My case on Maxwell:
In post 185, MaxwellPuckett wrote:Bolded because I want ArcAngel9 to confirm:
About the win condition. Since scum has no night kill, they have to eliminate every townie. The 'or nothing can prevent the same' would be when there's one townie alive and at least one vengeful alive, right? Also, is it a tie when there's just a townie and a vengeful mafia left, or would that be a maf win?
In any case, I agree with Wanderer. Vengefuls are the priority target, because they have to be eliminated sometime and our chances are best if we do that at the beginning. Ofc shooting mafia in general is preferred, and I wouldn't know what differences in play there would be between vengefuls are regular maf.
-Null Tell. This could easily be scum trying to look town or town truly having the question at that time. However, Maxwell seemed to be the first to mention needing to shoot vengefuls - yet also didn't mention anything at that time about what a vengeful would look like to him. This was shortly after wanderer also made a mention to thinking vengefuls should be shoot first (but then wanderer later says that goons would want vengefuls shot first? that progression did not feel right - and was my first town tell on wanderer)
In post 263, MaxwellPuckett wrote:I like CB's posts so far. Good town feelings from them.
Heartless' active scumhunting is also promising.
Enomis' shitposting was endearing but now I'm kinda yawning at it. I don't think it's scummy but I don't like it in general.
I think my only proper scumread at the moment is RedCoyote.
This game is interesting in that shooting mafia does not actually advance our win condition. It only does if we hit vengeful. But shooting town is bad, obviously, and there's a time limit. So the normal mafia are there as safe hits. I think this means the normal mafia will play less carefully, as CB said. I think the vengefuls will avoid risky posts. Of course me saying this might change all that, I don't know. If there are any actual differences between the playstyle of the different kinds of mafia, they will be very slight. I DO think this will matter endgame, though, just maybe not as much now, with so many players to sift through. For now, finding a safe shot for nacho is priority. (I'd count vengefuls as a safe shot of course)
-Four pages later, Maxwell describes his belief on how vengeful look. This is also how Maxwell has played. Also Heartless is promising at this point. enomis has also been seen as "endearing" and "not scummy". While at this time, those are null reads. Maxwell's reads rarely change throughout time. I believe that's a scum tell. Especially for someone who is so confusing like enomis. Furthermore, Maxwell has tied himself strongly to enomis early on in the game with a random vote and now a further read on it. Odd.
In post 293, MaxwellPuckett wrote:pablito: Sorry, completely missed that one. I like that system you alluded to, actually. It makes it extremely difficult for scum to twist their earlier words to mean something else later, as it makes it very clear what their thought process is. If implemented, we would all have to do it, though: perhaps with some kind of template that is used to open and close a case on another player, like in that example you quoted. Using it, you would accuse someone as scum (a serious accusation, you are suggesting to the gunbearer to shoot this person), give your case, and launch a discussion where other players have to give their opinions on the current case. This would also mean that scum would have to make a decision about where to take the case. If it's against their fellow scum, they can't be wishy washy then decide to bus at the last second in an effort to look town, and if they push too hard, they may sway town in an unfavourable way and get their scumbuddy lynched. It would put them on edge and make them more likely to slip up, in addition to giving lots of ammo to catch them in a lie.
TL-DR: Good idea.
-Here's where I start to pick up on Maxwell's self-defeating posting style. Maxwell says he likes the system, but puts a conditional spin on it. He says it won't work unless everyone has to do it. He's pretending to like an idea, but then at the same time is trying to defeat it simultaneously. Maxwell knows that this plan would kill scum in the long-term. Later on I will ask Maxwell more about his ideas about the plan and also what he wants to do to implement it. I still don't get Maxwell's all-or-nothing thinking. Maxwell will do this later on as well. I get a sense that Maxwell will acknowledge, avoid further mention, and then try to look as towny as possible later on.
In post 307, MaxwellPuckett wrote:Also: would that be considered Nacho's preliminary short list? If so, I'd like to try that case-by-case thing. Still like the idea.
-Town points for mentioning case by case even after the shortlist. Null tell because didn't do anything about it.
In post 325, MaxwellPuckett wrote:Mmk, now that I've actually looked at everyone:
...
vonflare: A lot of posts, but those lots of posts were mostly defending vonflare's own actions. However, almost all of the defense posts were prompted by questions about the readslist and such so I can excuse them. Null. Please comment on the game itself!
...
Ugh, I still think that active players are a mix of scum and town and I want an active shot. My only active scumread is julien. I need to give Wanderer, Heartless, CB, vonflare, and pablito another look. I think I messed up somewhere in there.
-At this point, a wagon on vonflare had been created. Considering that the majority of these reads were also Nacho's list of town, I can't help but think that Maxwell's role is to create doubt about who is truly town and also to push his own ideas about who is town (which are not like Nacho's list).
In post 330, pablito wrote:I'm getting scum-reads on Maxwell - moreso as a vengeful mafia. It was a gut feeling early on in the day, but now it's getting stronger as a vengeful mafia. I'm not feeling the full aggressiveness that I want from Maxwell. Maxwell seems to me as trying to look town without going full force. I see Maxwell as having good content inside each post, but I am not getting a
comprehensive
inter-posting pattern that is creating an overall picture. In an ISO, he'll look fine, but not in context of all other posts. Just as much as others are suspecting wanderer for not doing scum-hunting, I'm getting Maxwell as being half-assed scum-hunting. Which is why I asked the question of a voting system. If I felt Maxwell was pure town, I'd've wanted Maxwell to actually try to implement something. But I don't get the sense that Maxwell wants that. So prove me wrong Maxwell and force everyone to look at certain players through some type of referendum or focused-voting system.
@Maxwell (and if you care, @wanderer) - my thoughts on wanderer? I still think that wanderer talking about mafia wanting the vengefuls to go first is either a dumb-mafia tell or a town tell. I lean toward town tell, in fact, the posts about win condition speculation are the ones I would want to put the most weight into. So, for the moment, I have wanderer as a strong town tell. I am going to excuse the dcl vote as well, but I do
not
like the rationale that the dcl vote was to stir up discussion. #298 feels genuine to me as well - mainly because there's a lot of over-reaching in a lot of the analyses especially scum pairing with vonflare. I think wanderer as over-eager town than anything else. I don't feel that the analyses in #298 are necessarily helpful, but I feel it is coming from a townsperson perspective easily. julienvonwolfe has no effect on my view on wanderer as you can see in my post. All that being said, if wanderer is a target to be shot, I'm all for it. I think wanderer has shown some holes, and I'd like to see how wanderer would be in even more pressure and how others would react to wanderer being in full pressure as well. I just still have a more town-leaning read on wanderer though. wanderer being gunbearer if shot is not a bad thing though, which is why I have no problem with wanderer being a target despite my view on her.
@Maxwell regarding julienvonwolfe. Tell me again where you read that julien says that we ought to follow the gunbearer? I assume you're reading post #237, but if you could read it again for me and tell me where you read that, I'd appreciate it.
@Maxwell - also please explain this:
In post 329, MaxwellPuckett wrote:Also, scum can choose the gunbearer, remember? They indirectly control the shot (obviously not nacho's, but every shot after that), so it's more dangerous to just follow the gunbearer's lead, as that gunbearer's lead is geared towards what the scum wants, especially if the gunbearer is left to their own devices and town is afraid to argue with them.
Basically, I'm saying that is has to be a discussion, not done by majority vote and definitely not by just following the gunbearer.
-That was my original argument. Here is Maxwell's reply which I found VERY scummy.
In post 345, MaxwellPuckett wrote: In post 330, pablito wrote:If I felt Maxwell was pure town, I'd've wanted Maxwell to actually try to implement something. But I don't get the sense that Maxwell wants that. So prove me wrong Maxwell and force everyone to look at certain players through some type of referendum or focused-voting system.
@Maxwell regarding julienvonwolfe. Tell me again where you read that julien says that we ought to follow the gunbearer? I assume you're reading post #237, but if you could read it again for me and tell me where you read that, I'd appreciate it.
@Maxwell - also please explain this:
In post 329, MaxwellPuckett wrote:Also, scum can choose the gunbearer, remember? They indirectly control the shot (obviously not nacho's, but every shot after that), so it's more dangerous to just follow the gunbearer's lead, as that gunbearer's lead is geared towards what the scum wants, especially if the gunbearer is left to their own devices and town is afraid to argue with them.
Basically, I'm saying that is has to be a discussion, not done by majority vote and definitely not by just following the gunbearer.
About julienvonwolfe:
In post 237, julienvonwolfe wrote:
Here our friend Wanderer proposes normal mafia playing techniques (voting, lynching those with the most votes) as if they are incredibly useful scum hunting techniques. I'll admit that there's a reason that we use them in every other game, just about, as getting people to state their opinions is good for town, but I don't like the suggestion that we coerce (or constrain, perhaps) the gunbearer.
From my perspective, the gunbearer is confirmed town, and any majority opinion of players will include scum joining and maybe even steering the wagon. I trust the gunbearer more than the collective will of the players, in other words.
The bolded is what I was referring to, particularly the last sentence. At the time I took it as julien saying that we should just follow the gunbearer, instead of taking into account other player's thoughts.
However, I've now read julien's
331, and I think I may have reacted too quickly to what they were saying about wanderer. Explained like that, their thought process makes more sense.
Speaking of wanderer: I think their suggestion makes sense considering they're never played a nightless, lynchless game before, and they maybe haven't thought about the different style of play needed for it.
About 329: I'm saying that we can't just let the gunbearer (besides nacho, who was chosen so early it isn't a problem, though obviously we should still discuss with him too) make decisions entirely on their own, because they were chosen by the mafia for a reason, perhaps because they had a strong scumread on a townie, or townreads on vengefuls, etc, etc. It was in response to what I thought julien was saying about how we should handle the gunbearer.
Finally, pablito: That voting system. I like it. You suggested it. I kind of expected you to try and implement it too. Why are you not doing that?
When you suggested it, you were looking for opinions or better ideas than your own, right? And I agreed with your idea, so naturally I should be the one to 'force' everyone else to go along with it too? First: what? And second: It's not something that can be forced. Everyone has to agree, or at least the majority needs to agree, before something can be done.
Nacho: How do you feel about pablito's suggestion? If anyone can lead that off the ground, it'd be you, and I think it's something we can do.
Everyone:
Same question.
-Maxwell replies to my questions appropriately. Backs down where needed, backs self up and etc. It's the end of the post that gets me. Maxwell tries to jab at me. If Maxwell had ended his post right before addressing it to "Nacho" and/or "everyone" - I'd've dropped by lead on Maxwell and would've sniffed elsewhere. I expect vengeful to NOT get into one on one arguments with players. If a vengeful does so, the more likely vengeful gets shot when a town gets gun (ie: me). Instead vengeful would need to rely on goons to distract or defend, and would need to diffuse the focus. This is one reason why I can't yet put Flubber on any scum read. Additionally, Maxwell seems to be prematurely destroying the plan before seeing it go through. That's just annoying to me, but I also feel like it could be a good scum read. Maxwell kept the all-or-nothing rationale. I feel like Maxwell uses it as a crutch to tear down ideas without having to own anything at all. Also, he pretty much dropped it later...but then again part of that was due to Nacho's work and actually working on it later.
Let's contrast this with a post that Maxwell made just a few posts prior to that:
In post 329, MaxwellPuckett wrote:Read what I said about Vic. Then read it again. Maybe read it once more? Votes with no explanation make my gut think town. That's literally it, and it's not a substantial read at all. I had no gut feelings either way for the three of ya I put down at the bottom.
No, I don't think scum can hold the gun, obviously. I'm saying that it's more difficult for scum to influence a whole bunch of votes (a lotta people to influence), and it is much easier to influence a single person, ie the gunbearer. There are a large number of scum right now, so it only takes a few townies suggesting a shot that happens to be town for the scum to see and agree with, thereby creating a lean on that person for the shot. Also, scum can choose the gunbearer, remember? They indirectly control the shot (obviously not nacho's, but every shot after that), so it's more dangerous to just follow the gunbearer's lead, as that gunbearer's lead is geared towards what the scum wants, especially if the gunbearer is left to their own devices and town is afraid to argue with them.
Basically, I'm saying that is has to be a discussion, not done by majority vote and definitely not by just following the gunbearer.
-Maxwell talks about not following the gunbearer (theme of not letting power be held in one hand), but yet also not letting the field of mafia overrule the gunbearer. This seems contradictory to what he tells me a few posts later. Again, Maxwell seems to be putting out plans to help the town, but the inter-connected throughout the posts is weak. If Maxwell wants "the majority" to agree with the referenda plan but yet also does not feel that "the majority" should decide a gun shot - I'm not sure I follow. He's picking and choosing how to use the argument.
Let's fast forward a little bit more through D1:
In post 453, MaxwellPuckett wrote:pablito: I'm a bit confused. You said you expected more from me than from Wanderer, which, while flattering(?), does not make much sense to me. I've never played a game with you before, and Wanderer has considerably more games than me. This is my first non-Newbie on the site, ie my third game. Are you saying that you've read up on both of us, and think I'm the better player, or did you think I had a strong start in this game, while Wanderer did not, and now I'm not living up to your initial expectations?
As for my thinking Millar is not vengeful: Lazy play. There's a difference between laziness and lurking, and there it is. Millar is currently bored with the game, and that makes me think town or vanilla maf, not vengeful. I believe vengefuls would be doing more to avoid being the shot. Doing things that don't involve blatantly saying that Flubber will be the shot, for instance. I don't think a Millar shot is worth it.
But, apparently Nacho is avoiding Vengefuls, and would like to be shooting in inactives for that reason. I guess I can understand that, as Nacho wants to stay alive and be more useful, it's just the opposite of what I'd like to do. But since I haven't been able to propose an active shot of my own, I guess I can't blame anyone for going the inactive route. So, considering that, I guess Millar is as good a shot as any? But I'll look at Wanderer's proposals right now.
-Maxwell continues to play the role of reminding people of re-opening more leads. Maxwell isn't someone who opens up new cases on people, but is very well prepared to remind others to add in others to their list just in case. If lucky and RC are scum - Maxwell could be seen as trying to push millar on the spit instead. While Maxwell says to not shoot Millar, Max also makes a little side comment at the end that could easily push someone in the opposite direction. That's a scum tactic I like using as well. If Max is town, I don't get why Nacho vs. Lucky/RC wasn't fine as it was. So let's contrast this with a post that Maxwell made earlier! I'm liking this fun game of see how a post is contradictory with an earlier Maxwell post.
In post 398, MaxwellPuckett wrote:Heartless, I've said repeatedly that I do not want to shoot an inactive at this time. As I haven't made my mind up about Millar, I don't want to risk the possibility of him being town and having the gun. I think the possibility of him being town or non-vengeful scum is a lot higher than of him being vengeful, so I really don't think a shot is worth it.
-Just to note from 398 to 453, there is no further change in the millar read. 398 had Millar as
and 453 had Millar as "lazy". The kicker here, is that millar made 0 posts between 398 to 453. During this progression of posts, I also got more aggressive against Maxwell and voted him. Both Max and West also try to point out my hypocrisy of treating West and Max differently. This was outlined in my previous post. I do not disagree with Maxwell and West on this - I was treating Maxwell differently. However, when I also pointed something out to wanderer - I got an immediate answer and wanderer created a referendum. Maxwell continues to seem to avoid most of what I say. Going back to Maxwell's lack of internal consistency...I'll fast forward to a post where Maxwell actually goes full force and tries to suggest millar as an actual shot rather than pretending it's not worthwhile:
In post 456, MaxwellPuckett wrote:...
Wanderer: Wanting to prioritize keeping Nacho alive instead of weeding out vengefuls... I don't like it. I think Nacho hitting a vengeful is a victory, even if it means scum will give the gun to a lurker probably. Once all Vengefuls are dead, we win, we literally win. I just can't get behind trying to shoot goons first. I still don't think there's a surefire way to determine what kind of scum someone is, but I do think we will be able to tell by lategame, as we'll have more posts to look at and the stakes for scum will be much higher. Goons that didn't care about being shot in the beginning would be much more protective of themselves lategame, etc.
I think Wanderer's play has been fine so far. No contradictions, no laziness, just scumhunting. Their play just seems very towny and genuine, I'll grab quote examples if prompted but you can see it just by reading her posts. I still don't know why she's being scumread. Julien's reasoning was Wanderer saying she's never played a game like this before, and I've already said why I think that's a bull reason, in an earlier post. Also, being null on the lurkers is reason for scumread??? How are you supposed to read lurkers except superficially?
Anyways, I really disgaree with Wanderer as the shot because I think she's useful town. But I don't agree with any of these three players being the shot, either... Lucky is null and buhhhh but I'm glad he's in the list because maybe it'll prompt him to post something, finally, and Red is null lean town because if he were scum his play makes no sense to me, and he's not a new player so I can't just slap 'bad scumplay' on him and call it a day.
If Lucky is the shot, I see no reason why Millar and Jeanne aren't just as likely candidates. I guess you can differentiate them by saying that Jeanne wanted to be shot, which I still don't understand, but between Millar and Lucky I see no difference.
-If there's any question I want to ask Maxwell - it's why Millar and not Lucky at that time? I didn't pick up on this back then and I'd like to hear more.
Okay, posting now, but still building more cases.
Sup, later.
If in a 1v1 situation wouldn't that mean the last living town player is then the gun-bearer? These seem to contradict to me.
