Newbie 991 - Newbieville! (Game Over)

[Aranneas]

I am pretty content with the reluctant lynch

scapegoat?

because your previous content post mentioned reluctant in your town reads

[Thor665]

You are correct, scapegoat is who I meant.

How do you feel about Anton?

[Aranneas]

Based on one post? I may be open with my reads but that's pushing it even for me.
But I will give it a shot. FOR THE GAME

It's clouded by the fact that he's still catching up. I've had some rough experiences with that myself on replacing, so I'm trying not to be quick to judge, but the sense that I get is that he's 'trying to appear town'. Not much of a logical basis behind it, mostly just a gut read, but I can try to dissect it. He has a lot of fluff for a post of that size and ends up pegging the target of opportunity.

Note that this does not mean by definition that he's not town. It just means to my mind, he's (sub?)consciously trying to project the appearance. But it does make me uneasy.

[Coach Travis]

I'm really not sure about Anton, because I liked his big post for the most part, but he hasn't done anything since, and never even voted, so factor all that in and he doesn't seem all that townish right now. Still, I don't find him as scummy as scapegoat right now, and don't think he's as good a lynch target. I definitely want to see more from him though, and soon.

As for Thor's list:I like it, and I find it almost as important to find town players as scum players anyway, because if you find someone you're very certain is town, that narrows down the list of potential scum, so it can be very helpful in the long run.

[reluctant]

Scapegoat is the only one I'd be willing to consider right now, but I'd still prefer holding off a bit if possible. I'd still like to hear more from Jupiter (or his replacement) and Anton.

[Aranneas]

2-0 my favour vs. Izzy. Wish him better luck in the future.

[Aranneas]

wrong thread >.> can I get a mod delete?

[Thor665]

Scapegoat is the only one I'd be willing to consider right now, but I'd still prefer holding off a bit if possible. I'd still like to hear more from Jupiter (or his replacement) and Anton.

If scapegoat were magically removed from the game and we were suddenly at deadline - who would you vote for?

[reluctant]

Scapegoat is the only one I'd be willing to consider right now, but I'd still prefer holding off a bit if possible. I'd still like to hear more from Jupiter (or his replacement) and Anton.

If scapegoat were magically removed from the game and we were suddenly at deadline - who would you vote for?

In this crazy hypothetical situation If we were at deadline in 15 minutes, I'd bandwagon on whoever had the most votes to try to get a lynch before day 1 ended, this would include myself. I think even a bad lynch is probably better than no lynch based on the stats mentioned above. If there wasn't a clear target to bandwagon on I'd vote either you or Anton, whichever I felt would get more support for a lynch, so probably Anton.

I'm curious as to your response to this hypothetical question as well.

[Thor665]

In this crazy hypothetical situation If we were at deadline in 15 minutes, I'd bandwagon on whoever had the most votes to try to get a lynch before day 1 ended, this would include myself.

You shouldn't vote for town - voting for yourself is (let us presume) a vote for town - why would you vote for town?

I judge by this answer that you have no real clear feel for a second scummiest player - what are you intending to do to get a better read off of the other players? Just answering my questions doesn't seem like th emost proactive way, does it?

If there wasn't a clear target to bandwagon on I'd vote either you or Anton, whichever I felt would get more support for a lynch, so probably Anton.

What have I and Anton done to make us worthy of a vote?

I'm curious as to your response to this hypothetical question as well.

I already answered it.

I am pretty content with the reluctant lynch as currently stands, and I would be willing to consider the Anton lynch.

[Thor665]

*thoguh again - change reluctant to scapegoat in that last quote sentence, as previously noted

[reluctant]

You shouldn't vote for town - voting for yourself is (let us presume) a vote for town - why would you vote for town?

I think even a bad lynch is better than no lynch. If we were at deadline I would vote in any way I could to avoid a no lynch. If there were 4 votes on me and I lived b/c a deadline happened people would still suspect me the next day and that would be a distraction. If I died everyone would know my role / alignment and then that gives them concrete information to go on and stops me from being a distraction.

I judge by this answer that you have no real clear feel for a second scummiest player - what are you intending to do to get a better read off of the other players? Just answering my questions doesn't seem like th emost proactive way, does it?
...
What have I and Anton done to make us worthy of a vote?

You're right, I don't have a strong feel for 2nd scummiest. The reasons I mentioned in post 74 are still the reasons I would use to vote you or Anton. I've been trying to ask myself what information I'd gain from scapegoats death if he turns out to be scum and what information I'd gain if he turns out to be town. I haven't come up with much yet, though maybe seeing the reaction of the players and who gets NK'd will help.

I guess you are right, I'm probably not being proactive enough. I'm still new to this and I'm not sure how to get more information besides providing content and hoping that others will do the same. I'd like to see more posts from Anton & Jupiter, and to a lesser extent willows_weep & Mrs Sak but I can't make them post. Hopefully any discussion will make other people chime in, which gives us more to base our decisions off of. I will also probably go back and re-read everything again at some point and provide updated reads when I think it useful.

In your lack of inexperience as an IC, how often do games have players who just fail to participate and is there any correlation between participation level and alignment? I've spent some time thinking about that, wondering what could make one post less? Personal reasons (too busy, broken computer, etc), disappointed with role (thinking a VT role is lame), boredom (turns out forum mafia isn't for me) or fear (of saying something scummy) is what I've come up with.

[Coach Travis]

I feel I could answer those questions as well, since I have some experience of my own:Every game I've played in(on both sites) has had at least one or two players who haven't really done much, and either they eventually get lynched for this, or they end up needing to be replaced. I consider lurking to be scummy, since the town needs to do whatever it takes to get as much information as possible, but I don't think it's really a way to determine alignment, I used to think it was, but I've seen it go both ways, with some people just not caring for the game or being too busy, and others as scum trying not to slip up. Basically, lurking is unfortunately quite common, and because there are many different possible reasons for it, so I don't think there's a correlation between activity level and alignment.

[Aranneas]

ITT: People post about how people need to post more.

And yes, it's hypocritical of me to say that. And yes, it's true. But it irritates me (mildly) that five pages in this is still the topic of choice. Either they will, or they won't. Talking about it in the topic they're not posting in is unlikely to change much.

A *known* mislynch is never the correct play in a normal (or newbie) game. If there's someone most of us have a town read on (which I do for reluctant atm, he has been playing full town since page 2.5ish) we can analyze wagons just as easily without the flip. If it comes to that I suggest we take out someone who everyone is feeling ambiguous about. But I don't think we're there yet.

[Thor665]

@reluctant - Coach Travis gave a decent answer, and the quick summation is - lurking is a null tell. (active lurking, however, should be considered scummy - active lurking is posting enough not to be called a lurker while having all of your posts be on 'neutral' stuff and not really making real opinions known.

@Mrs Sak - would really like to hear you restate your thoughts on Aranneas and why he should be lynched. My read there is town and I think you're wrong.

@scapegoat - *really* want to hear your thoughts on why you are still voting reluctant.

@Coach Travis - what is your take on active lurking as a scumtell?

@willows_weep - are you still alive, or have the zombies gotten to you? I'd like you to weigh in on your current thoughts on at least two of the people with votes on them.

My current lynch desire list is;
scapegoat (or reluctant, who can tell them apart )
Anton
Coach Travis

[Coach Travis]

Yeah, active lurking is pretty scummy, because it's a good way to give the illusion of being an active player, making it seem like you're helpful, when really all you're doing is posting as much fluff as you can just to keep the post count up. It's not necessarily the first thing I look for when scumhunting, but it can be a factor in finding scum, if the scum aren't playing particularly well.

Right now, my main suspect is obviously scapegoat, but if I had to name two others I'd be willing to vote today if it came up:Probably Anton and willow_weep, though both are more because I haven't seen enough to get a read on them, while I'm not really suspicious of anyone else right now. DukeJupiter will probably need to be replaced, so I can't comment on him either way.

[Coach Travis]

To add to my thoughts on active lurking:The main reason I said it's not the first thing I look for, is because it's such an obvious scum thing to do, I would expect anyone who's played even one game to know not to do it. Obviously, whenever I see someone doing it I consider it suspicious, but I haven't seen it happen as often as standard lurking.

[reluctant]

@Thor I see you put Coach Travis on your lynch desire list. I'm interested to hear why. So far he seems to have been suspected by others very little. I certainly haven't ruled him out, but I got a pretty strong town vibe from him.

[Thor665]

I will first off note, that sometimes it is best not to say things too much in order to see the reactions they create.

For starters look at how he's responding to my question. He's certainly not dumb and he understands I see his current actions as active lurking to some degree or other. That's why his first response includes commentary in addition to answering my question - he's offering more reads so as to show he's doing more then just active lurking. He then follows shortly thereafter with another post suggesting he believes active lurking isn't even that good of a scum tell to begin with, and certainly not as worthwhile as considering those who have been lurking. At the very least this shows he agrees that active lurking is a charge that can be applied to him.

Also, thus far this game I've felt his play is a little 'follow the IC' which suggests one of two possibilities. 1. He thinks I'm a brilliant player and am town, and is following me because either he's not sure what else to do and chooses to follow the towniest player he sees and/or he agrees with pretty much everything I've done thus far *or* he's scum, and he figures by playing nice nice with me he'll avoid suspicion from me and hopefully I'll lead town on a charge away from him.

I certainly consider him a person of interest right now. Depending on what I can/cannot get out of Anton and scapegoat will probably help shape my opinions as regards Travis.

[scapegoat]

Welcome to the first full week of day 1. So far, this game has been nothing but boring, and the lack of a day 1 bandwagon has given us no answers. All your 'reads' and statistics are 100% worthless right now. It's going nowhere.

Feel free to sub me out.

[Thor665]

We've had two bandwagons, actually. Both you and reluctant have been taken to L-1.

I'm sorry to hear you don't like the play environment here at mafiascum, we are slower paced here then at some boards. Thanks for trying us out.

[willows_weep]

I would not vote scapegoat for their thoughts on roleclaiming. Roleclaiming is only useful or important if you have something to hide. Otherwise claiming a vt if you are vt looks scummy and expendable. I just came from winning as scum on a newb game where I subbed in during a rough patch of the game where I suddenly had to claim. I claimed doc. Since I had something to hide role claiming was pretty intense. Luckily folks believed me enough that I was alive 2 more days and won with my partner. Now if I said I was vt I would likely have been nixed. Expendable. If I really were vt then claiming would have been pointless if I were forced to l1 because folks thought I was that scummy.
Right now coach travis looks suspect to me. I haven't seen the most recent post count .
If scapegoat is scum then I'd peg thor as the scum buddy
With that said I'd like to vote scapegoat. This is going off of what I feel is thor's unnecessary back hand coaching of scapegoat. Not sure there was a good reason to tell scapegoat that you wished they had not claimed. Other townsolk really should have no vested interest in that roleclaim since they really can't tell if it is true or not. Ie for other vt it adds to the confusion. Like "are you a powerless role like me that just has to walk blindly in the midst of otyers paranoia?" I'd like to see the latest vote count then dep on that ill vote scapegoat .
Also, comp is still broken and I'm on vacation in maine until tuesday (however my mac gets delivered wednesday) and then I'm leaving again on thursday afternoon. That is a lot of v/la between the broken comp and vacations. If you feel the need to sub me out that's fine.

[Thor665]

@willows_weep - I noted the lack of desire to have scapegoat claim due to my IC role of wanting to inform players of general mafia strategy. It is odd how often players think claiming as soon as a few vote is on them is a good strategy. I wanted him to know it was not.

Also, me being buddies with scapegoat? Is that why, right when reluctant was at L-1 and about to claim that I actually told him not to claim, and shifted my vote to scapegoat? Why would I do that if scapegoat was my partner? It would make a reasonable amount of sense if you wanted to claim reluctant was my partner - but scapegoat? I don't grok.

[xRECKONERx]

reluctant (1): scapegoat
Aranneas (1): Mrs Sak
scapegoat (3): Thor665, Coach Travis, Aranneas

Not voting (4): Anton, DukeJupiter, willows_weep, reluctant

Apparently, I'm going to need to replace DukeJupiter & Mrs Sak. Prodding Anton.

[Thor665]

Feel free to sub me out.

@Mod

It's times like this that mods earn their danger pay.