[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/ext/alfredoramos/seometadata/event/listener.php on line 114: Undefined array key 11827473 [phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/ext/alfredoramos/seometadata/event/listener.php on line 114: Trying to access array offset on value of type null Micro 941 | Brass and Shrapnel | Game Over! - Mafiascum.net
Post
Post #13 (isolation #2) » Mon May 18, 2020 10:39 pm
Postby Night 3 Roses »
last time i played this, we played it "normally", except there's no roleclaiming before a hammer (or ever before a massclaim), and we generally made the second scummiest person hammer
In post 13, Night 3 Roses wrote:last time i played this, we played it "normally", except there's no roleclaiming before a hammer (or ever before a massclaim), and we generally made the second scummiest person hammer
-D
How do you even make the second scummiest person hammer?
err, something something Town consensus, "hammer or you'll be the lynch tomorrow". if memory serves, one person ended up not wanting to hammer because "no i townread them i'm not gonna hammer", we lynched them the next day, and they were scum, so it kinda worked?
Post
Post #23 (isolation #4) » Tue May 19, 2020 4:34 am
Postby Night 3 Roses »
i think we ended up scrambling and getting someone else to hammer, since no-lynch is generally worse than any lynch. in an ideal world, yeah, pivot to that person immediately, but the issue was that we were very close to deadline (so even if we wanted to it would've been difficult) with a lot of people scumreading the person being wagoned anyway.
On surface level, this post is apperently attempting to to point out the logical conclusion that I, HoldenGolden, am calling myself a Moron. However, this post gets much deeper by using Emjoi Analysis (EA), where the real scummy intentions come alive. We all know that such a contradiction coming from a townie PoV would use either the (if you are a filthy casual) or (If you want a comedic option). Coupled with a lack of any other analysis besides EA, this is certainly a scummy attempt at discrediting my intelligence.
You not only get my Finger, but my own Arm of Suspicion
Post
Post #70 (isolation #9) » Tue May 19, 2020 12:51 pm
Postby Night 3 Roses »
In post 67, DkKoba wrote:lets take a look at probabilities and such firstly: its going to be a lot to take in, so any help with this would be appreciated from anyone talented with math.
i'm Sometimes Not Shit at math, no promises though. i'm not sure what math has to do with it, past the 25%-50%-25% odds of our setup?
In post 67, DkKoba wrote:we should eliminate the extreme points because frankly ,we dont want to be in a
position where there's a unique power role missing
(well, other than the blank vigs. they are kinda stupid).
what do you mean by the bolded?
In post 67, DkKoba wrote:my brain hurts but essentially a vig that successfully shoots a supersaint can claim, especially when a bomb dies and no one else does.
Post
Post #91 (isolation #16) » Tue May 19, 2020 1:11 pm
Postby Night 3 Roses »
last run of the setup, we first only claimed either vig or non-vig to create the "pools", and later on when it came down to planning some other stuff fullclaimed.
Post
Post #147 (isolation #17) » Tue May 19, 2020 7:49 pm
Postby Night 3 Roses »
In post 67, DkKoba wrote:lets take a look at probabilities and such firstly: its going to be a lot to take in, so any help with this would be appreciated from anyone talented with math.
we should eliminate the extreme points because frankly ,we dont want to be in a position where there's a unique power role missing (well, other than the blank vigs. they are kinda stupid).
now we are probably never going to find out which setup we are in based on claims ever, since we have no claiming etc. but we can plan based on likely outcomes of setup rolling.
There's not much depth to strategy however I have discovered a couple scenarios that DO help town gain clears and narrow down things via the n1 flips. (I agree with no claims d1 but post d1 we should 100% consider it)
(im actually incredibly tired after getting all this info up but also is of note that we shouldn't even think about scum lynched d1 because d1 scum lynched is stripped of their power to self protect and must RB others, and even NK and hope vigs kill eachother)
my brain hurts but essentially a vig that successfully shoots a supersaint can claim, especially when a bomb dies and no one else does.
you expect me to read this because then i've got some baaaad news for ya
Post
Post #150 (isolation #20) » Tue May 19, 2020 7:52 pm
Postby Night 3 Roses »
In post 108, Kilgamayan wrote:Posts so far have given me a sense of playing a "safely helpful" game; decent post volume but all of the game content is focused around trying to solve the role puzzle or info dropping (such as details about a previous game that used this setup), which doesn't require any real alignment-related effort. Basically active lurking.
checks kilgamayan's iso
no setup related efforting
no allignment spewing or solving related efforting
is voting us for efforting and calling it active lurking
@DKKoba, I don't really get what you're saying about Holden? Do jokes count as WIFOM? and why am I not in the same level of consideration? Heck, I was the one who brought up the two of us being scum together.
As for the PR talk, I'm going to sit out. I took a semester of clowning at community college, all this math is way above my head. I'll just go with whatever the town consensus is.
P-edit: You and I can RVS as long as you like, but if you change your avatar you're dead to me.
than him when I posted. It helps that 158 is pretty much exactly the response I intended to give to 150, which itself feels like a disingenuous response. Particularly since (a) it doesn't make an attempt to address why my accusation is wrong, and (b) it doesn't differentiate between our post volumes. I would say someone who doesn't post a lot but offers alignment opinions when they do is townier than someone that does post a lot but doesn't offer alignment opinions, regardless of the actual content of those posts.
your own iso up to that point was 4 posts, all of which were either setup talk or non-game related, pot-calling-kettle-black. before i fell asleep, the only discussion so far was Setup Spec, the few KobavTux posts, and some people wanting to vote Holden (which I actually did ask about but got ignored).
than him when I posted. It helps that 158 is pretty much exactly the response I intended to give to 150, which itself feels like a disingenuous response. Particularly since (a) it doesn't make an attempt to address why my accusation is wrong, and (b) it doesn't differentiate between our post volumes. I would say someone who doesn't post a lot but offers alignment opinions when they do is townier than someone that does post a lot but doesn't offer alignment opinions, regardless of the actual content of those posts.
your own iso up to that point was 4 posts, all of which were either setup talk or non-game related, pot-calling-kettle-black. before i fell asleep, the only discussion so far was Setup Spec, the few KobavTux posts, and some people wanting to vote Holden (which I actually did ask about but got ignored).
i don't understand what you mean by (b)?
-D
The idea behind (b) is that I feel a larger volume of gameplay posts without alignment-related efforts comes across as "trying to look like one is being helpful without one actually being helpful" than a smaller volume of such posts, which could be explained as simply as "I have notable stretches of time throughout each day where I am able to pay little/no attention to the game". I will grant that it can be tough to dig up alignment opinions on ED1, but DkKoba was at least making such an effort, like with their vote for me (which happened early on and was something you could have made at least one alignment-opinion post about).
I also followed my vote for you a bit later with an alignment opinion on the DkKoba/Holden argument, which you could also have made at least one alignment-opinion by now but haven't.
Basically, for all your posting, I don't actually know what you think about the alignments of anyone in the game, whereas even with my current low volume of posts, I think I have some pretty obvious positive/negative opinions of a few players.
why such a difference between purely the volume of posts if they're all the same content-wise?
i was thinking of questioning koba, but tuxedo beat me to it, and i don't like butting in when i see someone questioning someone else. then when he said there hasn't been anything ai so far and didn't react to tuxedo calling it a joke, i figured it was just that.
do posts have to be made in the format of "x is town y is scum" for them to count? ico's earlier posts showed liking tux and disliking you and ceejay.
Post
Post #200 (isolation #32) » Wed May 20, 2020 1:51 pm
Postby Night 3 Roses »
In post 198, Hoctac wrote:Datisi, is there a reason you unvote before placing your vote on ceejay? If the reason is to show us you were voting for someone prior, I do not understand the logic as you did not include the person's name with the unvote. Strange.
my previous post was talking about RVS votes, in which i said my vote was one of them, and it got clidd to respond to me with a Sherlock gif? s'there a point to this?
In post 198, Hoctac wrote:Datisi, is there a reason you unvote before placing your vote on ceejay? If the reason is to show us you were voting for someone prior, I do not understand the logic as you did not include the person's name with the unvote. Strange.
my previous post was talking about RVS votes, in which i said my vote was one of them, and it got clidd to respond to me with a Sherlock gif? s'there a point to this?
-D
Ah, I did not realise clidd had responded with a Sherlock gif. Is there a reason you unvote before voting in the same post?
because i said "
it
has served its purpose now" referring to my current vote? if you're expecting a profound thought behind it, i'm gonna have to disappoint you.
~
In post 203, Kilgamayan wrote:Man, my mind short-circuited for a moment there because I completely forgot that Holmes and Moriarty are actual characters that have appeared in many different mediums and not just a hot dude and a foxy grandpa from everyone's favorite cell phone game.
from the what
In post 203, Kilgamayan wrote:@Night 3 Roses: I think the post volume difference does matter in that a higher post volume comes across as an active attempt to look good whereas the lower post volume does not. To be sure, not contributing is generally a scummy thing, but I am more wary of someone that's actively trying to look good without actually contributing than someone's that not trying to look good while also not actually contributing.
I will admit I assumed you (or your slot, or whatever term is appropriate) didn't like ceejay or myself not because of any scumhunting justification, but simply because we're voting for you. Aside from Hoctac being unhappy with ceejay for not being original, no one else has seemed to have a problem with the nature of the pressure being applied to you, so I figured it was a safe assumption. I've seen so many players over the years do it, so.
you're assuming i'm trying to look good. i'm well aware of what "active lurking" is. i was posting because i felt like posting, and at the time what i felt like "actually contributing" either a thing that could've been ai was already dismissed as non-ai, or my question got ignored.
i can tell (or at least i like to believe i can...) the difference between good votes and bad votes on my slot, simply disliking/scumreading someone because they dare vote against me would be silly. i think your arguments are bad but they seem to be genuine. (un)fortunately ico is currently having some sorta holiday so i can't exactly bug him right now to ask what he thinks.
In post 203, Kilgamayan wrote:(particularly since my question about your potential alt-account-ness wasn't addressed)
are you saying it wasn't addressed by hoctac or did you miss the second part of 165?
Post
Post #283 (isolation #36) » Thu May 21, 2020 8:12 pm
Postby Night 3 Roses »
In post 179, Kilgamayan wrote:Basically, for all your posting, I don't actually know what you think about the alignments of anyone in the game, whereas even with my current low volume of posts, I think I have some pretty obvious positive/negative opinions of a few players.
Strongly disagree. You are pushing us on something that your slot is guilty of to a worse extent.
If you have those opinions, they ain't in your iso and they definitely weren't at the tim of your push on us. So I don't understand how it's natural for you to have that scumread.
Post
Post #285 (isolation #38) » Thu May 21, 2020 8:14 pm
Postby Night 3 Roses »
In post 193, clidd wrote:Ok, im done reading. Kilgamayan and Dkkoba are likely town, I have a TL on them (maybe I'll change my mind If see something on Kilga's meta)
I would like to know Ceejay's opinion about the pushs on his wagon and why his focus is still on Night 3 Roses, and not on the accusers.
Post
Post #286 (isolation #39) » Thu May 21, 2020 8:15 pm
Postby Night 3 Roses »
In post 198, Hoctac wrote:Datisi, is there a reason you unvote before placing your vote on ceejay? If the reason is to show us you were voting for someone prior, I do not understand the logic as you did not include the person's name with the unvote. Strange.
Post
Post #287 (isolation #40) » Thu May 21, 2020 8:17 pm
Postby Night 3 Roses »
In post 203, Kilgamayan wrote:not contributing is generally a scummy thing, but I am more wary of someone that's actively trying to look good without actually contributing than someone's that not trying to look good while also not actually contributing.
I don't think you really know who you are dealing with here if you think that either -D or me cares about how we look. And that's as either allignment.
I really don't get the 'trying to look good angle' because I Always have a fuck all attitude and it's NAI.
Post
Post #288 (isolation #41) » Thu May 21, 2020 8:20 pm
Postby Night 3 Roses »
In post 215, Kilgamayan wrote:Like, I still think your earlier performance is a mildly scummy approach - "you're assuming i'm trying to look good" and "i was posting because i felt like posting" are things one could just as easily say falsely as scum as truthfully as town, and while yes, town and scum can behave in similar manners and do similar things, there are some town behaviors and actions that are easier to do as scum than other town behaviors and actions, and I think your earlier play falls in the first category there - but your responses have felt more like "slightly offended townie" than "defensive scum", so I'm willing to shelve it for the time being. Particularly given recent happenings. (Also I somehow completely missed the bottom of your 165. Terribly sorry for that.)
I don't understand your take and conclusions here. If something can come from scum just as easily as town, how are you scumreading it? You literally just said it's NAI yourself.
At least the reassessing and trying to solve here is a +.
In post 198, Hoctac wrote:Datisi, is there a reason you unvote before placing your vote on ceejay? If the reason is to show us you were voting for someone prior, I do not understand the logic as you did not include the person's name with the unvote. Strange.
my previous post was talking about RVS votes, in which i said my vote was one of them, and it got clidd to respond to me with a Sherlock gif? s'there a point to this?
-D
Ah, I did not realise clidd had responded with a Sherlock gif. Is there a reason you unvote before voting in the same post?
because i said "
it
has served its purpose now" referring to my current vote? if you're expecting a profound thought behind it, i'm gonna have to disappoint you.
~
In post 203, Kilgamayan wrote:Man, my mind short-circuited for a moment there because I completely forgot that Holmes and Moriarty are actual characters that have appeared in many different mediums and not just a hot dude and a foxy grandpa from everyone's favorite cell phone game.
from the what
In post 203, Kilgamayan wrote:@Night 3 Roses: I think the post volume difference does matter in that a higher post volume comes across as an active attempt to look good whereas the lower post volume does not. To be sure, not contributing is generally a scummy thing, but I am more wary of someone that's actively trying to look good without actually contributing than someone's that not trying to look good while also not actually contributing.
I will admit I assumed you (or your slot, or whatever term is appropriate) didn't like ceejay or myself not because of any scumhunting justification, but simply because we're voting for you. Aside from Hoctac being unhappy with ceejay for not being original, no one else has seemed to have a problem with the nature of the pressure being applied to you, so I figured it was a safe assumption. I've seen so many players over the years do it, so.
you're assuming i'm trying to look good. i'm well aware of what "active lurking" is. i was posting because i felt like posting, and at the time what i felt like "actually contributing" either a thing that could've been ai was already dismissed as non-ai, or my question got ignored.
i can tell (or at least i like to believe i can...) the difference between good votes and bad votes on my slot, simply disliking/scumreading someone because they dare vote against me would be silly. i think your arguments are bad but they seem to be genuine. (un)fortunately ico is currently having some sorta holiday so i can't exactly bug him right now to ask what he thinks.
In post 203, Kilgamayan wrote:(particularly since my question about your potential alt-account-ness wasn't addressed)
are you saying it wasn't addressed by hoctac or did you miss the second part of 165?
-D
I like the
"your reasons for suspecting me look bad, but I think you're town"
mentality. It's the kind of thing that I find myself applying in every game as town.
I feel that a scum mentality is more inclined to apply omgus in this situation on the pretext that the accuser is acting in bad faith.
I disagree with this, clidd. Anti-OMGUS is actually a slight scumtell, though context is king of course. However, I am pleased to hear that you refrain from exhibiting OMGUS as town.
does this mean you scumlean us or are you just disagreeing with the "theory"?
~
In post 239, clidd wrote:Don't worry, I think it's even better for me to analyze you without established prejudices of your scumgame.
Who's posting right now? Ico or D? If it's Ico do you still town read Dkkoba? If so why?
P-edit: Oh, can you answer how you feel about Dkkoba?
annoyed mostly
i was hoping to let ico read players like them since i have a p hard time reading aggressive players (and may have lost a couple of games because of that)
In post 401, Night 3 Roses wrote:holden my dude you still have your rvs vote up, does it reflect your reads or
also same question at enomis
It's my RVS vote.
It's just vibing rn. Does that vibing bother you? Is this a no voting vibing zone?
--- absolutely no vote vibing allowed ---
i'm asking because i notice the last VC that 3 votes (actually it's 4 now that ceejay unvoted) are either RVS with not much sign that the holder is Happy with the vote, or are straight up not voting
Post
Post #445 (isolation #59) » Sun May 24, 2020 3:38 am
Postby Night 3 Roses »
yeah, i have seen scum fake scumhunt, i've played mafia before. scum by definition cannot genuinely scumhunt. good scum can fake it well, sure. but saying that everyone can or that it's easy to do is ???. ok cool day 1 is difficult low info yadda yadda. nobody said it's easy. so why don't we all go "oh well it's day 1 everyone is null". like does genuinely nothing so far make you think one way or another?