my experience, Drew is a player who is frequently mislynched early in games. I'm not saying that definitively makes him town since I have no opinion on his alignment whatsoever, but that knowledge combined with shallow reasons for lynching him make me hesitant to join this wagon.

Can you quote a game in which he was mislynched early ?

[clidd]

If Clidd is scum, it's with Drew and he's happy to bus him here for the sweet sweet towncred. I don't see scum!Clidd making this play willing to sacrifice himself over hammering a town Drew. That makes no sense.

I don't think clidd actually has any intention to hammer.

Are you sure ? if i built my read around him being scum, i don't see why would I choose someone else to hammer.

[clidd]

1°

There is one Wolf goon and two traitors

- Unlike a conventional setup, as are those belonging to the scope of newbie games, it has three instead of two members belonging to the scum side. This impacts the game in the sense that, considering that town side does not have mechanical tools (prs), it becomes much more difficult to find associative evidence between the three individuals, if not impossible.

This context benefits neutral players much more significantly than aggressive ones

.

2°

There is no scum chat

- There is no private communication exclusive to them, which prevents more elaborate pre-day strategies. However, it does not completely stop the execution of more intuitive movements of common sense

(including self-vote too)

.

3°

For day 1 only, if a member of the werewolves (werewolf Goon or 2 traitors) were to be the last person to vote to lynch a player, they would, themselves, be lynched as well

- I believe that this rule, in isolation, suggests a generalized misinterpretation, if not complemented with additional information displayed in the messages along with the roles. Such deficiency opens up the possibility that i mentioned in post 80, where a scum can claim innocent by hammering a partner and not automatically die (which contradicts the initial interpretation of the rule).

Pointing this out in post 51 was essential

to clear up that doubt, but it was also strange not to have been mentioned by someone else before. I believe that not only me, but others were also aware of this disparity in interpretations, but they chose not to comment.

This also suggests the reasoning that the scum, as a rule, should vote early, to avoid the hammering situation later.

4°

The Werewolf knows who the two traitors are, and the Traitors both know who the Wolf is, but they do not know who each other are

- Considering this, signaling scenarios don't come into play.

This would make the misunderstanding described in post 91 correct.

5°

This game is nightless

- In addition to emphasizing the morning period and prioritizing the voting stage, there are two others characteristics: the fact that it is not possible to eliminate an active voice player, whose presence would be a threat to the late game, and the incentive to not do risky gambits, considering that the game can end at any time, if performed incorrectly. It is very likely that the approach by scums, given this scenario, would be more incisive, considering that they can win if they advance a player's lynch early in the day.

Based on that, they would jump at the first viable wagon opportunity

5.

Okies, I have issues with this bc I think your conclusions are all wrong.
1. I think given the mechanics and the need for traitors to not hammer each other that associative and reading in to information gathering allows for plenty of associatives later in to the game. I think fundamentally this game functions similarly to any other, just that some of the logic behind it changes. I don't think any play style is alignment indicative.
2. No daychat is common enough and has not been proven to change play styles a heap. I don't think there is likely any way to reliably signal traitor to traitor, however wolf could be signalling. Pre-day Strats tend to never go to plan in MS style mafia bc there is far too long required to hold up and any tenseness created by trying to illogically stick to a game plan gets scum read quickly. Over a few hours or 1 day, this can be expected to maybe work, but not here.
3. I kinda see your logic here but I don't think that the logic doesn't apply to town. We also don't want to hammer bc if we're wrong we lose flat out.
4. I think I covered this in point 2.
5. Given the small player list and that vocal people tend to be both strongly town read and strongly scum read, I think there is very little to be gained from looking at in thread charisma and presence as indicative of anything other than player skill neutrally.

Given that I don't really see your logic all together I think that any conclusions while potentially correct due to the near coin flip of any slot flipping scum, I think it would be purely coincidental.

Actually, you used ten times the word ''

think

'', which is ironic given the term

''hot trash logic''

used in post 224. Apparently, you discredit many of the points I mentioned, but are still impartial when commenting on them ? unconsciously, you're not sure about what you're saying.

[clidd]

I have started using think bc people kept getting mad at them for being too argumentative by flat out telling people they were wrong, which I do believe you are here.

Interesting to see this from someone I consider

indicative scum

. It makes sense that you disagree.

[clidd]

Why are you so eager to hammer, clidd? Don't you want someone who could potentially be scum to hammer? I haven't seen nearly enough from Drew to be happy with lynching him. We have almost 7 days so let's use it. My current preference would be Espeonage hammering Norwee actually, but these aren't confident reads, and I need to hear more from both Espeonage and Drew especially. Clidd, AaronFF, and Doro are tentative townleans.

Aaron and Espeonage, what do you think of this Drew wagon, do you think it's justified?

No, also this is feeling kinda gambit-y from clidd.

Gambit would be if I rolled a dice. It is different when you see a read, in fact, as a potential scum.

You are thinking random not gambit. A gambit is where you present something but it is actually the opposite or a trap.

So I am saying that you really had no intention of hammering but were saying you intended to try and grab town credit but would back out later.

What is "random", from your point of view ?

[clidd]

Money atm is on Norway/clidd/djester

What is ''Money atm'' ?

If I was going to make a bet my money would be on Norway, clidd, and djester as the three scum.

This read was done under the influence of internal chemical reactions.

[clidd]

I still don't understand Clidd at all, I don't even understand his case on me and what it's based on.

And Hectic, I wish I was nuanced enough to make that play.

What are your reads ?

Hectic, Norwee, Aaron, Esp, Doro........Clidd.

Town read/lean on the first three, Esp is null since nothing jumps out(though with being LA I may have missed something), Doro is null as well with a smidge of scum equity, but at this point Clidd is the only person I would vote for.

Pre Edit: Stop sniping me Hectic! Haha

Good. So you agree with what i suggested about the reverse hammer.

[clidd]

1°

There is one Wolf goon and two traitors

- Unlike a conventional setup, as are those belonging to the scope of newbie games, it has three instead of two members belonging to the scum side. This impacts the game in the sense that, considering that town side does not have mechanical tools (prs), it becomes much more difficult to find associative evidence between the three individuals, if not impossible.

This context benefits neutral players much more significantly than aggressive ones

.

2°

There is no scum chat

- There is no private communication exclusive to them, which prevents more elaborate pre-day strategies. However, it does not completely stop the execution of more intuitive movements of common sense

(including self-vote too)

.

3°

For day 1 only, if a member of the werewolves (werewolf Goon or 2 traitors) were to be the last person to vote to lynch a player, they would, themselves, be lynched as well

- I believe that this rule, in isolation, suggests a generalized misinterpretation, if not complemented with additional information displayed in the messages along with the roles. Such deficiency opens up the possibility that i mentioned in post 80, where a scum can claim innocent by hammering a partner and not automatically die (which contradicts the initial interpretation of the rule).

Pointing this out in post 51 was essential

to clear up that doubt, but it was also strange not to have been mentioned by someone else before. I believe that not only me, but others were also aware of this disparity in interpretations, but they chose not to comment.

This also suggests the reasoning that the scum, as a rule, should vote early, to avoid the hammering situation later.

4°

The Werewolf knows who the two traitors are, and the Traitors both know who the Wolf is, but they do not know who each other are

- Considering this, signaling scenarios don't come into play.

This would make the misunderstanding described in post 91 correct.

5°

This game is nightless

- In addition to emphasizing the morning period and prioritizing the voting stage, there are two others characteristics: the fact that it is not possible to eliminate an active voice player, whose presence would be a threat to the late game, and the incentive to not do risky gambits, considering that the game can end at any time, if performed incorrectly. It is very likely that the approach by scums, given this scenario, would be more incisive, considering that they can win if they advance a player's lynch early in the day.

Based on that, they would jump at the first viable wagon opportunity

5.

Okies, I have issues with this bc I think your conclusions are all wrong.
1. I think given the mechanics and the need for traitors to not hammer each other that associative and reading in to information gathering allows for plenty of associatives later in to the game. I think fundamentally this game functions similarly to any other, just that some of the logic behind it changes. I don't think any play style is alignment indicative.
2. No daychat is common enough and has not been proven to change play styles a heap. I don't think there is likely any way to reliably signal traitor to traitor, however wolf could be signalling. Pre-day Strats tend to never go to plan in MS style mafia bc there is far too long required to hold up and any tenseness created by trying to illogically stick to a game plan gets scum read quickly. Over a few hours or 1 day, this can be expected to maybe work, but not here.
3. I kinda see your logic here but I don't think that the logic doesn't apply to town. We also don't want to hammer bc if we're wrong we lose flat out.
4. I think I covered this in point 2.
5. Given the small player list and that vocal people tend to be both strongly town read and strongly scum read, I think there is very little to be gained from looking at in thread charisma and presence as indicative of anything other than player skill neutrally.

Given that I don't really see your logic all together I think that any conclusions while potentially correct due to the near coin flip of any slot flipping scum, I think it would be purely coincidental.

Hum, no. I keep thinking the same.

Is this you saying you disagree with ALL of his points in that post?

Probably not, but imagine that lul. Anyway, I'm V/LA mostly for the rest of today.

When you come back, i want to see your read on Espeonage.

Decent

, so far.

Yes, it is.

[clidd]

I still don't understand Clidd at all, I don't even understand his case on me and what it's based on.

And Hectic, I wish I was nuanced enough to make that play.

What are your reads ?

Hectic, Norwee, Aaron, Esp, Doro........Clidd.

Town read/lean on the first three, Esp is null since nothing jumps out(though with being LA I may have missed something), Doro is null as well with a smidge of scum equity, but at this point Clidd is the only person I would vote for.

Pre Edit: Stop sniping me Hectic! Haha

Good. So you agree with what i suggested about the reverse hammer.

Refresh my memory.

Post 193.

[clidd]

Can you speed things up and hand me over to your partner ?

[clidd]

You hammer me and die because of the first day rule. Before dying, i indicate two names that will decide the next lynch day 2.

[clidd]

And that's it. No secret.

[clidd]

Who would those two names be, Clidd?

One is NorwegianboyEE, and the other i will say if you agree with my prop.

[clidd]

You hammer me and die because of the first day rule. Before dying, i indicate two names that will decide the next lynch day 2.

I will gladly.

Let's do then.

[clidd]

Can i self vote ? (according to the rules)

[clidd]

Ha! I got a page top finally!

Votecount 1.4

dsjstr

- (0)

Hectic

- (0)

Doctor Drew

- dsjstr (L-3)

NorwieganboyEE

- Espeonage (L-3)

AaronFrost

- (0)

Espeonage

- (0)

Clidd

- Hectic, Doctor Drew (L-2)

Not Voting: NorwieganboyEE, AaronFrost, Clidd - (3)

With 7 Players alive it takes 4 to lynch.
Deadline is (expired on 2020-02-08 13:00:00)

*Espeonage V/LA until February 2nd
*Doctor Drew is on V/LA until the end of the weekend

Im l-2 now.

[clidd]

Can i self vote ? (according to the rules)

Technically, yes, but I still don't understand why you're so confident on Drew being scum.

Regardless of match, I trust my reads. Of course, there are consequences, but they don't scare me. Only two things can happen: I am right, or I am wrong.

[clidd]

Losing, winning. It depends on how you see it.

[clidd]

Can you quote a game in which he was mislynched early ?

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=81273

He maintains a pattern between games. But still, I will keep my point.

[clidd]

Can you quote a game in which he was mislynched early ?

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=81273

That game finally ended?

Yeah it just ended like two days ago lol.

clidd are you scumreading Drew for reasons other than inactivity?

Yes, it is a little difficult to explain, but I am using my intuitive behavior analysis. It's not something I can mechanically, so it's normal for people to disagree with me.

[clidd]

Mechanically prove *

[clidd]

I thought Clidd was town bc effort seemed too strong for scum coming in to a game like this. I was feeling like it was an absence of fear which is usually town indicative, however the whole actions around drew seem terrible.

This sort of mirrors my thought process right now, but looking back at clidd's posting, he is putting a lot of effort in but I feel like it's a little 'too' much effort early on in the game. I think more often than not scum need to put more effort into what they're doing in order to make themselves look townier while sometimes town has a tendency to get lazy (something I can definitely attest to).

Actually, this '' effort '' is something basic.

[clidd]

Can we just lynch Doctor Drew ? *thinking*

[clidd]

I will gradually lose interest here as the days go on, probably.

[clidd]

Dsjstr + you, or Dsjstr + Hectic (who is the joker), unless AaronFrost is hidden wolf.

[clidd]

Norwegianboy is locktown from my pov. And yes, i know you don't agree.

[clidd]

And yes, i think you are more likely to be scum than Hectic.

[clidd]

I liked his reasoning about me being scum (post 94 ). I did something similar in the past game, but the player was not a scum, and I noticed that later.

[clidd]

On the same day, of course.

[clidd]

283, 285.

[clidd]

I will probably be typing for an hour or two, at least. In the morning I send, if you want.

[clidd]

My third language is english, so i have to put together my reads, build my thesis and then translate, word for word, adapting to english language.

[clidd]

I liked how

NorwegianboyEE

managed to get out of a defensive position, to the offensive when I started accusing him, also the way he did it. That kind of attitude was basically '' hey, get off scum'', not to mention the fact that he played a game with a very convincing player, who even won the game, deceiving everyone (who knew how to type consistently). It kind of "armed" his natural defenses, causing the spontaneous reaction of disavowal and moderate anger, when I started to structure my argument against him. That's why i consider him as lock-town.

That would be the three-paragraph '' summary '' attempt about Norwegian being town.

[clidd]

There are other facts as well, but they are confusing to explain. These are the most ''normal''.

[clidd]

Doctor Drew basically suggested some very small deviations from the standard he had in games as town, not to mention another factor (which would need to mention a game in progress, that is, forbidden) that was decisive for me to keep my reading about it.

[clidd]

Dsjstr acted like the innocent false Samaritan, something I did when I was very young on the subject of the mafia. And the lack of emotional response in that match, as he demonstrated in another topic, when he was accused as scum, even though he was town.

[clidd]

And other point that would be an insult to him, so it's better with just that.

[clidd]

And other point that would be an insult to him, so it's better with just that.

[clidd]

And theres you, Hectic and Aaron. I cannot summarize these three, just with a medium/big size text.

[clidd]

Dsjstr acted like the innocent false Samaritan, something I did when I was very young on the subject of the mafia. And the lack of emotional response in that match, as he demonstrated in another topic, when he was accused as scum, even though he was town.

He demonstrated in that game, but didn't demonstrated here *

[clidd]

Anyways, I don't expect you to agree with that.

I will go to get some rest. Good night.

[clidd]

How many days are left ?

[clidd]

Ok.

I believe that if 93 posts, on my part, were not enough to resolve the doubts in my case against Doctor Drew, it will be fruitless to provide new information now. Waiting for a plausible outcome in my absence was also ineffective. So, ignoring my subjective tunnel, it would be interesting if we reach, as suggested by Hectic, a prior agreement on who will be voted by the majority, and who will be the individual with the hammer.

Therefore, i would appreciate that everyone indicate who they intend to vote for, and who they would like to hammer. Just discriminate who, you don't need to specify the reason.

[clidd]

@dsjstr

|

@Hectic

|

@Doctor Drew

|

@NorwieganboyEE

|

@AaronFrost

|

@Espeonage

[clidd]

Hectic, answer.

[clidd]

Let's slow it down.

[clidd]

It would be interesting if, by the process of elimination, the composition: Doctor Drew, Espeonage and Dsjstr was definitive.

[clidd]

By the way, the collision between Hectic and Norwegian provided a positive point in my read about both. The ''Joker'' is playing well.

[clidd]

The ''Joker'' is playing well.

You mean that as in "playing well for being town", "playing well for being scum" or "playing well in general"?

Playing well in general.

[clidd]

I was going to ask the same question.

[clidd]

Like this game if effectively 50/50.

You need to be really sure of a town read for it to hold any weight.

Like it's 4v3. I am town, so the other players are 3v3.

This reasoning seems prone to paranoia.

[clidd]

Yeah can you explain that post Clidd? What were you getting at there?

I see no benefit in suggesting that, even with our own established reads, we should be suspicious of them and go back to step zero. Especially when we were, in a way, starting to align some reads. Opportunistic.

Meta is evil and is shown time and time again to be inherently flawed. Any case that involves meta is a flawed case. I end up talking about this every game I play and I always insist on ignoring any meta tells anyone has. And somehow?!? I end up winning a lot of games as town after taking this line of argument.

Examples of individual experience can be used as a auxiliary base, but never generalized. Affirming that the meta is ''flawed'' without presenting statistical references to prove it, mischaracterizes the argument and makes it a fallacy.

Btw Espeonage, how do you expect any lynch to happen at all unless some of the town members form a so called: "clique" and succesfully target scum? (Although i'd most likely substitute the word "clique" with "temporary alliance")

I expect people to form reads with thought, not with emotions.

Emotions are part of human behavior and influence their actions. Failure to consider them will decrease your judgment accuracy. An example would be the rage scenario, which can only be correctly detected through emotions, such as empathy to perceive the other is, in fact, expressing anger at the oscillation in his typing.

Like this game if effectively 50/50.

You need to be really sure of a town read for it to hold any weight.

Like it's 4v3. I am town, so the other players are 3v3.

This reasoning seems prone to paranoia.

Mafia as a game IS prone to paranoia. Like what even?

Even so, emphasizing this side diminishes collective confidence. This game cannot be won alone, it is a group game.

[clidd]

Doctor Drew, he doesn't fool me.

[clidd]

Mathematically speaking, Dsjstr and Espeonage can still contribute, in a way. But that guy smells rotten from daystart.

[clidd]

@Dsjstr

Do you assume that comparing two different players, in different contexts, will be the same in behavior ?

[clidd]

Doctor Drew has 17 posts, and we are going to 486 posts right now..

[clidd]

How do you measure this mathematical fact if you were to translate it into an alignment indicator ?

[clidd]

No, it isn't.

[clidd]

Scum.

[clidd]

Basically, you and Doctor Drew share the same alignment.

[clidd]

I am currently directing all my attention to another eventuality temporarily for the next few hours. I believe that keeping the vote on Doctor Andrew is more correct, considering that no one directly supported his lynch (including scum), and the lack of active participation (which, under normal conditions, would have been used to replace him if he had been town much earlier).

VOTE: Doctor Andrew

[clidd]

I believe that my preference for Doctor Drew's lynch was clear from the start, regardless of who hammered him.

[clidd]

And yes, for now my reasoning considers the association you pointed out.

[clidd]

I refuse to consider this a neutral indicator.

[clidd]

UNVOTE: Doctor Drew]


Whatever, make him L-1 and I hammer. If we lose, at least I will know that my reads were wrong and you can blame me.

[clidd]

If you're willing to hammer him,

AaronFrost

, I accept.

[clidd]

If not, no.

[clidd]

On second thought, I agree with this scenario as well.

[clidd]

But I believe that you are waiting for Looker's collaboration, which doesn't look like it will happen.

[clidd]

Precisely.

[clidd]

I do not believe that the entry of Looker will change radically my view.

[clidd]

Of course, we can argue about some points that I made prematurely in my read (and possibly change), but his slot, specifically, I don't intend to change.

[clidd]

I think Espeonage should hammer Looker. The disappearance act so close to deadline isn't great.
Why those 3 as scum, Looker?

He has a strong alibi, i checked.

[clidd]

So, Dsjstr lynched with Looker hammering or the opposite ? @AaronFrost

[clidd]

VOTE: Dsjstr

[clidd]

Votecount 1.8

dsjstr

- AaronFrost (L-3)

Hectic

- (0)

Looker

- Hectic (L-3)

NorwieganboyEE

- Espeonage(L-3)

AaronFrost

- (0)

Espeonage

- (0)

Clidd

- dsjstr (L-3)

Not Voting: NorwieganboyEE, Clidd, Looker- (3)

With 7 Players alive it takes 4 to lynch.
Deadline is (expired on 2020-02-11 01:00:00)

*Looker has replaced Doctor Drew.
*Espeonage has been prodded.
*I'm making a youtube video about EDM, so pm me if that's your jam. Or if you dislike it for any reason. I need opinions from both.

Better not to engage in a clash now.

[clidd]

So, I propose three scenarios for today:

1°

Looker agrees and hammers Dsjstr

2°

Norwegian and Aaron vote on Looker and I, personally, take responsibility for hammering him. Or,

3°

most radical scenario: I unvote, Looker votes Dsjstr and I, again, take responsibility to hammer.

[clidd]

Anyway, if indecision remains in this lynch, I intend to adopt one of the scenarios above, considering the absence of Hectic, Espeonage and the lack of collaboration from Dsjstr.

[clidd]

What I don't understand is why DJ is more likely to be scum than Norway, Espeo, or Clidd. (I thought I repped into this D3, but it's just D1.) I like Clidd's posting, but that's playstyle, not alignment. I also like democratically choosing the D1 hammer to make the most of it. I'm not getting what's differentiating DJ from anyone else. I'm fond of AaronFrost, though, so there's sheep potential.

'' I also like democratically choosing the D1 hammer ''

So you don't mind about three players wanting you to hammer, right ?

[clidd]

If i’m ‘protecting’ Clidd, why would you want him to hammer me? Having two people you see as a potential team hammer one another is bad playing. If we’re both town then we lost the game. You should put two independently scummy individuals to hammer one of the other. That’s the best play here. Your suggestion is anti-town and scummy.

• You say it's bad playing, but that's the strategy you're proposing with DJ - I'm just substituting him with someone who hasn't been ganged up on
  
• How would you lose the game if you were both town? The rules say only wolves commit suicide.

If you want to "powerlynch" me for having a difference of opinion, then fine - go for it. Were you supposed to intimidate me? My lack of confidence is what I'm pushing; I don't believe there's enough evidence on DJ for there to be this much confidence that he's scum. And I read all 22 pages of these shenanigans.

The best play would be to draw associative for who's opposing who's lynch - I'm comfortable with opposing DJ's.

'' How would you lose the game if you were both town? The rules say only wolves commit suicide ''

We lose because of numerical equality. That is, 7 players (4 town / 3 wolves), lynching a member of the town is 3 against 3, so mathematically we would be tied for votes.

'' But the traitors didn't know each other '

' yes, but the wolf knows who the traitors are, he would be able to confirm, so bluffs would be unworkable.

[clidd]

Hum, can you hammer ? @Looker

[clidd]

I'm explaining, there is no insult at all.

[clidd]

Do you want to wait until the last seconds so there is no one to hammer ? this is worse than accelerating.

[clidd]

I thought I would feel something different from you, but you stay on the same line as Drew.

VOTE: Looker

[clidd]

So, I propose three scenarios for today:

1°

Looker agrees and hammers Dsjstr

2°

Norwegian and Aaron vote on Looker and I, personally, take responsibility for hammering him. Or,

3°

most radical scenario: I unvote, Looker votes Dsjstr and I, again, take responsibility to hammer.

Still don't believe this until I see it.

Hum.

[clidd]

My initial read points Drew, Dsjstr and Espeonage as scum team. Does the agreement between two of them suggest something ?

[clidd]

UNVOTE: Looker

if you don't mind voting him, Espeonage. I guarantee my hammer will not be fictional like your posts.

[clidd]

VOTE: Looker

[clidd]

Posting by tomorrow (busy).

[clidd]

So, Dsjstr lynched with Looker hammering or the opposite ? @AaronFrost

So, Dsjstr lynched with Looker hammering or the opposite ? @AaronFrost

dsjstr lynched, Looker hammers

VOTE: Dsjstr

clidd, how come you were so easily convinced to lynch Doro over Looker with AaronFF's opinion here? Wasn't Looker your extremely confident scumread? After all, you even hammered him earlier when most wanted Doro to.

The lack of cooperation from him encouraged this. It was a risk I took, obviously. But I believe that either would be viable (although I had my preference).

[clidd]

And in your absence, I didn't have much of a choice.

[clidd]

Clidd who do you think is remaining scum?

Probably Espeonage and Dsjstr, as i said in post 154

[clidd]

You wanted to lynch Doro because he wasn't cooperating to hammer Looker you mean? I don't see that.

Doro is one of my three scumreads.

[clidd]

VOTE: Dsjstr

[clidd]

I would appreciate it if you hammer, Hectic.

[clidd]

''

For day 1 only

, if a member of the werewolves (werewolf Goon or 2 traitors) were to be the last person to vote to lynch a player, they would, themselves, be lynched as well''

[clidd]

You're trying to rush an endgame while people aren't around to stop you. For clarification.

Looker has been Lynched. He was a Werewolf Traitor!

[clidd]

I will repeat: can you hammer?

[clidd]

Oh, sorry. This was rude.

[clidd]

This is not the right way to play, let's calm down. And yes, you are right: it is still early, Hectic.

[clidd]

I didn't expect things to go so well.

VOTE: Espeonage

[clidd]

Actually, there were wide margins of error in that.

Dsjstr

and

Doctor Drew

are players who naturally have scum behavior, even when they are town. In a different scenario, this same read would probably not be valid.

[clidd]

Fortunately, we were lucky that the conditions were right.

[clidd]

@Aaron @Hectic, opinions ?

[clidd]

Ok, I need time to think.

[clidd]

UNVOTE: Espeonage

[clidd]

I will post here again only tomorrow. By then I will have made up my mind.

[clidd]

Good, gg.

[clidd]

I was preparing something for today, in case I was wrong about the Espeonage. Fortunately, we won.

[clidd]

Thanks, Norwegianboy. You played well too.