Micro 71: Lucid Dreamers - Night 4

[ProHawk]

/bows to the Almighty T-Bone

[ProHawk]

VOTE: PiggyGal15

For being a duck.

[ProHawk]

I vote the alignment reveal again, this time we don't even have to worry about the possible actions taken the night before
Thoughts?

This is my first Lucid Dreamers game, so I would like to hear your theory behind the idea...

[ProHawk]

Mit, trying to read through a Lucid Dreams game because there is a lot of talk about theoretical planning and such. I don't know what to make of the sides (town or scum) without a solid background in how things could go. I will get back with some of my thoughts soon.

[ProHawk]

Mil, my point is, until I see what has come of planning, who likes to pitch the ideas, and which way is generally pro-town, etc my reads won't be as effective. Don't worry, my activity here won't be a problem.

Can I shoot you if you're scum?

[ProHawk]

Mit - Thanks for the permission.

Piggy - There are some strange things going on with your posts. Explain yourself.

Here

Today we No Lynch.

And

Well that sucks plan wise :/
Therefore I will say, DON'T BE A HERO AND TRY TO VIG SOMEONE TONIGHT.

I'm serious here, RC got LUCKY last game. I doubt we'll get that lucky again.

Hmmm... All the role ideas I had are now unusable, which is saddening...

Here.

No-Lynch... and RC got Lucky? I would have vigged/lynched Klick myself if I would have been playing.

Both of these points are bad. Had a no-lynch occurred, Klick would not have hammered town (his most scummy post IMO). Had Klick not been vigged, he wouldn't have been lynched D2 because he would have faked his death. It was not a random vig target from what I saw.

My read on you - scummy. I see someone posting pro-town ideas with ulterior motives. Discuss/explain.

[ProHawk]

Um, I can't really tell much.

Piggy has a eensy weensy townread from me, so can't take that wagon.

Don't really support the whole empking wagon.

VOTE: Mist7676

For trying to derail a wagon that could have gotten us information. Sure it will crash and burn, but it's already going so maybe stop trying to crash it?

I think I'm developing a dislike for catchup posts...

For someone so fixated on how wagons provide information, interesting that you provided a non-wagon vote?

[ProHawk]

Don't really like the piggy wagon, especially L-1 so early. Definitely don't want a lynch without much more content from Siveure and some others.

But more than that I don't like Prohawk's reasoning:

Calling for no-lynch while also calling for no hero-vigilantism is logically consistent and doesn't show any cognitive dissonance.

I get it. You don't like me. You have said it twice.

Problem is, I am not here to gain your support. I am not here to make you like me. I am here to catch scum.

Calling for a no-lynch while calling for no hero-vigilantism sounds pro-town/logically consistent/doesn't show any cognitive dissonance at first glance. However, what I am saying is that in the last game she played in (which Piggy uses as support for her argument):

The lynch directly lead to the death of scum

by

hero-vigilantism. Herein lies the logic inconsistency/cognitive dissonance I am wanting Piggy to explain.

Side Note:

Mists rebuttal (Post #83) of Siveure's argument for voting her is interesting, and something that I also found to be lacking in Siveures post. Although Siveure is speaking in the past tense that Mist "derailed" a wagon, the fact is that he is also indirectly "derailing" any other wagon by not joining one. (One vote does not equal a wagon). I understood Mist's argument as such and agree.

[ProHawk]

Already disliking Prohawk as well. Him and Mist are my biggest scum reads, though I doubt the interaction between them comes from scumbuddies.

Prohawk, I was saying we no lynch if we do the alignment reveal plan. We're not doing the alignment reveal plan because we can't even do that anymore. Ergo, we're lynching today.
How in the world can you say that what RC did was obvious? Klick wasn't anywhere near scummy (at least not to me, he was barely even there) so why would you think RC had any way of obviously knowing that Klick would be scum and would warrant a lynch? Unless you're suggesting he got outside knowledge or something,

it was just a lucky shot.

Ok. Please state the reason you dislike me, and clarify if disliking indicates that I am scum.

[ProHawk]

How in the world can you say that what RC did was obvious? Klick wasn't anywhere near scummy (at least not to me, he was barely even there) so why would you think RC had any way of obviously knowing that Klick would be scum and would warrant a lynch? Unless you're suggesting he got outside knowledge or something,

it was just a lucky shot.

Also, in answer to your question read this exchange when RC had a chance to explain himself as well as Klicks explanation. Posts #320-#324

https://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.p ... 4#p4444774

RC explains why it was not just a lucky shot.

Klick explains why he was deliberately acting scummy.

[ProHawk]

I understand he (Zoid) nor you mean you dis-like me personally. My point is I am not here to make in-game friends or allies so most of my methods will be harsh because they have to be in order to fish out scum. If dislike = scum read then thats fine, I just need to know so that I am not mis-repping your posts when I gather evidence.

Do you happen to like politics? You dislike the idea of my slot being town or you disbelieve that my slot would be town..... so do you think I am scum? Please provide your reasoning if you could.

Also, while you're here care to address the issue of you voting for your obv-town read?

[ProHawk]

Time for my reads.

~ Town ~

Mit

- Is actively hunting, seems genuine

~ Leaning Town ~

Mist

- Participating, willing to stick her neck out.

Qwints

- Scum hunting has been little to none, however he was the first most vocal against making plans when most everyone else was trying to come up with something

Sive

- Uses logic that I can't really follow, but seems to genuinely believe it.

Scream

- Seems to be actively participating, although the double personality is throwing me off a bit.

~ Leaning Scum ~

Empking

- Super Lurker

~ Scum ~

Piggy

- Scummy posts, and responses

Zoidberg

- Fence sitting hard core.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If anyone would like any more explanation on my reads, just ask.

With that said

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Zoidberg

Take a stance on something Zoid.

Side Note: Piggy is still scum.

[ProHawk]

You mean like on Siveure being scum? ok

It is possible to fake taking a stance, which is what I believe you are doing with Siveure. Lets take a look at your vote post.

Piggy has a eensy weensy townread from me, so can't take that wagon.

Whoa there, nugget. Why can't you vote someone who says they have a town read on you?

VOTE: Siveure Dtsomething

First, from what I understand, you read this post wrong. Siveure said he has an eensy weensy townread on Piggy, which is why he didn't vote her. Not the other way around as you seem to imply.

So to me, your stance on Sive was faulty to begin with, and to top it off rocky on its own.

Second, you make no other argument, mention, or attempt to find out if Siveure is

really

scum. I would go so far as to say you don't even care to find out. You only indirectly address him in one post in which you quote qwints who quoted Siveure just to say you wouldn't be on board with his plan, failing to address anything about scum.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now onto my point of fence sitting. You leave your vote on Sieve without any real solid evidence/rationale

Post #71 - Scummy reads on Qwints and Prohawk
Post #84 - Obvious attack on Mist without deliberately calling her scum for her action.
Post #118 - Imply Mit is scum for making a scum-slip about the number of scum in this game

You seem to think that other people are scummy yet maintain your vote on Sieve and don't continue to pursue your reads.

[ProHawk]

@Qwints,

Not seeing how Piggy and Sive are not scum together aside from I don't have a scum-read on Sive. I somewhat agree with your reasoning about scum wanting to be apart of the town planning night actions, however for a much different reason. I believe that scum are doing it not to decrease the efficacy of the town or by limiting them to weak actions, but rather to blend in by looking like town.

Empking - Super Lurker

What metric do you use to think that I'm a super-lurker and not Mist.

Content vs. Fluff. I consider this post even as a content-less ball of fluff. Get to playing, you are quickly dropping down my list of reads.

Initial posts, basically agreement posts, not really offering any insight.
ISO #4, 5, 6, 7 - Short answer question response
ISO #8 - The first post I find content in, and even then its scarce
ISO #10-12 - Very scummy, you want in on the wagon, but don't want to hammer. I could see bussing here.
ISO #13-14 - Fluff

[ProHawk]

Would love to hear some details on your reads Mit, specifically on your Emp's town read and Siv's scum read.

[ProHawk]

Two things about this post that make me post it in full. First, I don't think scum piggy makes that kind of attack on her scum buddy which is why I don't think they're scum together. Second, can we talk about just how stupid this neighbourizing proposal is? What a waste of an action. Not only is this discussing plans of actions (which is anti-town), it's proposing incredibly weak actions. If scum piggy convinces just one townie to neighborize instead of doing something more useful, she'll have achieved a victory for scum. Piggy needs to be the lynch today.

I concur on your point about the attack.

I know scream will scream at me for this, however I think Piggy is on board with the neighborizing because she really thinks its a good plan, not because she is scum trying to convince the town to make poor night choices. My evidence is from the game you linked to. She

did

neighborize in her last game as town which says to me she

thinks

its a smart move.

[ProHawk]

Piggy, your posts are not helping your case. I still think you are scum, just for other reasons. Let see some more content out of you, including your reads.

[ProHawk]

You have failed to mention anything about Scream.

Why do you feel Emp, Zoid, and Mit are town?

[ProHawk]

Still wishing for the promised post from Zoid and not seeing how your play could get any better post D1 Piggy...

[ProHawk]

I'm relaxed, aside from the stagnated forum, but by all means take your time, you haven't missed much.

[ProHawk]

How come you aren't voting Zoid?

[ProHawk]

Yeah, I forgot a coma...

Zoid, how come you aren't voting?

[ProHawk]

comma.... ::facepalm::

[ProHawk]

Qwints, the loose cannon of the town

[ProHawk]

Zoid, why do you have the intent to hammer Piggy?

[ProHawk]

Who said we were ready with two lurkers chillin out?

[ProHawk]

I claim Bomb, what did you do Zoid?

[ProHawk]

Just a few things I don't understand...

1) Emp, why an Ascetic/Aesthetic over Commuter? From what I understand you would still be susceptible to a night kill as an Ascetic.

2) I don't recall one person saying that mist was obvtown.

3) Mist's motive stated in post #249 does not make sense to me. Mist please show me how someone who has to claim scum every third post can do it in a suspicious manner without out-rightly stating it.

4) Post #263 leads me to believe there is more to the post-restriction than Mist has led us to believe?

[ProHawk]

The other obvious possibility is maybe Scream-Zoidberg, as that sort of reflecting investigation could have been faked. Especially given that they went last.

^ I thought of exactly the same thing.

[ProHawk]

^Anti-Town

[ProHawk]

Vote: Mist

- Yeah, I don't understand her motives behind her night action, and I think that's because they're fake (the supposed motives).

VOTE: Empking

I don't agree with the current argument about Mist being scum.

You are lurking AND sheeping.

[ProHawk]

No need to shout? How am I lurking? How is sheeping scummy?

Aside from my post on how you were lurking D1, what content have you provided to help find scum D2? I see you participated in the night action reveal, answered a few questions, and sheeped with qwints.

I view sheeping as scummy because sheep don't have to do extra work to find scum. Scum already know who is innocent and who is guilty therefore in order to attack someone they have to do extra work in order to make their push not seem forced but legitimate. It is a lot easier for them to just sheep off of someone else. The second reason is if they sheep, they don't provide town with content with which could be used against them at a later point.

I also find it convenient that you used a night role which essentially made you untargetable to both kills as well as investigation by seers or watchers/trackers alike. If we are looking at night actions that are scum-motivated yours by far trumps Mists IMO.

[ProHawk]

Qwints, between Mist and Empking, which night action do you consider was made with the most scum-motivation and why?

[ProHawk]

While I agree that her choice of action makes zero sense, where is the scum-motivation?

[ProHawk]

Thoughts on Night Actions: Please comment, and let me know if I am missing anything. There are a lot of logistics that I probably am missing because of my inexperience.

The

Scream-Zoid

cross investigation to me says that they either

both

have to be lying or they are

both cleared

barring any role-redirects. If Scream flips scum, that would then make Zoid's result false and scum (without having had a role redirect). The opposite should also be true.

I believe that it would be less probable that scum would make such a connection as it would lead to a swift loss. Therefore my reads on Scream and Zoid are most likely town for now.

Mist's

action has provided for distraction and a bit of an annoyance.

Still leaning town on Mist.

Mit

- I believe that investigative claims are one of the easiest claims to make as scum because of the information already at your disposal.

Aside from that, Mit has been and continues to be town. He claims third which would be risky as scum IMO.

Qwints

- Making Mist reflective is null in my opinion.

Also a leaning town read for me. I find his quick attacks of scummy behavior townish.

EmpKing

- Making yourself immune to everything

including

any investigative role is chalk full of scum-motivation - especially when you could have used something else like self-priest, or bulletproof which would allow you to survive being night-killed while still allowing people to investigate you.

This action screams scum to me, especially considering his D1 play.

Sive

- This was the first claim which was no action. This claim has the very nice benefit of not having to come up with a back-story to explain any counter claims that could arise should a false action be presented.

I am leaning towards qwints reasoning on Sive from post #337. His failure to present any action is a huge mistake at best, if not a scummy lie. I can see scum being Sive along with EmpKing.

[ProHawk]

And, thats what I missed.... thanks mit, re-running things again.

[ProHawk]

Siv's admitted to flaking. He failed to submit an action, and I think that's the most likely explanation for a scum no-kill. The problem, of course, is that he told us he flaked.

Qwints, please explain. Also, how much of the other game did you read?

[ProHawk]

The target dies when they make their first post can get round BPness.

HFOS: Pro

So this is your explanation as to why you made yourself "untargetable"? Whats with the OMGUS? I am not being dishonest, I am posting my thoughts. For the record this is my first Lucid Dreamers game.

[ProHawk]

Zoid is town.

[ProHawk]

Zoid and Scream cleared each other. The likelihood of them both being scum is low because that one string of actions connects both of them and they either have to be both scum or both town. Therefore I won't support a Zoid or Scream lynch today.

[ProHawk]

Perhaps I shouldn't be looking into non-confirmable actions so closely... but I still feel like the likelihood being fairly low regarding those two.

[ProHawk]

As long as you keep all the possibilities in mind.

This is the problem. The possibilities are endless and would be impossible to keep them all in mind, I have obviously already overlooked quite a few of them.

[ProHawk]

Bomb was to kill any scum that decided to NK me.

[ProHawk]

@Hawk: Did you have any reason to suspect that you might be killed? Also, wouldn't they roleblock you first, making your bomb action meaningless?

What exactly are you trying to imply?

[ProHawk]

@Hawk: No need to be so defensive. The first question is not implying anything. I assumed that you had someone in mind who would target you and was asking who that was. The second one is implying that your action may not have been optimal. Response?

You are on a run of scenarios with reasoning that any night action would be futile. As I already stated, with unlimited possibilities, there is no way to conceivably have an optimal action that could not be thwarted by scum. Your action wouldn't have even required a role block and would have allowed scum to make a kill and then another action. I would also argue that your action may have been as sub-optimal as mine.

I think its easy to judge after the fact, hindsight is after all 20/20. The way I see it, if scum would have wanted me dead, they would have to use up two of their actions to accomplish it. If I could tie up both scum in order to draw a kill, I would gladly do it even if it meant that my bomb wouldn't have worked. If they wanted to risk it, then it would be their loss.

I don't think that looking at night actions will be as concrete of evidence until we see some role-card flips.

I thought my reads were pretty good, and I might have been killed because of it.

[ProHawk]

Both wagons seem like town to me. What are the arguments for their lynch?

[ProHawk]

Qwints and Mit scumteam. The quicklynch with a delayed kill, be smart with your night actions.

[ProHawk]

What strategy did I make?

[ProHawk]

She already explained herself...

[ProHawk]

Well, her flip will tell you if it was a lie or not.

[ProHawk]

I redirected any action Mit made to qwints. How ironic.

[ProHawk]

I hate you and qwints for rolling over Mist yesterday. Thought you two were scum together so I was hoping any nastiness that you were to dish out to anyone else would be best served on your scum comrade.

I would be happy with your lynch today and I will put up my thoughts on the matter tomorrow after we hear the other actions.

[ProHawk]

Unless we have a guilty, I'm not sure we should be vigging.

Agreed.

[ProHawk]

Just want to live out this game on your awesome day play Emp?

[ProHawk]

So do you maintain that you are the reason that there was no night kill again?

[ProHawk]

Piggy's MisLynch Wagon: PiggyGal15 - 5 (qwints, Empking, Siverue DtTrikyp, Mitillos,

Mist7676

)

Mist's MisLynch Wagon: Mist7676 - 5 (Empking, ScreamIampost, Zoidberg, Mitillos, qwints)

Of both the mislynches, Empking, Mit, and Qwints are on both wagons. We need to be looking closer at these players as the probability of scum on these wagons is high.

Empking has been high on my scum list since D1 and his anti-town night actions aren't helping me see any differently. Making himself untargetable is an extremely self-preservationist type of attitude, but it could be just how he plays town.

Mit has been playing pro-town, but I am getting scum reads from his end of the day quick-vote on Mist.

Qwints has been playing town, but I also don't like the coordinated hit he made with Mit. His defense of lynching Mist also strikes me as scummy.

Between the three, I think Mit will have the highest chance of flipping scum as well as semi-validate his night actions should he flip town.

[ProHawk]

Ok, even if you don't think the last quick votes were scummy, odds are one of you three are scum.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Mit

[ProHawk]

The fact that the mod stated that he wouldn't be able to police the forum makes me believe he wouldn't be so keen on allowing actions that would require policing to accomplish properly (abnormal votes, etc) but I could be wrong.

[ProHawk]

Don't be bitter because you keep on failing to kill.

This is comical at best.

[ProHawk]

T-Bone, correction on the Vote Count?

[ProHawk]

Where's the red fish?

[ProHawk]

This is coming from someone who does absolutely nothing with his actions but covers his balls. My actions are just as confirm-able as yours Emp. They are not clearly fakeclaims because none of them are fake.

I have solid evidence that three of the same people are found on two mislynching wagons. Qwints has solidly pointed out that the number of seering claims are improbable and you say my claims are fake?

[ProHawk]

So if I am understanding you correctly, I am scum because my actions aren't risky?

You do realize that lynching someone based off of the decisions they made as to what action they took already lead to a mis-lynch because it seemed like it wasn't a "town" action. Or do you just not care if another townie gets lynched?

[ProHawk]

You missed the second paragraph. Please respond.

[ProHawk]

qwints, whats your read on Mit?

[ProHawk]

You are all cracking me up with this discussion about "unconfirmable/safe" claims being scum. Mostly because the majority of you voted to lynch Mist what had the MOST confirm able claim last game day. Emp, you are the biggest hypocrite in the room at the moment regarding this issue. I also think you are the lesser of the three people we should be lynching today (between Mit, qwints, and Emp). Also, my claim number from how I rank claims being the safest (the last people to claim have the greatest chance of making a safe claim) does not make me obv scum as I was no where near one of the last people to claim. Your logic is faulty, and really needs to be backed up in facts Emp.

Bomb should only kill someone who kills me, not targets.

[ProHawk]

@Mit, targeting me won't prove anything unless you target me. My action redirected any action you take to qwints, in-essence I would guess that I didn't target anyone?

[ProHawk]

Sive is officially insane. He needs to by lynched, am I dead?

[ProHawk]

Lets see, aside from the fact that you would have vigged a dreamer...

Your reckless vig would have been completely anti-town regardless of your alignment. Would you mind explaining your reasoning behind your action?

[ProHawk]

Can we all get back on some kind of direction today instead of stalling? Today it needs to be either Mit, Emp, or Qwints

[ProHawk]

Just going off of a hunch there Mit? I surely can't recall nor find any case you have made for scream, and you leave much lacking in this post. Why again do you feel that scream needs to be lynched?

[ProHawk]

I freaking cannot stand any of you with town roles right now. The nightmare scum are just laughing at us squander and waste time so they can throw up another quick lynch in the name of avoiding a no-lynch. If I am not mistaken, the deadline is tomorrow.

It's not rocket science. We have three people who were on both mis-lynch wagons, one of the three have a high probability of flipping scum. I am telling you Mit is our man, but if you have a case for one of the other two I am all ears. Lets get on this and make an informed decision rather than a rushed piece of crap one like we did last game-night.

[ProHawk]

^I second this plan.

[ProHawk]

I want anyone of you lynched. Mit #1, You #2, and Qwints #3. Ranking is in order of most likely scum to least.

[ProHawk]

I want to hear a good reason why you vigged Scream Sive. I still maintain the scream and zoid pretty much cleared eachother and was a terrible vig choice.

[ProHawk]

You're logic is

impeccable

. Reason on your vig choice pronto Sive.

[ProHawk]

Wow.

[ProHawk]

Good heavens this game was painful to watch!

[ProHawk]

Because I thought he was scum?

[ProHawk]

I guess I didn't answer your question... I couldn't very well cop him as an innocent result doesn't account for godfathering. Best way I felt was to catch him in a lie. What is a PGO?

[ProHawk]

Nevermind... I looked it up.