Mini 2079 - Guns & Roses [Game Over]

[Alisae]

Okay.
I'ma get some sleep.

[Something_Smart]

if we run someone up today and they claim gun, and the real gun sees this and knows that they're mafia, they shouldn't counterclaim. Instead they should just shoot them (on whatever night they can), because they're mafia and the mafia probably took guns (and even if they took roses, it's not guaranteed they'd be on the same night(s) as the town gun).

Not sure about this for three reasons. One, it's helpful to have a confscum dead so that we can scumhunt off of associatives. Two, especially if this occurs D1, we may give a mafia gun an extra shot by letting them live an extra night. And three, it's unlikely that scum would counterclaim to lynch a gun claim when they can just shoot them-- so counterclaims can PROBABLY be trusted. That does depend on the numbers though, because we don't know if scum are going to hit active roses or not.

[Something_Smart]

Something Smart why aren't you voting me yet?

Why would you expect me to be?

[Something_Smart]

Vote: Something_Smart

Oh and this vote wasn't random, by the by. S_S's entrance was not good. Actively choosing to decline the gambit choice (be the third vote on the Pops wagon v. start your own RVS wagon) and just post an empty phrase as he did feels like he was trying to slip into the thread, look like he's arrived but dodge having to enter crossfires early.

I rarely participate in RVS. I don't change my vote much, especially early, and it has more meaning to myself and to others when they can see my vote on a VC and immediately know it's serious. Argue with me on whether that's a good idea all you want, but it's what I do, and I don't use my vote a lot on D1 anyway because I usually focus on townhunting.

Also, I play by egosearch. So I still wanted to post, even though I had nothing to say.

[Something_Smart]

Oh god it's a literal actual trust tell

"Trust that I'm not a bad person, so I'm town"

Well, no. It's not a trust tell unless you explicitly uphold it as both town and scum, and you explicitly insist that you uphold it as both town and scum, and I don't think e said anything amounting to the latter. Without that it's just a regular tell.

That said, I hope e would know not to intentionally mess with your feelings as either alignment...

[popsofctown]

VOTE: Vote: Something_Smart
I'm sheeping LLD.
Not on her top read cause I don't understand that one but I like the logic on S_S.

Unfounded accusations could have subbed in for a vote if he cares so much about the voting record.
Is there gonna be a 100% siteflake rate on the newbies?

[Something_Smart]

Unfounded accusations could have subbed in for a vote if he cares so much about the voting record.

Kinda confused by this, are you suggesting that it's towny to make random accusations in your first post?

[popsofctown]

Yes

[Something_Smart]

Why do you say that?

[popsofctown]

Because it's true.

I'm gonna reread this thread tomorrow and have more/better to say

[Something_Smart]

I very rarely see random accusations made early and not accompanied by an RVS vote by players of either alignment, so even if it is town indicative, the fact that the vast majority of people don't do it means that not doing it is hardly going to be scum indicative.

[hitogoroshi]

re: claiming. Listen, there's two things that go in to the decision on how to treat claims:

1.) Are we going to demand gun claims right away?
2.) Are we going to back off lynching a gun claim if they're our most suspected person?

2 is the one I am worried about. There's a strong chance killing D1 vs N1/D2 denies extra kill pressure from the mafia, so getting a D1 mafia kill is very good, but answer question 2 with "yes" makes it nearly impossible to achieve. If everyone agrees the answer to question 2 is "no" - or at least "if there's a cc gun claim, we lynch the original target that day, instead of texas justice or anything like that" - then whatever, I don't care as much about question 1, even if I think it really ought to be "yes" once question 2 is "no". We can be double "no" and it's whatever. But I'm gonna keep being strident that "yes" to question 2 seems fuckin awful!

re: LLD/Alisae. For LLD, I can just barely believe that LLD scum could fake something like that, but I really don't think she'd be inclined to? LLD-scum tends to bust out the big ATEs in high-pressure situations but I just can't buy LLD-scum being all that worried here. So it feels pretty town/town on the face of it, my meta on LLD makes me more inclined to think it, don't know anything about Alisae to adjust that prior on eir side.

I'll do a separate post for my quote response to keep shit readable.

[Something_Smart]

I would rather lynch the gun today with a guarantee of lynching mafia tomorrow, if the gun was already the scummiest player alive, than I would have the gun claim today and get killed tonight. So with respect to 2), I say that if someone does claim gun on the stand, we ask for CC's, and if there's a CC lynch the first claimer regardless.

Worst case scenario, that puts us in 4:1 if scum CC, and it's more likely to put us in 8:1 if the original gun claimer was scum.

[justincase1017]

well it is 1st day. I read all the threads and I am gonna go with what I see so far....

VOTE: LLD

[hitogoroshi]

also, Alisae saying you seemed scummy so far very early on caught my attention -- it made me reassess your first couple posts, and I felt like they came off as you trying to be present early on without necessarily being

involved

early on.

What does a song lyric do differently here then the "damn" and "aloha" posts, I guess? I tend to find first posts without voting to be more of "present without involved" than those with. (Not that I think SS or implo are mafia for their first posts, because I don't buy in to "present without involved" for the first coupla pages. But if you do, why LLD shitpost-with-vote over nothing-post-without-vote?)

I rarely participate in RVS. I don't change my vote much, especially early, and it has more meaning to myself and to others when they can see my vote on a VC and immediately know it's serious. Argue with me on whether that's a good idea all you want, but it's what I do, and I don't use my vote a lot on D1 anyway because I usually focus on townhunting.

Also, I play by egosearch. So I still wanted to post, even though I had nothing to say.

aaaaah this has happened in like my last three games and I am sick of it (and also it has always come from town) so even though this is getting-MD-in-mafia: voting vs townhunting are not at all at odds - the more you utilize your vote, the more you'll find townies, as well as scum. This is for all sorts of reasons: partly because you can do pressure tests that leave you walking away really liking someones reaction, partly because it introduces you into the conversation more and you have an inherent advantage reading exchanges you're involved in, and especially because being more responsive with your vote lets us read YOU, which will both help the town get reads AND helps YOU find townies by people's responses to your more transparent play. Saying you'll only cast votes past some threshold of 'seriousness' means that in the early game you're not directing the town, you're harder to read, you have no chance of causing an interesting pressure reaction, etc etc. I was like you in my mafia youth and I can say without reservation you are objectively a worse mafia player than the future version of yourself who's eking every last drop of advantage outta your vote. the good news is that you can #GlowUp in this very game! cast your vote in your next post my friend!!

VOTE: Vote: Something_Smart
I'm sheeping LLD.
Not on her top read cause I don't understand that one but I like the logic on S_S.

Hey pops, what the hell? If I'm openwolfing, that means that I'm so smug about being the gee-darn mafia that I'm not even trying to hide it and just playing for maximal advantage for my team. that is a pretty serious accusation and I was excited to hear more! but instead you just get off my wagon without a word on how I'm openwolfing and instead sheeping LLD but not even her primary read? When you just said you can't read LLD and figure that if she's scum you're just catching her on associatives with her partner?

renewing my vows

VOTE: popsofctown

well it is 1st day. I read all the threads and I am gonna go with what I see so far....

VOTE: LLD

You need to vote with bold text or VOTE: tags so it's easily visible.

Who do you think is

least

likely to be mafia so far?

[justincase1017]

Thanks for the instruction, I think it is natural to be unsure on the 1st day but I read xyzzy and SS's posts and it seems reasonable to me.
I don't really see 'least likely to be mafia' yet. Everyone looks equally doubtful.

VOTE: : LLD

[Something_Smart]

voting vs townhunting are not at all at odds - the more you utilize your vote, the more you'll find townies, as well as scum.

In general, yes you're probably right.

However, just because something's true for most people doesn't make it true for everyone. You might even be right about it being true for me, but I'm basing my actions off of my experience-- and in my experience, I usually don't get better reads as a result of my votes.

If you'd like me to vote a particular person for reactions and you have a good reason for it, that's not a bad compromise.

[FakeGod]

Apparently some of the players are unable to post in the thread.

I will try to have it sorted out asap.

[Alisae]

VOTE: Vote: Something_Smart
I'm sheeping LLD.
Not on her top read cause I don't understand that one but I like the logic on S_S.

Unfounded accusations could have subbed in for a vote if he cares so much about the voting record.
Is there gonna be a 100% siteflake rate on the newbies?

what do you like about it?

[Alisae]

Thanks for the instruction, I think it is natural to be unsure on the 1st day but I read xyzzy and SS's posts and it seems reasonable to me.
I don't really see 'least likely to be mafia' yet. Everyone looks equally doubtful.

VOTE: : LLD

So what makes LLD stand out?

[Agoodcivilian555]

I second to justincase

VOTE: : LLD

LLD was too aggressively defensive when accused.

[Something_Smart]

Here's the format you want to use for votes:

Code: Select all

[v]LLD[/v]

You can copy-paste it or type it exactly as written in the code box.

[Alisae]

I second to justincase

VOTE: : LLD

LLD was too aggressively defensive when accused.

That aggressiveness is just her personality.
She's always like that regardless.
If you think there's something that makes it particularly wolfy here, it would be nice if you could explain it.

[Alisae]

Vote Tags. Result: VOTE: Fakegod

Code: Select all

[v]person name[/v] [vote]person name[/vote]

Unvote tags. result: UNVOTE: Fakegod

Code: Select all

[uv]person name[/uv] [unvote]person name[/unvote]

You can also just use bold tags as well.

[Alisae]

Other nifty features for newbies to use.
A post is given a post number.
You can refer to posts using [post= tags
So for example, if I wanted to refer say "I feel like you're town/scum because of post x" all I would have to do is put [post]] tags

So for example, if I wanted to refer say "I feel like you're town/scum because of post x" all I would have to do is put and put the number inbetween them
like 98

Also, right next to the post number is the ISO button. If you click that you can view their iso.
You can also view their iso by clicking activity overview underneath the page numbers and clicking on the number of posts the person you specificly want has.
The activity overview tells you
- how many posts a person has
- when they last posted
- when their first post was made
- and lastly, how much time past since they made a post.

Also, here are a few more tricks that not that many people know and more experienced players themselves may not know.
You can look at ISOs of up to 3 people at once. To do this, look under quick reply to find "Display post by user" this by default is set to all users, but you can change that to be anyone you want who has posted in the thread. There's also a + button next to it, so you can add more people's names to it. You can only do it up to 3 people at once, but thats all you really need.

And lastly, you can use this url to display posts at 200 posts per page.
viewtopic.php?f=23&t=79939&ppp=200
This makes it easier to read games since you don't have to keep going to the next page, you can just infantly scroll until you reached the 200th post. THEN you have to go to the next page.