Excalibur [Endgame]

[Auro]

Throwing out a thought:
If scum claims Excalibur, they die immediately.
Town can vote on someone to claim Excalibur for the day. ONLY that person claims at night. If they're scum it remains unclaimed, lynch next day. If there's a claim treat them like an IC the next day.

[Auro]

Re: LL and Jay, I think it's better overall to discuss mechanics and find out a good strategy at this stage, instead of starting with the accusations already. *Shrug*

[Auro]

Throwing out a thought:
If scum claims Excalibur, they die immediately.
Town can vote on someone to claim Excalibur for the day. ONLY that person claims at night. If they're scum it remains unclaimed, lynch next day. If there's a claim treat them like an IC the next day.

Sure. Give me Excalibur.

Town should probably vote for a consensus scumread to claim Excalibur, for maximum benefit. If they're scum they can't claim and we get a confirmation in the night. If they're not scum and claim we know they're IC -- they're gonna either contribute the next day and kill themselves, or Merlin confirms they're Arthur and we move on.

[Auro]

Re: LL and Jay, I think it's better overall to discuss mechanics and find out a good strategy at this stage, instead of starting with the accusations already. *Shrug*

This is scumsided. Early interactions and reads are crucial and giving scum the time to hide behind mechanics talk to provide "content" is allowing them the luxury of coasting early.

FoS

Early interactions are crucial, but can also get ugly and cloud out any useful discussion. As long as there are no quick-duels, it's fine.

[Auro]

And scum can choose to engage in mechanic-talk regardless initially, anyway.

[Auro]

@DVa:
Cool. If this IS a good strategy, we need to figure out a consensus forming mechanism to decide the top two scumreads.

Merlin becomes a bit irrelevant here, though, as we have a fixed claimer every day anyway - the person holding Excalibur would vig someone *anyway*. Would the confirmation help during the day?

[Auro]

Kill resolves before claim. Yes, we'd effectively gate the scum kill but we'd also render the setup as 13-4 mountainous.
But I think you're right in that we could effectively use the sword claiming as a one-shot cop, but, again, that renders the bulletproof aspect of it kind of useless.

I considered this, but claim can only happen if it's non scum. Scum NKing the voted claimant would be bad for them anyway, right?

The bulletproof aspect works once Arthur gets the sword.

[Auro]

Merlin claiming Excalibur is useless IMO because there's no real way to convey who Arthur is. The only reliable method of conveying that information is through a confirmation. Merlin claiming and holding the sword till dead just removed that part of the mechanic. Is there some way we can get a Merlin claim and have him as an IC with the sword, though?

Like, next night ONLY Merlin claims, next day he says he has it, so confirmed BP Inno. Can't be faked, right?

[Auro]

@Auro: They kill town and keep the sword out of play, though, again, I don't think scum really have anything to fear if a townie WOULD get the sword is the problem, because then so long as that townie is not Arthur, it's just a BP IC and scum knows they're BP so they won't waste time there.

Exactly so scum don't have incentive to NK the claimant -- even if they do, you're saying this then reduced to a mountainous?

A town leader claiming it would be all the better reason to NK that person.

[Auro]

Throwing out a thought:
If scum claims Excalibur, they die immediately.
Town can vote on someone to claim Excalibur for the day. ONLY that person claims at night. If they're scum it remains unclaimed, lynch next day. If there's a claim treat them like an IC the next day.

Sure. Give me Excalibur.

Town should probably vote for a consensus scumread to claim Excalibur, for maximum benefit. If they're scum they can't claim and we get a confirmation in the night. If they're not scum and claim we know they're IC -- they're gonna either contribute the next day and kill themselves, or Merlin confirms they're Arthur and we move on.

Yeah, I was thinking that too. Anyone who is scumread can prove they’re town by claiming the sword and attempting to vig another consensus scumread. So then, Merlin shouldn’t claim the sword.

In case we DO have a Merlin claim, we should let them claim, a fakeclaim by scum would mean suicide the next day anyway.

[Auro]

This will never work with players who have such strong egos. I can tell you straight up if you decide to try and make two of my townreads gladiate, I will actively fight to ensure it does not happen, up to and including gladiating my own preferred target.

And your reads are how better than random?
What you're describing IMO would be anti-town. You're saying that *all* "strong ego" players would behave the same?

@Firebringer: Means let him claim for the night and no one else does.

[Auro]

Word your things better then.

Also you're so fucking scum holy fuck....

If you really thought that you'd challenge me and accept that your dying today. But you won't. Scummy.

You're trying to provoke an early duel?
If that happens, I don't think anyone should vote till we actually get somewhere.

[Auro]

Yeah, that’s a great idea. We lynch the scummier of the two and lesser of the two scumreads either attemps to vig yet another consensus scumread and if there’s only one kill, we make them gladiate the following day and lose and so on and so on and so on, until we kill all but one scum and if the vig is actually successful, then Merlin kind of becomes irrelevant anyway.

Echoed your sentiment especially wrt the last sentence in an earlier post. Is there some way we can make this strategy better involving Merlin's role?

If we're sorting people already, I'll town you.

[Auro]

@Nancy: The bigger problem apparently is that a chunk of the playerbase will refuse to work with that, starting with LLD herself.

[Auro]

Yeah, Merlin hunting serves no purpose. Merlin needs to stay hidden until the real Arthur is confirmed by vigging and not dying.

Merlin can't prove he is Merlin then though -- how'd you decide? Making him gladiate a counterclaimant?

[Auro]

Nancy and UT are town

How strong are these reads?

[Auro]

I'm still wondering if it's just not a stronger play for everyone BUT Merlin to attempt to claim, so that we get a BP in the mix that scum doesn't know exists.
Then if said player is ever gladiated, they can just claim Excalibur-holder, Merlin can confirm and also confirm Arthur exists.

This is random play, though, so balanced must mean a 50-50 chance of town wins anyway, right?

[Auro]

uh, no, the person who has claimed the sword does not gladiate the next day lol. This is because it's revealed that the sword has been claimed, so if only one person claims to have claimed the sword, that person is town.

Merlin is someone who can avoid a gladiation by claiming his role, although it does guarantee he dies shortly afterward.

Yep, sword holder shouldn't gladiate. They should attempt a vig though.

Merlin can't prove he is Merlin then though

scum never counterclaim merlin in this setup unless it's lylo or something

Yeah I think I talked about this in a later post.

[Auro]

Nancy had one post to her name when Lady decided to label her town. I wouldnt put to much faith in that read, Auro.

It could either be early loose bucketing, or actually strong reads she intends to carry through the game. I call BS if it's the latter, hence asked.

[Auro]

Well, the problem is that if both Merlin and the consensus designated scumread both claim the sword - assuming of course that the designated scumread is actually town - then Merlin claiming, makes it random and therefore no way of checking that player’s alignment.

If we end up making Merlin claim it, he might as well -- IC then on.

[Auro]

This sounds reasonable, and no one that I’d want to promote this agenda for over LLD is around, so I’m in favor of this plan.

There's also a problem that she could just hold the sword and not vig anyone, destroying the point of the mechanic - and we wouldn't want to lynch her because she'd be an IC.

[Auro]

@Nancy, scum will never claim the sword. If they try, they die.

[Auro]

Well, they shouldn’t because that’s antitown. I think DVa’s hurt tags are a great idea. The two players with the most hurt tags, need to agree to gladiate each other. If players can refuse to do this, then how do we get any lynches?

This is why I want the mechanics talk first -- get consensus on following through the strategy, THEN follow it.

There's still no guarantee some player who wants to screw around also claims the sword, no guarantee that the player holding it vigs the next night, and so on.

[Auro]

Throwing out a thought:
If scum claims Excalibur, they die immediately.
Town can vote on someone to claim Excalibur for the day. ONLY that person claims at night. If they're scum it remains unclaimed, lynch next day. If there's a claim treat them like an IC the next day.

I volunteer as tribute.

Read further posts.
FWIW I don't think a town aligned player should act super scummy just to get to claim and go "Huh, I told you so" the next day -- clouds judgment and would give scum better reason to actually FoS said player.

Pedit: What makes you read LLD as scummy? Is this not a playstyle thing?

[Auro]

Why would they want to? If they aren’t Arthur they die, and their influence dies with them.
This looks like a scum thought.

They die only if they vig.
Which means a player with "influence" on getting the sword can just refuse to vig, and thus hold on to it stubbornly.

[Auro]

Why would they want to? If they aren’t Arthur they die, and their influence dies with them.
This looks like a scum thought.

They die only if they vig.
Which means a player with "influence" on getting the sword can just refuse to vig, and thus hold on to it stubbornly.

Also interesting. My fears that a player might work anti-town as an IC is scummy?

[Auro]

Obviously yes, if we scumread Merlin, then they claim the sword - then can safely claim the following day. But the problem with that, is that the real Arthur can’t claim until Merlin dies in that case right? Because once you posses the sword you can never unclaim it. The only way the real Arthur could ever get the sword in that case, would be Merlin dying.

And if Merlin claims before they get the sword, then they’ll get NK’d. And if they say who Arthur is, then Arthur dies. So Merlin having the sword is really not much help.

I mean in the worst case, we get an IC for the rest of the game. Merlin killing themselves just to let the sword out in public makes this go to the previous state, so not so useful IMO

[Auro]

Exactly. Does it seem smarter to gamble on the 1/12 chance you are Arthur (as there are 12 that receive Knight Errant PMs) with the cost of losing your ability to lead from then on, or to hold fast and remain an influence to town’s benefit?

In the abscence of strategy, the latter.
If there's a town strategy otherwise, former.

Merlin, if alive, could confirm the person holding it is Arthur. No Merlin approval means the person is definitely not Arthur -- following prior discussed strategy, what should they do then? Suicide to give it up, or hold on to it?

[Auro]

Why either/or? I don’t see why the two need to be mutually exclusive.

Yes, we do need an effective strategy but it’s a bad idea to let scum hide under mechanics. We need to focus on both.

I'm not saying we shouldn't do either. Seems like we have a player who probably would FoS just because "hey you're hiding behind mechanic talk", my point being it's important to reach consensus in any case.

[Auro]

with the cost of losing your ability to lead from then on, or to hold fast and remain an influence to town’s benefit?

Relatively new to the site, is there any individual who has reads much better than random?

Nancy, his post has nothing to do with Merlin holding the sword.

[Auro]

Merlin having the sword defeats the entire purpose of their role.

What do you think is a good strategical direction to begin with? The previous parts where you agreed with top scumreads gladiating and winner claiming to shoot the next day, that also kinda doesn't involve Merlin. Unless Merlin decides to confirm IFF Arthur is holding it, in which case it brings up the question of what the holder should do, which I brought up.

Merlin getting the sword means they're an IC anyway, no?

[Auro]

I thought you were saying that if we force Merlin to gladiate, his getting the sword is useless - I'm saying it's just like Merlin is like any other Knight then, gets the sword and THAT makes him IC.

[Auro]

Making proper use of the Excalibur mechanic, to my eyes, is *heavily* reliant on town working together. Individual players pushing their own reads through, as opposed to forming consensus, would be anti-town. Am I wrong?

[Auro]

What are you saying? Why can only the real Arthur be IC?
If it's guaranteed only one player is claiming the sword, and the sword holder says he's Merlin, why will you NOT treat him as IC? That the sword has been claimed means scum didn't claim it.
That would be a terrible fakeclaim especially if the real Merlin's still hanging around.

[Auro]

Nancy, I have a suspicion you read the setup mechanics wrong. Or I did, correct me if I did.

[Auro]

Also, since you're implying a strategy should necessarily involve Merlin's ability to confirm Arthur, can you propose one? ATM strategies I can think of either defeat the point of Merlin, or Arthur, not make use of both.

[Auro]

If there are players who have muuuch better than random reads with this player list, and there's consensus on that OR objective proof of that, I'll find myself *slightly* agreeing more with the idea of having a strong town leader IC, and discarding the whole Merlin/Arthur mechanic.

[Auro]

Merlin getting the sword does confirms them town, so yes but how are they more useful to town than any other townie, since anyone other than Arthur cannot vig with it and Merlin prevents the real Arthur from ever getting the sword, because they are the only townie who cannot be Arthur.

Then you're agreeing with me. I said IN worst case, at least we have that one IC anyway.

[Auro]

No, obviously anyone who claims the sword, will be confirmed town. The point is that unless Merlin loses the gadiate, it’s pointless otherwise for him to try to claim the sword.

If Merlin loses the gladiate, he dies.
The 'unless' being the 'worst case' I was referring to, where he's forced to gladiate and

wins

the gladiate.

Can you point out the part where I've contradicted myself, seeing otherwise as we're in agreement about this?

Also, your basis for a townread on Gamma is that he pointed out something that's not really that hard to deduce? How strong is this townread?

I know that INDEPENDENT of the previous discussed strategy, if Merlin simply claims the sword it's discarding the Merlin mechanic, but I still won't be quick to dismiss that idea so fast, much less townread someone for that. Also, previous challenge is still up where you come up with a strat that makes use of both the Merlin and Arthur mechanics.

[Auro]

I still very confused about some aspects of it, like we get a gladiate to happen. I do understand that the point of the Merlin role, is to confirm Arthur and since Merlin can never be Arthur, it’s better that they not claim the sword, unless they absolutely have to. Merlin should never volunteer to take the sword.

Again, where have I said they should? O.o In the strategy I'm leaning towards ATM, they should never get into a gladiate preferably, and if they do, should claim it.

Which part of the gladiate are you confused about?

The role having a point to it doesn't necessarily mean we can come up with an awesome strategy that involves it, which implies that we can't simply dismiss proposed strategies that don't make use of it. Agree?

@DVa: I'm not saying he should, gosh.

[Auro]

In case we DO have a Merlin claim, we should let them claim, a fakeclaim by scum would mean suicide the next day anyway.

Is it this you're referring to?
If the true Merlin claims, town would lose them to a NK anyway.
If it's a fakeclaim, and the real Merlin stays hidden, this exposes them as scum.
If you're arguing that it's better for real!Merlin to counterclaim in this case, okay -- I see your point.

[Auro]

Dude Merlin doesn't claim the sword, that's mechanical redundancy and strictly anti-town

We want two ICs not one, wtf, you're better than this people

Modification to the previous being that if we're opting Merlin to gladiate, he just claims and we take him as IC for that day, revising our gladiate options before a challenge is made? He'd get NK'd that night anyway, so we're losing an IC after that.

Optimum would be gaining two ICs while not letting them get NK'd in the process.

[Auro]

Yes but at some point, if the real Arthur is still in the game, Merlin would probably need to fake vig at that point to allow Arthur to have it. But the one problem with the confitown by sword claiming theory, is that it can only work until that player attempts to vig, because once any player has it and doesn’t use it, it cannot be claimed by another player, so no one should claim but the consensus scumread.

So Merlin's trading his life for the *chance* that Arthur takes hold of it and gets vigging abilities?
The problem you're stating is what I'm stating as well - the person not following through. It's effectively 11/12 suicide the next night.

[Auro]

1. *Consensus scumread gladiates next highest scumread*
2. Winner HAS to be the only person to claim
3. (If Merlin's alive) Merlin confirms if Arthur the next day, says nothing if not, thus confirming to town that yesterday's winner isn't Arthur
4. ???

Also, what are the advantages to town IF Arthur does get a hold of Excalibur? How much does it swing town's winning chances?

Pedit: Nancy, why would stating that idea help scum? Would you state it at a later point in the day? O.o

[Auro]

We need to both keep Merlin hidden and not give scum any clues about how Merlin should confirm Arthur. We also don’t want scum to figure out who Arthur is. If Arthur is the one who has claimed the sword, that is when Merlin can publically confirm it.

The way I see it, the only way for Merlin to make use of his role is to confirm IFF Arthur has the sword, I don't see a change in this part at least.

this is gonna be one of those games i see

What games, and what would you prefer?

[Auro]

A person simply challenges another player, that's already given.
We'll need our own consensus mechanic to unofficially *make* a gladiate to happen, if we want town to be in control of it.
That's what we were discussing a few pages ago.
One proposal is that we use HURT tags, and when majority is reached, the player gladiates another scumread. (Maybe the second-highest HURT).

[Auro]

I take it that no gladiates would effectively mean a no-lynch.

[Auro]

1. *Consensus scumread gladiates next highest scumread*
2. Winner HAS to be the only person to claim
3. (If Merlin's alive) Merlin confirms if Arthur the next day, says nothing if not, thus confirming to town that yesterday's winner isn't Arthur
4. ???

Also, what are the advantages to town IF Arthur does get a hold of Excalibur? How much does it swing town's winning chances?

Pedit: Nancy, why would stating that idea help scum? Would you state it at a later point in the day? O.o

If Merlin knows that Arthur holds Excalibur, then he needs to confirm Arthur -

after

he has the sword obviously - and he can start safely vigging consensus scum.

Yeah, that's step 3. If he confirms, Arthur starts safely vigging.
If not, I'm wondering what's best.

[Auro]

This guy feels scummy to me as well

Either you're tone-reading or there's some scummy content in what I've posted that you disagree with.
Which is it? If it's the latter, go ahead and engage me.

[Auro]

Yes but how do we force any player to duel? Why can’t scum just refuse? What’s stopping them from doing this? If there is no mechanic to force duels, then I don’t know how we ever get lynches.

In my imagination, someone REFUSING to gladiate is anti-town, and someone gladiates them for that.

@Dunnstral, yeah if it's "both" you can go ahead and engage with me on the content itself.
If you're scumreading me because I'm talking heavily about mechanics, sure. Can't help that.
Tone I'd say is playstyle, I feel like *every* game there's someone scumreading me off tone alone -- So I'd call that weak, but whatever suits you.

[Auro]

Also, is talking heavily about mechanics anti-town in your opinion, or is it because you think scum's trying to hide behind the veil of mechanic discussion and achieve towncred through it?

Which part of step 3?
I STRONGLY feel that if Arthur has the sword, Merlin should confirm it. NOT confirming that is anti-town.
And if non-Arthur has the sword, Merlin shouldn't say anything. Coming out is anti-town.

[Auro]

@Dunnstral: IF Merlin isn't coming out to confirm that Excalibur-holder is Arthur, this *confirms* to town and the holder that he isn't Arthur. I didn't mean that Merlin comes out saying "Hey he's not Arthur". He says nothing.

Sure that can happen instead, but you're saying what I said was anti-town, and I'm asking for clarifications on which part of step 3 was.

[Auro]

What can happen instead: If the person with the sword is suspected enough that they are likely to be gladiated, they should probably speak up about having the sword before they are gladiated

Merlin/arthus shouldn't be outting at any point during this

I mean the context I'm talking of is in the strategy where town knows who's claiming the sword.
What's the context behind what you're proposing? Arthur can't out himself, doesn't know that he's Arthur.

@Dunnstral: So you're saying there's no point to Merlin's mechanic of Arthur's knowledge -- reducing it to only Merlin!strategy depending on his knowledge that HE isn't Arthur.

I generally agree that Merlin outing himself to confirm Arthur is useless in that context. If fakeclaiming Merlin post-Arthur's outing is a strategy that scum would never adopt, you'd be correct, yeah. But the moment Merlin comes out he becomes an NK anyway.

[Auro]

Also, is talking heavily about mechanics anti-town in your opinion, or is it because you think scum's trying to hide behind the veil of mechanic discussion and achieve towncred through it?

Scum can hide behind mechanics discussion yes, especially when they don't make any reads

Furthermore I think your mechanics discussion contains parts that would be suboptimal at best for town to do,

I mean, this is why I'm asking and not laying this down as some amazing-winning-strategy and everything. I'm freely open to correction when I'm on the wrong track. Can you not see town doing this? O.o

[Auro]

Scum can hide behind mechanics discussion yes, especially when they don't make any reads

Scum can do X; doesn't mean X implies scum.
I'm wary of making strong reads at this point, especially because I'm largely unfamiliar with most players who have posted till now.
Also, you don't think engagement on mechanics discussion is useful to evaluate someone? You literally scumread me off what I was discussing, so

[Auro]

why tho
scum will be scum regardless of if we are discussing mechanics or not

Reaching consensus on a plan is important.
Scum will be scum, but there's a possibility of useless fights cluttering and dominating the game, with little cohesion.
I had a feeling that town might fall to that, so I was stressing that there should be some direction town agrees on as soon as possible..

[Auro]

I'm through pg 6 and auro has the most posts in the game by far but zero scumhunting, I don't count random questions. c'mon bro where's it at
certain other players (COUGH nancy COUGH) are guilty here too but not as badly
i don't think this is necessarily scummy but it's also not really helpful and honestly I think this massive setup discussion is gonna severely murder the motivation of the other 2/3 of the game playerlist because it's a ton of reading that is really hard to read unless you can really follow (and I couldn't, maybe I'm just an idiot tho)

that was up there for the most useless 7 pages I've ever read, at least to me. setup fiends will love it. i'm sure FG is loving it lol
i don't think i've ever read the words arthur, merlin or gladiate more before

What do you count as scumhunting then? I did make a cursory townread on Nancy, is that too 'random' for you too? I prefer to 'scumhunt' through engagement and questions, not outright-accusations.

I'll shut up with my attempts to figure a good strategy if town would rather just ignore it or not read it. If what you're saying is true, sure.
You see absolutely 0 utility in mechanics discussion? What if I tell you that through the process, we could come up with a consensus strategy reliant on town cohesion, and follow through to maximize town chances?

[Auro]

If Merlin knows that Arthur has claimed the sword, why shouldn’t they confirm it?

Because arthur ALREADY HAS THE SWORD and all merlin confirming doing is telling him to shoot it - something that they are likely to do within 1-2 nights anyway, and even if they don't shoot it it's /just/ a vig, I think I'd rather have an additional confirmed town hidden away

Agree with Dunnstral here for now. If the sword-holder is going to shoot anyway, there's no utility in Merlin coming out.
If the sword-holder's NOT shooting but holding on, this *may* be needed, but IDK.

[Auro]

useless fights are gonna be more useful in the scumhunting game though

I'm blown away that you think useless fights won't kill player interest but 7 pages of opening discussion will

Gladiations immediately limit town scumhunting potential and lock the dayphase into two people. That will nuke *my* interest in the game if people start doing it, which is precisely why I want town to be aware that yolo-dueling will result in the yoloing player getting lynched every time. There is nothing more boring to me than seeing two townreads gladiate each other because one had a momentary fleeting thought that the other was scum.

Town doing shitty gladiates on other town is pretty much the foundation of the scum wincon here because the gladiation mechanic will mean that until the lynch goes through they don't have to commit to any other read on any other player and can coast--and town will want to coast too. Basically gladiations force the town to come to standstill until someone dies.

Early townread on DVa as well.
Stupid ego-based duels will eliminate my interest in the game as well.

[Auro]

If Merlin knows that Arthur has claimed the sword, why shouldn’t they confirm it?

Because arthur ALREADY HAS THE SWORD and all merlin confirming doing is telling him to shoot it - something that they are likely to do within 1-2 nights anyway, and even if they don't shoot it it's /just/ a vig, I think I'd rather have an additional confirmed town hidden away

How does Merlin get confirmed without confirming Arthur?

I mean after Arthur's outed, they can only just claim to be Merlin. Premise being that scum wouldn't fakeclaim/counterclaim Merlin.

[Auro]

i'd consider scumhunting to be declaring reads, pushing people, analysis of player posts, etc
I don't mind the setup talk and ofc I agree we need a good strategy, but I feel it's going in circles (i was skimming at certain points so this could be wrong) and rather spammy.

I declared a townread on Nancy and DVa.
I'm "pushing" people to answer me through asking them questions.
There aren't enough posts to make a strong AI analysis on, anyway.
Scumlean on you for your weak shade of me not 'scumhunting', which is untrue even by your definitions.

It's not going in circles, I think it's useful, that it's spam is your opinion - which is prolly biased since you don't like mechanic discussions anyway.

[Auro]

I mean after Arthur's outed, they can only just claim to be Merlin.

NO... Merlin is still confirmed town, we know there's only 1 merlin in the setup, regardless of what arthur is doing with the sword

Merlin outting means he dies next night - there's no protection for him, if he doesn't die he lives on as a hidden IC that scum have to look for

Of course "Merlin" is conftown, we don't know who Merlin is.
Merlin can confirm himself to town only by revealing identity before LyLo/MyLo

[Auro]

like d.va I said earlier that someone who rando-gladiates early should be PLed
that's def not what I want

Disagree that it should be a direct

Policy Lynch

, this almost feels like pre-emptive opportunism.

[Auro]

Agree with Varsoon's post, also TR on Varsoon.

[Auro]

They would get confirmed once Arthur has the sword and they tell them to shoot and Arthur doesn’t die.

Ah, nevermind - when you said "confirming Arthur" I read it as Merling having to confirm Arthur, not Arthur being confirmed to town. Sorry about that.

[Auro]

i don't see what you're implying w/the italicized policy lynch
why would you want to keep someone playing anti-town by rando-dueling alive?

In this playerlist, does anti-town imply scum?
It'll be shitty anyway, but I'm not sure if that a person gladiates is enough to be lynched as more probable scum as the challenged.

[Auro]

hey look I was right about other players being annoyed by the setup talk

Big difference when it comes from a player who's annoyed by it because, from his perspective, there's already an optimal D1 strategy.

@Nancy: Scum claiming Merlin seems like a really bad idea before LyLo/MyLo, real Merlin also claims and both die.

[Auro]

How is there more value in having a pointless stealth IC than there is in townclearing the next day's lynch or mislynch?

And you are ignoring the possibility that the *next consensus scumread is scum* in which case we get a GUILTY and the sword is unclaimed and then we get to use the test again.

Do you not get that?

You guys are not playing toward best case scenario.

Best case scenario:
We force top two scumreads to gladiate
The winner is forced to claim sword
But they're scum so they don't and it remains unclaimed
Then we lynch them and rinse, repeat the next day

Like you all are thinking only of sword giving us an IC but it's *way more valuable* as having the potential to give us guilties

Effectively it gives us the chance to have a public daycop and a lynch each day phase

So no, "everyone claims the sword" is a shit plan

Your best case scenario is reliant on very good town cohesion, and doesn't account for "townies that disregard this shit" as Varsoon puts it. Trying to follow this would fail even if two or three town play against it - say, also claiming, randomly gladiating, blah blah blah.

[Auro]

like d.va I said earlier that someone who rando-gladiates early should be PLed
that's def not what I want

Disagree that it should be a direct

Policy Lynch

, this almost feels like pre-emptive opportunism.

Why? Rando-gladiating is terrible for town. If they gladiate and actually lynch scum, than obviously they wouldn’t be policy lynched.

What’s to prevent scum from yolo lynching?

If EVERYONE is on the same page that it is terrible for town, sure.
I've just a general distrust that town players wouldn't rando-gladiate out of what they think are strong scumreads.
PL'd in the sense of *that* gladiate itself, not in the future.
I think scum would be warier than to YOLO lynch and screw themselves over, anyway.

[Auro]

Considering 216 is an awful plan, I'm going to go ahead and HURT: Tripod

What did Tripod post? GIF doesn't show for me.

[Auro]

varsoon is wading into the setup talk despite trying to end it what a guy
i think there are definitely players in this game who would YOLO as scum

Why are you so anti-engagement?!

[Auro]

216's a great plan and the only one that accounts for all of town not being on the goddamn ball.

You're basically saying "town don't even try for cohesion"

You're thinking that it's probable that ALL town players here would actually commit to, and stick with the plan?
It's veeeery much subject to breaking down real bad even if two or three town don't, which makes it very dangerous.

I'm more comfortable assuming town wouldn't do that, and following a relatively more foolproof plan.

[Auro]

it's a gif of zoidberg saying "bless this post"
p-edit: how am i anti-engagement?

Like Varsoon's 'wading into it' because his post was called out on, why would he choose not to engage.
But nevermind this.

[Auro]

@Auro: Setup Spec doesn't help us do very much here and just informs the scum kill, imo. I think Cakez is more likely town for wanting the game to move away from it. We've got like 10 pages of shit that should be obvious.

I said there was a difference in the way Cakez came into it as opposed to yours. You have a far more sound reason for the setup spec not doing much to help here, he just came in an existing bias against mechanics spec. I don't think he's town for doing that the way I'd see you as town doing that.

You're saying there's *no* better plan assuming partial cohesion, yes?

@DVa: My question still stands, are you really going to assume perfect town cohesion?

[Auro]

Agree and doubling down on DVa townread. We should follow DVa.

The problems Varsoon and I have posed haven't been answered -- that plan is reliant on amazing town cohesion which is far fetched.
I'm following Varsoon till DVa/Dunnstral prove otherwise that Varsoon is incorrect.

[Auro]

We should not play towards THEORY best-case scenario, when pragmatically it's going to fail in all probability.
We should adopt a more foolproof strategy, like 216.

@Varsoon: Right. I think setup/strategy spec could be useful for open games, so I'm not gonna give him town points on that alone, myself.

[Auro]

In fact, fuck you, I'm going for the sword no matter what you say, so your plan can eat shit and you can die.

Varsoon, why phrase it in such an attacking, provocative way? I personally think it's in bad taste.

@Nancy: Yeah, a Yolo gladiator forces the lynch to be them versus the other, bad already + No one's gonna towncred a Yolo gladiator for yolo-gladiating, if anything they strengthen scumreads on them. Scum would probably generally be warier of doing this than town IMO. I can see how it's circular at this point, but yeah, whatever

@DVa: Present a plan that doesn't go whack if two/three town don't stick to it.

@Varsoon: The strength town has in this context is that claims on Excalibur can ONLY be done by town -- therefore IF we manage SOME cohesion, there must be some way to take advantage of that. I think.

[Auro]

Yeah, Merlin should especially never claim before Arthur has Excalibur, or we will just get 2 ICs die - back to back.

Think Dunn might also be town.

2 ICs who also can be trusted to lead town on D2, and one who can be trusted on D3, ALSO with a hidden BP.

[Auro]

But Merlin should never claim before Arthur has the sword, otherwise scum either kills Merlin before he can confirm Arthur or if he confirms Arthur before he has the sword, then scum would kill Arthur first, then Merlin next.

Premise behind Varsoon's strategy being that the BP sword-holder doesn't vig, so the Arthur stuff doesn't even matter.

@DVa: Present a plan that doesn't go whack if two/three town don't stick to it.

Why don't you present a better plan than 216?

I'm trying to think of one.
If I can think of a plan that isn't as cohesion-reliant as what we previously discussed, I'll gladly state it here.

[Auro]

@DVa: Actually, I'm not going to let my disdain that town can't all work together destroy any attempt to.
I'll be fully happy if town CAN commit to that.
I, for one, am ready to commit to a best-case scenario.

@Varsoon: Cool, foolproof plan is fine, but I do think we should attempt to see if players ARE willing to work together first. You're saying you'll claim the sword ONLY because you don't think this is possible, so for now you can set this aside and see, right?

@Nancy: My opinion's above -- I think we should try reaching consensus and see if enough town are willing to stick to a plan, and THEN decide whether to fall back to Varsoon's.

[Auro]

Yeah, Merlin should especially never claim before Arthur has Excalibur, or we will just get 2 ICs die - back to back.

Think Dunn might also be town.

2 ICs who also can be trusted to lead town on D2, and one who can be trusted on D3, ALSO with a hidden BP.

nancy who is scum?

I don’t know yet. Why are you asking me specifically?

What about my post 275? O.o

[Auro]

@Varsoon: Not my point, I'm not saying we should follow DVa's proposed plan.
I'm saying that we should actually feel out whether town cohesion is possible, but I think this would be more relevant when a provably good cohesion-reliant strategy is proposed, anyway.

I've played multiple games with DVa can wholly see where DVa's coming from though, I think you're wrong on the scumread of her.
I think Nancy sees this too.

@Nancy: Oh, okay -- I guess Varsoon responded to your direct/indirect response anyway. What do you think of that?

[Auro]

So what then? If we ML D2 then D3 is still 2 ICs with a lynch pool of 10 with 4 scum in it.
"Oh nooo scum shot the other IC"
Okay great we STILL have 1 BULLETPROOF IC with a lynch pool of 8 with 4 scum in it which is a 50/50 LYLO which is way better than most LYLO odds.

Also if there's only one scum remaining, they lose - so better than 50/50.
(Unless you factored this in already)

[Auro]

How would an IC work anti-town?

"Behave" anti-town, by refusing to follow optimal play from a pre-decided strategy.
This is outdated anyway, currently I agree with Varsoon, what's your take on Varsoon's philosophy vs DVa's?

[Auro]

@Gamma:
Also my belief at that time was that a strategy involving suicides to search for Arthur was good, if Arthur getting the sword meant a great swing towards town win. The thought that players, as part of strategy, vig to pass on the sword or prove themselves Arthur isn't scummy in itself.
I'll take it that you're scumreading me for what I was feeling out as the best town strategy WHICH I also approached not with perfect confidence, and seeked to correct.

How is using the sword optimal play?

It's an available mechanic, so I'm trying to figure out a way where using the sword can benefit town.
You're saying never use the sword, and there's NO way using the sword can be beneficial, right?

[Auro]

If they’re actively acting in town’s benefit they should holster. If they’re inactive or they’re performing poorly using it might be wiser.

From their perspective they're always acting in town benefit. I'd trust this only if they have objective proof/consensus agreement on their own benefit/reads on the playerbase much higher than random chance.

[Auro]

I would say yes, but in LLD’s case I trust her to be effective at leading and not fooled by bad reasoning.

I don't, especially considering she was making reads off two/three early posts.

[Auro]

The problem is trying to differentiate between people genuinely confused about the setup and people intentionally trying to hurt town, which isn’t the easiest thing in this type of setup.

Nancy, I get a bad feeling from the people who swoop in to HURT because I was talking about setup/strat and obviously had the chance of putting out a thought that could be sub-optimal, while also open to correcting myself. Seems a tad bit opportunistic, no?

[Auro]

I don't think Nancy meant the HURT vote tag

I know that. I was talking about myself. I was agreeing with her in that it's hard to differentiate, and then leading to the conclusion that someone who swoops in to attack someone talking about it for having a wrong thought or two seems opportunistic.

[Auro]

Read post 305, Nancy.

[Auro]

Making proper use of the Excalibur mechanic, to my eyes, is *heavily* reliant on town working together. Individual players pushing their own reads through, as opposed to forming consensus, would be anti-town. Am I wrong?

I agree with this
Is this what you were arguing?

Yep! My point was that a stubborn player who believes their reads are totally right (When they might not be) and keeping the sword to themselves, is anti-town in general - If we follow a strategy based on passing around the sword, which would rely on town cohesion.

[Auro]

My pressing starting question right now is:
How stronger does a Vig ability provide, in addition to Bulletproof?
Is it *strong enough* to benefit town's winning chances greatly enough to actually adopt a strategy where we want Arthur ends up with the sword?

[Auro]

Addendum to Varsoon's plan in 216:
We still follow protocol to decide who gladiates -- and Merlin/Sword-Holder ONLY come out if they're the majority HURT. Otherwise, they lay low.
I think this should improve it and keep ICs hidden too in the average case, right?

[Auro]

This guy feels scummy to me as well

Either you're tone-reading or there's some scummy content in what I've posted that you disagree with.
Which is it? If it's the latter, go ahead and engage me.

Why wouldn’t you want him engaging with you if it was the former?

Not engaging with me would be direct contradiction of his scumread if it was the latter.
Of course I'd want him, or anyone, to engage me regardless.

[Auro]

Hey GENIUSES going on about "oh the plan falls apart if 2-3 town don't cooperate"

What happens if Merlin doesn't claim? Then the plan is useless and it only took one town to 'ruin' it

False equivalence, JUST the Merlin player throwing the game is less likely than ANY 2-3 town from the 13 town not co-operating.

[Auro]

Also on the LLD note I think auro is expecting everyone in this game to play logically and that definitely won't happen knowing some of these players...

I'm constantly showing my disdain over the plausibility of everyone working together logically, lol.
I'm trying to find a strategy where we can make use of a good part of town working logically, and also account for a few town who won't.

@Dunnstral: Dependence on *one* player is a lot better than dependence on *13 players* at the same time. I think it's pretty clear

[Auro]

My pressing starting question right now is:
How stronger does a Vig ability provide, in addition to Bulletproof?
Is it *strong enough* to benefit town's winning chances greatly enough to actually adopt a strategy where we want Arthur ends up with the sword?

Vig works like an extra lynch mechanically, although the truth of that depends on how it is used. So I think it should be pro-town overall, the variance is just how much.

Addendum to Varsoon's plan in 216:
We still follow protocol to decide who gladiates -- and Merlin/Sword-Holder ONLY come out if they're the majority HURT. Otherwise, they lay low.
I think this should improve it and keep ICs hidden too in the average case, right?

If Vig isn't ALL that useful, I currently think the strategy above is best.

We either find a strategy wherein Arthur gets Excalibur, or not.
If the former, we'll not only need convincing reasons that the strategy can work out, but also that we don't lose much in the process of Arthur getting it, just for a Vig ability that's not supremely pro-town.

I meant in general not specifically to you Nancy
@auro I just get the vibes you are expecting a lot of cooperation here when we could easily see a yolo gladiate from some of these players within an IRL day.

I'm relatively new, so there's the hope that co-operation is possible. I really hope a yolo gladiate doesn't happen.

[Auro]

Agreed. I wish Auro would stop talking mechs and post more scumreads because it's just clogging the thread at this point and is honestly not that helpful what so ever.

Disagree heavily, I think for this setup the treatment towards available mechanics is useful to generate content.
And also, in the process, helped me form some early reads myself.
And also, the current context of DVa/Varsoon exchanges -- which I find are TvT, are also useful to me to work with and judge reactions to.

If you don't want to read a few pages of discussion, don't.

[Auro]

*I* don't think it's as simple here simply because of the divide in philosophies which drive how one would approach the sword mechanics.
I agree that talking about mechs in the normal case is not helpful, but in *this* case is. In any case, there should be some starting point to scumhunt, and the Varsoon/DVa divide + reactions actually help.
I am forming reads alongside, as I said, and have stated them earlier.

Also see, you formed reads from that discussion too.

[Auro]

Also @Cakez: I take back what I said about the PLs, I'm also down to policy vote someone who gladiates out of protocol.

[Auro]

I did note reactions in my post.
Looking forward to your explanation on the Varsoon scumread.

[Auro]

Admitting I did not read carefully through the whole mechanics thing.

But Auro (47) and Nancy (70) are you really advocating that any of us who get the sword should try to vig? The worst case scenario is 3 town dead by D2 (one lunched, one NKd, and one dead not-Arthur)—and tbh it's not actually that unlikely. Unless we're super super confident in not only getting one scum, but two, at the least there'll be two town dead. this is weird

Spoiler: Mechanics Talk

If the goal of whatever strategy is to get the sword to Arthur eventually, then sword-holders have to attempt a vig to make it claimable again.
My current position has changed, and more reflects yours -- I agree with Varsoon's strategy in 216 with some modifications. I don't think any strategy where Arthur should end up with the sword is pragmatic, or useful for the probable costs.
There are a couple of slots who think Varsoon is incorrect, and one of them has said she would point it out; still waiting for that response.

[Auro]

@Mod: Formatting seems to have gone whack in my post above, please fix.

[Auro]

@Ariane:

Code: Select all

[hurt]Someone[/hurt]

What do you think of the DVa|Varsoon exchange?

[Auro]

Probably both town. DV strikes me as legit trying to solve the game, tho I don't like what I read of the strat. V's idea is like 'I'm throwing my hands up in the air enough with mechanics' and I reckon there's town emotions in there, reads honest to me

And which idea do you agree with? Anything glaringly wrong with 216?

HURT: Dunnstral

May change this if/when MariaR or anyone makes the case against 216, and I'm convinced that Varsoon may be misleading us.

[Auro]

@Auro: Misleading us how? I've been forthright with everything and I wouldn't even call it 'leading' to say we should just play the game the way it was probably designed to be played.

I'm just gonna hope someone already explained to Varsoon why this is incorrect and if not I'll do it after I finish catching up. Although I expect him to know better. First Fos goes to him.

MariaR seems to be insinuating that you're being deliberately misleading in your post, or that's how I interpreted it; that's what I'm talking about. I don't think you're being misleading ATM myself.

[Auro]

Aw man why are you asking me to properly consider mechanics posts

well there's losing two conftown N2 and N3 which might not be ideal, I think someone already said that, and also losing the vig. But I think probably that the vig is kind of like a shiny distraction and following it too obsessively will lead to a loss (eg like said above, worst-case scenario) 3 town dead by D2

tbh I think I might also be more instinctively inclined to it cos it lets us get down to playing mafia after 13 pages of mostly mechanics lol. Like I knew going in there'd be discussion but also a balance to be had here

Reflects my own eventual thought progression on it. Townreading you.

[Auro]

@Veridian, for easier clarification, just pool in all questions in one post without quotes and I'll try to answer in a list!

[Auro]

Confirming the highest number of town is not the best goal. If an obvious townie who was going to die at night turns out to be confirmed, it does nothing for us.

What we want is one of two things: confirmed townies that scum can't kill before it matters (either BP or confirmed in LYLO), or being able to choose who gets confirmed (because we can pick scummy players to get either guiltied or confirmed).

Just for clarification; an example of the former being random claim on the sword and holding on to it, and only claiming before being pushed to gladiate, and an example of the latter being a scumread claiming and attempting to shoot?

[Auro]

"Claim" can take two meanings, I'll rephrase:
Former -> Random sword claim and hold on, reveal that you're Merlin/sword-holder when pushed to gladiate
Latter -> Scumread gladiate winner claims sword and shoots.

[Auro]

What we want is one of two things: confirmed townies that scum can't kill before it matters (either BP or confirmed in LYLO), or being able to choose who gets confirmed (because we can pick scummy players to get either guiltied or confirmed).

I'm going to try not to directly get involved in the setup discussion. But I want everyone to either accept this principle or tell me why you think it's wrong.

Agree.

[Auro]

@Varsoon: He said confirmed *in* LyLo, not claiming in LyLo, there's a difference, right?
You don't think Merlin/Swordholder works better as a hidden IC till the day before LyLo, as opposed to coming out in D2 where he becomes an obvious NK?

[Auro]

Townread on Gamma Emerald -- I can feel he's being honest WRT his treatment of my slot, the progression from the initial scumread to his understanding my position felt genuine.

Gamma, any scumreads?

[Auro]

You're so lucky I think you're town this game.

how does it feel to be so wrong?

Looks like a scumslip, does Firebringer usually say these sorta things?

[Auro]

Also, UT looks significantly worse. The post he made about taking the sword and shooting and taking the sword and shooting is awful. Whoever gets the sword should not be shooting.

Didn't like his "I'm not using hurt tags, just gladiate your scumreads" seems like his intent was to destroy any town teamwork.

[Auro]

Also, is talking heavily about mechanics anti-town in your opinion, or is it because you think scum's trying to hide behind the veil of mechanic discussion and achieve towncred through it?

Which part of step 3?
I STRONGLY feel that if Arthur has the sword, Merlin should confirm it. NOT confirming that is anti-town.
And if non-Arthur has the sword, Merlin shouldn't say anything. Coming out is anti-town.

Bad logic.

Weird post to quote for "bad logic".
It's correct logic within the context.
Two schools of thought and I revised my stance on the approach. Now either DVa/Something Smart's approach to it is "bad logic", or Varsoon's is. Which?

[Auro]

I'm more interested in having a unique experience than I am in trying to game the setup to be something it wasn't designed to be.

This part reads to me a lot like you saying you'd rather have fun than win the game

Looks like you're trying to lead him to say he's anti-town.
I actually weakly think UT is town.

[Auro]

UT what do you think of LLD?

DVa, what are your reads?

[Auro]

I actually weakly think UT is town.

why?

Given the current gamestate with multiple people saying they'd policy vote gladiates, this seems like daring behavior from UT, right? Of course he might just be discouraging town cohesion, but just comes off as a troll of some sort -- wouldn't he be bit more careful as scum?

[Auro]

He didn't. He said something like "I'm not using hurt tags, just gladiate your scumreads" earlier and that's what I'm referring to.

[Auro]

I actually weakly think UT is town.

why?

Because he agreed with 216 and auro worships that post

Na, it's a read I formed after his recent posts.
Also, people keep *saying* 216 is wrong or whatever, but don't say how.

[Auro]

Ah fuck
I just realized a nasty scum strategy that could really send Town in a downward spiral
I’m NOT saying what it is because it’s something they possibly aren’t aware of.

And no counter-strat for town?

[Auro]

Also, people keep *saying* 216 is wrong or whatever, but don't say how.

Provably false, MariaR isn't "everybody" and that's what you're referring to, the rest of us have pointed out it's flaws

I'll read them up again, but IIRC they were answered. Don't think they are flaws.

[Auro]

Best general scumplay ATM is probably to troll around and distract from town beginning to work together, and try to draw them into gladiating at worst.

Trolls are really dangerous this game, and town should NOT fall into their traps.

@Dunnstral: I said people are saying it's wrong. But haven't convinced anyone why so.

[Auro]

Best general scumplay ATM is probably to troll around and distract from town beginning to work together, and try to draw them into gladiating at worst.

That's exactly what UT is doing but he's town to you because "would he be that bold" or something

UT doesn't seem to be trolling individuals. His perspective is valid, if not game-winning in that he also wants to have fun and not discard certain mechanics just because "optimum".

He's not triggering anyone.

[Auro]

Emphasis on "but don't say how"

we did say how

Which wasn't convincing.
They were rebutted, and thereafter left.

[Auro]

Best general scumplay ATM is probably to troll around and distract from town beginning to work together, and try to draw them into gladiating at worst.

ok who specifically is trolling and do you therefore think they're scum?

Got those vibes from Kokichi, she did this in early game too if I remember right.

[Auro]

Auro you just said he comes off as a troll, stop backtracking

Yes, and after his responses to you, he looks less like a troll and more like someone who just wants to enjoy the game.

Contrast with players jibing at players and claiming to read them perfectly and fling scum accusations at them.

Firebringer too, for example.

[Auro]

there’s a 1/4 chance we get a dead mafia n1.

There's 0% chance scum claim the sword Gamma don't shake my read on you

He said in his next sentence, "Of course this crumbles if Maf don't go for it, which is the probable case"

[Auro]

How about we let Varsoon, UT, and LLD go for the sword? They've all already volunteered their intentions to go for the sword, and they seemed pretty bent on going for it

Was thinking along these lines -- a lot of us ready to co-operate, leave the rest to claim.

But Dunnstral, these people are also not willing to let go of the sword -- so what then?

[Auro]

But Dunnstral, these people are also not willing to let go of the sword -- so what then?

Then we can't do the plan at all, or else we have to adjust it to whatever they want to do

Yeah, it's not likely ALL of them are scum -- so if we leave it to those three, it's equivalent to picking a town leader who's gonna hold the sword, except for UT

[Auro]

@DVa: Their holding the sword discards any sword passing strategy town would want to adopt. Say it falls to Varsoon -- what then?

I said "Except UT" in my post.

@Dunn: Except the swordholder singlehandedly forces us to discard certain strategies. They don't need to lead the town in terms of reads. But can lock strategies.

[Auro]

@Elsa: By lynching them?

[Auro]

Oh nevermind.

[Auro]

I'd personally challenge thee wielder if they are shitty enough. You don't get to keep the sword if you hurt the game.

Why would town vote for potential scum as opposed to an Innocent Child?

[Auro]

I'd personally challenge thee wielder if they are shitty enough. You don't get to keep the sword if you hurt the game.

Why would town vote for potential scum as opposed to an Innocent Child?

Wouldn't*, sorry.
I don't think any reasonable town would vote the IC just because "shitty" lol.

[Auro]

do you think I am scum for "baiting" lld?

I think you get scumpoints for that, yeah.

[Auro]

FTR. I was trying to bait LLD to get her more upset

You literally said here you were baiting her to get her more upset

[Auro]

Let's say Lady gets the sword and the first thing she does is challenge me day 2 so town will never get the option to do anything. You lynch me because I'm not the sword wielder. Lady gets her way.

Lady does the same thing day 3, and again, she wins since she has the sword. Day 4, guess what, she does the same thing.

I will forever hang a shitty town if it means the rest of the player base has fun.

This is a valid concern - Gladiation mechanics means the holder may force us to kills, if town never lynches the holder.

[Auro]

The point is, that's possible. I want it to be known we cant stand for that shit if the sword wielder just challenges whoever the want to kill that we just do it. Then nobody but them has any opinion.

Dunn: well if I'm alive at that point and they're doing what I suggested they might do, I'll sure as hell try to lynch them.

Agree, and I'll actually follow Jay into this if IC gladiates to their whim, without consensus scumreads on the other.

[Auro]

I'm inclined to agree with Fire, Auro you're saying some wild shit this game

Wild shit being?

[Auro]

Um, no, how is that relevant?

[Auro]

This is a valid concern - Gladiation mechanics means the holder may force us to kills, if town never lynches the holder.

like this seems like fearmongering

We are not playing around the assumption that the sword holder plays like garbage.

There's no assumption - it's a non-negligible possibility, and we should be prepared to deal with it if it happens.

[Auro]

HEAL: auro

i often scumread non native english speakers.

O.o was my English crappy anywhere? Or are you referring to the alleged out-of-context baiting quote?

Anyway, I don't think you were as provocative as I assumed after your recent posts on it. Apologies if it disturbed you.

Pedit: I've been speaking English all life, and do think in it too, but I understand what you're saying -- People do generally get weird vibes from my tone.

[Auro]

it's a non-negligible possibility, and we should be prepared to deal with it if it happens.

WHO DO YOU IMAGINE DOING THIS THOUGH?

Why is it actually a non-negligible possibility and why is it worth talking about right now when it is so remote?

You know there's no way I can objectively prove the likelihood of this. I can imagine UT doing this (set the vig apart), he literally said "just gladiate your scumreads".

[Auro]

I can imagine UT doing this (set the vig apart), he literally said "just gladiate your scumreads".

if you think UT is this bad of a liability as town why not just have him lynched today?

I think many players are probably capable of exhibiting such behavior - if people claiming the sword explicitly agree to 1. Not do that, and 2. Town is ready to lynch ICs for doing that, it's fine.

UT is self-resolving anyway, considering he'll attempt to vig.

If he lol gladiates today, I'll vote him.

[Auro]

@UT: Fair enough. I'll still vote you if you gladiate before it's a ethical certified town approved gladiate.

[Auro]

No, they won't be town leader, they'll be innocent child

It's not the same thing

We don't need a town leader and someone being unclaimed sword-holder will not make them 'town leader' when the reason we let them claim in the first place was them being scummy

While it's true that it's not the same thing, I don't think there's a negative correlation between how scummy someone is and how good their reads are. If anything, there's a positive one because (a) scum will generally try to discredit and push people with good reads and (b) they can form reads off of how people treat them, knowing that they themself are town.

There's a type of player, good at both town and scum, that is both hard to read and very strong to have as a town leader. If we do have someone hold onto the sword for the whole game, it should be someone like this.

gross post.

What's gross about it?

[Auro]

Let us look at the most likely scenario: It is day 2 2 knights are dead (town) A random guy has the sword.
So at that point, Merlin should claim so we get 3 'IC' with him whoever Arthur is and the random sword. With 15 alive that makes our lynch pool 12 with 1/3 chance of lynching correctly. While I do understand this play it seems wrong when we wouldn't even know who the IC or Arthur are. We can't control the sword IC but if say Arthur and the merlin are already towny then that doesn't really help us.

So you're saying claims should happen as such:
Arthur gets sword: Merlin outs Arthur (Matches Varsoon's strat)

Arthur doesn't get sword

: Merlin still outs Arthur
You're asserting that in the latter case, this reduces the lynch pool, but the way I see it, the lynch pool reduces even *without* outing the swordholder.
If the swordholder becomes a consensus scumread, enough to trigger a gladiate, *then* he should claim.
Merlin can crumb Arthur/Swordholder, so in case scum happen to NK Merlin, we then know Arthur is Arthur for sure.
A secret BP swordholder reduces chances (slightly) for a successful NK as well.

So why is outing Swordholder superior to keeping them hidden?

[Auro]

Tripod for agreeing with Varsoon's post while obviously processing 0% of it seemed scummy AF

It's

pretty

clear that he agreed with the "Let's shut up and play" part of the post, not necessarily the strategy parts. I hope this alone is not why you're scumreading him.

[Auro]

It's pretty clear that he agreed with the "Let's shut up and play" part of the post, not necessarily the strategy parts. I hope this alone is not why you're scumreading him.

Is that pretty clear?

Yes. Read his later posts. He clearly said this isn't a math problem, blah blah, just wants to have fun, etc etc.
Should I go find his quotes?

Also,

FoS

: DVa. She's a lot more chatty as town, and finds it difficult to emulate that as scum.
She has had not a *single* non-serious post this game, excepting 650, a (seemingly half-hearted) response to Firebringer asking her for vids/GIFs.
DVa, do you think my meta evaluation of you is fair?

[Auro]

Did you read Witches Ball?

I might have, in the past. If you're referring to the post where you actually recognize that self-meta, I did read it before.
FYPOV why is my meta evaluation of you wrong?

[Auro]

Your experience with me is from:
One newbie game as town
One Mini Normal as town
One newbie game as scum

In the Mini Normal, I joked tanks briefly in RVS and then was serious for pretty much the rest of the game
In the town newbie, I provoked the new players with nicknames
In the scum newbie, I played seriously

So while I think I can see where you'd come up with that, you are ignoring the Mini Normal, and you have not read Witches Ball, which is the closer analogue to how I'd interact with this list. In Witches Ball I for the most part was pretty serious

So I would say you're being selective in your meta analysis, yes, unless the Mini Normal left less of an impact because you were dead

viewtopic.php?p=10442346&user_select%5B%5D=31878#p10442346
The other scum game for you (which I wasn't in). Not a single chummy post here too.

Mini Normal 2040 doesn't easily fit here because you

did

start getting serious at the A50-NM policy no-lynch, which happened before my death. Till that point you were chummy here and there, so fits the pattern.

[Auro]

Being aggressive doesn’t make you town. Ever played with scum!Thor?

Did I townread someone for aggression?
Gladiating without town consensus is anti-town, not just aggressive.
What are you asking me, exactly?

[Auro]

Mini Normal 2040 doesn't easily fit here because you did start getting serious at the A50-NM policy no-lynch, which happened before my death. Till that point you were chummy here and there, so fits the pattern.

True but that was only like a few posts? We're past RVS here. If you're scumreading me because I'm not posting memes at post 70 then your use of meta is rather weak my friend

Only a few posts till the A50-DVa exchanged caused a change in attitude.
Even you know it's harder for you to chummy-talk when you roll scum.
Faking it is something you're probably not comfortable doing yet, IMO.
Your

complete

lack of chummy/teasing posts (Don't have to be memes, you'd often just insert this kinda stuff into posts) increases the likelihood of your being scum, doesn't it?

Maybe you feel like I'm scummy because I'm less jokey with you in particular given that I'm not locking you as town as quickly as I did in the newbie game? Have you considered the possibility your read of me is warped because you are not used to me scumreading you?

You're being less jokey in general. You were *very* chummy muuuch before you actually sorted me.
This is not an OMGUS, by any stretch. This is an objective meta argument.

[Auro]

You're also ignoring that:
a) everyone complained about it in the newbie game (even if it helped my win)
and
b) the reason I was doing it (its success in BoR) was proven to be a total failure in 2040

Basically Elsa ruined my memes.

a) Everyone complained about the nicknames (which were confusing to them), NOT the chummy attitude.
b) I doubt you generally do this for any reason. It's just your style -- You do it because you like doing it, not for some scumhunting advantage. Also, if it was a total failure in 2040, what made you adopt it in Newbie 1899? You literally posted a meme there, too.

These factors don't affect the meta case on you.

[Auro]

@DVa:
If you're saying your chumminess is strictly as a scumhunting tool, I don't trust you on that.
If you're trying to imply that you'd discard all chumminess because of those factors in 744, then I definitely don't trust you on that.
You were pretty excited to join this game, and I doubt you'd approach it throughout with the dead-serious attitude you've been carrying the entire game.

@Nancy: I'll get to that, what do you think of the DVa meta thing?

[Auro]

+1

@Auro, why are you hard defending him for this? He is advocating a blatantly anti-town plan.

I'm not hard-defending him.
What part of the 'blatantly anti-town plan' are you talking about? Can you go into details on this?
I clearly said I'll vote him if he gladiates without consensus in an early post.

His perspective of not overthinking mechanics, trying to get the sword and vigging people to have fun and enjoy the spirit of the game -- isn't scum-indicative to me.

[Auro]

OK

Are you joking as much?

Why are you tryharding so much?

I thought you wanted to channel your inner Not_Mafia?

Should I meta you as scum because you're not joking enough?

I generally don't joke/play with a chummy attitude off the bat, I get comfortable with the playerlist first. If there's a player I'm already comfy with, I'll prolly be a bit more jokey with them, as either alignment. I just completed a scumgame (1898) where my first post had "You can trust me this time, I swear " to a couple players I played with.

I tryhard as either alignment, and YOU know that. If I would comment on this, I think I tryhard a lot less carefully when I'm town.

You also know I wasn't aiming to channel my inner Not_Mafia

this

game. I exhibited interest in the mechanics and possible solves to you BEFORE the game started.

You

can't

meta me as scum because I'm not joking enough, that would simply be false.

[Auro]

btw, doing a d1 meta argument is shitty in the first place. Now if I wanted to actually joke because the mechanics discussion was over you'd be overreading into it which means you're basically provoking me into being less funny which is not helping my wim in a game that already has kinda pissed me off

I never said your meta applied only to D1.
You have 80+ posts till now.
Why would you refrain from joking just because there was mechanics discussion going place in the middle?
Where has this game pissed you off already?

HURT: Auro

Here's what I think of your case on me.

Aww.
(FWIW, in the current gamestate scum!me would have attempted to pocket you by now)

[Auro]

OK, and I'm already familiar with the vast majority of this player list. So maybe I'm not being as "chummy" because I have already used most of my opening jokes with half the players in this game, and the ones I'm unfamiliar with haven't really inspired me to be funny

So you yourself admit that your level of chumminess varies based on your familiarity with a player list. In that case, why would you think that I would be the same amount of chummy with a playerlist that I'm already familiar with as a playerlist that I'm meeting for the first time?

You're acting as though I would play this like a newbie game where I literally know one person, instead of a game composed of like 20 people I literally just completed a game with.

Yeah except it's not a set of jokes to re-use when you find someone new, it's a friendly attitude in general that you adopt.

My

chumminess is, to an extent, dependent on familiarity, yes. The more familiar, the more chummy I could get -- that too, usually not something I initiate. Mine's a direct correlation, not an inverse.

If anything it feels to me that it's unnatural for you to be absolutely 0 chummy with a highly familiar playerlist.

[Auro]

Where has this game pissed you off already?

Are you being intentionally dense? Maybe the part where Varsoon told me to die because he didn't like my plan?

Sure wish you rolled town here but I don't think you're changing my read based on how shitty this push is.

You're pretty darn experienced, and I don't think you'd get as pissed off at

the game

because of that. Also, you know Varsoon.

You were evaluating me as town based on play earlier but now have decided to flip your read for reachy meta reasons, shortly after I indicate I'm not townreading you.

You were trying to pocket me and now when you saw it was backfiring you're trying to push.

Sorry you rolled scum Auro.

I townread you because I thought I could see how your perspective towards the mechanic philosophy would shape your thoughts on strategy, and it seemed to come from town!DVa.
Making an "early townread" isn't pocketing. You've seen how I pocketed people in my scumgame. I cozy up, begin to work with them, treat their slot like we're on the same team and work from there, etc etc. IMO it's the style of engagement which enables me to pocket people, when I do.

And you don't have to be sorry, cos I did not.

[Auro]

cos I did not.

Where's your "I'm lying when I say I am" response? Why so serious Auro?

Because this wasn't your question.

Auro, this is your one chance! Are you the scum? You know I can see right through you! Tell the truth... or else!

[Auro]

I don't think you'd get as pissed off at the game because of that

To be clear, you think that someone telling me TO DIE in a game I play for FUN would not make me less interested in being jokey?

I do know Varsoon, as scum he was very pleasant. As town he's obnoxious. So yeah, at the moment that makes me even more annoyed, because if he claims the sword I'm dealing with a game where the most obnoxious person is going to get the sword and never use it. So no, this game has not been as fun so far as I was anticipating. So now the game is disappointing and you're trying to push a scumcase on me because this game isn't as fun as I thought it'd be.

Keep pushing it Auro. Keep pushing it and see where it gets you.

To be clear, I don't think it would

piss you off

, coming from Varsoon.
I'm open to hear other thoughts on this and their own meta-eval of you.

This is a valid concern - Gladiation mechanics means the holder may force us to kills, if town never lynches the holder.

like this seems like fearmongering

We are not playing around the assumption that the sword holder plays like garbage.

If you were pretty annoyed by the thought of Varsoon taking the sword and obnoxiously not using the sword (which is very much bad play to you), would you say this? I know that you were only referring to the Swordholder gladiating their scumreads without town consensus, but still. O.o

So who do you want to gladiate Auro? Would you prefer LLD or UT?

What's the intent behind this question?

[Auro]

HEAL: All
HURT: Auro

You're now my only priority.

Uh huh.
Go ahead and case me, aside from my meta-push on you.

[Auro]

If I had my way right now:
Smart/LLD would be dueling
winner goes for the sword along with Dva or UT.

I think you're going to be pushed regardless if you're scum or not. If you win the duel you go for the sword. If you flip people lose the excuse of pushing you.

You're not scumreading LLD. If she loses and flips people lose the excuse of pushing her, but she's also dead. O.o
Are you scumreading Something_Smart? If not, why do you want two non-scumreads to duel?
Sword claiming is independent of the duel, right? If you want LLD to claim it, why make her gladiate first?

[Auro]

@Varsoon: What would be wrong with hypoclaims on Arthur and outing only if consensus hurt?
So if Merlin perchance dies at night, Arthur is an IC the next day.
If Merlin isn't NK'd, and Arthur is -- this could've happened anyway if both both were outed.
If both make it to next day, that's awesome, right?

[Auro]

Arthur is never IC if Merlin dies before claiming.

I don't get what you mean by hypoclaims on Arthur.

Also, I trust you WAY less after this recent loss to you in that Newbie game. You wormed your way into a townread on me there by being methodical and questioning like this and so I'm going to be way more critical of you moving forward.

In D2, everyone says who Arthur is if they were Merlin.
If Merlin dies, the person he said is Arthur, is confirmed Arthur.

Yeah fair enough on the trust part.

[Auro]

That'd actually probably be fine. It makes it much more likely that Merlin gets shot D2 but if scum are out to shoot Merlin anyway they'll just do that if he hard claims.

Yes, it increases the likelihood of Merlin/Arthur getting shot N2, but considering he is Arthur would be shot anyway if outed in D2, it's equivalent to outing in D2 in the worst case.

As far as D2 and not N2 goes, Merlin only outs himself or Arthur subject to either being pushed to gladiate.

Cool then.

[Auro]

No one on the list of big personalities should be dueling people day 1. It's too galvanizing. Force of personality, in one direction or the other, will be a huge confounding factor and ruin too many connections.

Even if one the "big personalities" has 9 hurts on them?

[Auro]

And finally, just because townies have to suicide in order to use the sword as a cop doesn't mean you should automatically discount it. That strategy DEFINITELY has the best chance of Arthur getting the sword, and maybe you should trust literally everyone else when they say that's a huge plus for town.

Something_Smart, I thought that the whole Arthur thing was irrelevant - the point of the sword mechanics was to use it as a copping mechanism by deciding who takes the sword. Said copping mechanism doesn't seem so appealing giving it's virtually suicide for the holder.

Can you show how Arthur getting it is a huge plus for town, given the costs of suicides in the process?

[Auro]

First of all, a plan that requires some town cohesion is not necessarily worse than a plan that requires no town cohesion; in fact it's likely to be better because we can assume that town can put its cohesion to good use. So really the best thing to do is to accurately predict how much cohesion town is going to have

Townread on Something_Smart for this, I really don't see any utility in scum pointing this out. Plus, I've actually thought (and maybe said) something like this earlier in the game.

[Auro]

LOL are you serious? I feel like me + DVa + maria have been saying some variation of this all game day long

AFAIR, you were arguing with me that the likelihood of *one* town screwing up as Merlin was arguably as much as two or three town out of 13 not co-operating. I said it's pretty clear that's untrue, and you then stopped engaging me there.

Something_Smart's pointing out that it's worth searching for a strategy expecting a degree of cohesion but not *perfect* cohesion, which early DVa's plan required.

Can you show me the relevant quotes from you guys that say this?

[Auro]

How was that a misrepresentation? This was our exchange back then.

Spoiler:

Hey GENIUSES going on about "oh the plan falls apart if 2-3 town don't cooperate"

What happens if Merlin doesn't claim? Then the plan is useless and it only took one town to 'ruin' it

False equivalence, JUST the Merlin player throwing the game is less likely than ANY 2-3 town from the 13 town not co-operating.

Hey GENIUSES going on about "oh the plan falls apart if 2-3 town don't cooperate"

What happens if Merlin doesn't claim? Then the plan is useless and it only took one town to 'ruin' it

False equivalence, JUST the Merlin player throwing the game is less likely than ANY 2-3 town from the 13 town not co-operating.

That's arguable

Also on the LLD note I think auro is expecting everyone in this game to play logically and that definitely won't happen knowing some of these players...

I'm constantly showing my disdain over the plausibility of everyone working together logically, lol.
I'm trying to find a strategy where we can make use of a good part of town working logically, and also account for a few town who won't.

@Dunnstral: Dependence on *one* player is a lot better than dependence on *13 players* at the same time. I think it's pretty clear

Going to reaffirm
HURT: Untrod Tripod

HEAL: Auro
Because he sounds better, consider this me unvoting him rather than expressing a townread

In exchange:

HURT: Elsa Jay

[Auro]

What do you think I've been arguing Auro?

I never said all 13 town need to band together and join hands and spin in a circle, I compromised and said the three people who were definitely having a go at the sword (Varsoon, UT, LLD) could do so and we could work with that

I also said I'd like for people who were going to be lynched anyway to grab the sword and then step away so that the sword could be used again (and who knows, maybe they're arthur)

We really just need to put pressure on people and then when they feel like they're going to be mislynched, GRAB THE SWORD

I never ever said we needed the entire town to cooperate on something so I'm confused about what you're getting at - the whole basis of my arguments have been around some town working together, even what you just said:

I see that, but there's a slight difference from what Something_Smart said. His intent in finding a strategy with a basic starting point of finding achievable town cohesion was transparent. You're saying that your actions later have expressed this intent (and that you were going to work towards a solution accounting for this), and I simply did not read it that way among the other posts. I'll read over your posts.

What stance am I taking here:

1)We should get 1 town member to co-operate
2)We should get some town to co-operate, like 2-3 or even 4 or 5
3)We should get all 13 town members to co-operate

If that was your stance while making it, cool! You can see how, at the time, I thought that was just a stubborn jab at Varsoon's strategy in favor of a strat that required 100% cohesion which would *probably* not happen - which could come from scum, right?

HEAL: Dunnstral

[Auro]

Also, no, lynch pool doesn't become 12 if people don't claim because people won't know who is who and won't know that UNLESS THEY CLAIM. Worst case scenario is that Arthur gladiates Merlin or the Sword Holder. You're working on the assumption that the lynch pool is 12 without the claims because, once gladiated/run up, the player can claim, but then we haven't looked in that pool, we've just run up or, worse, gladiated a player we can't lynch due to IC, forcing our lynch onto the other option, which is awful because then there's no criticism that can really be levied for mislynches and no associatives based solely on voting.

Sorry I'm talking about mechanics again, but - this would be countered by consensus hurts well before the deadline, and sticking to an "ethical gladiating protocol". The most hurt gets to claim, and if not Merlin/Arthur, declares intent to gladiate another player (preferably second-most hurt) who gets a chance to claim. The prior interactions till then

with

the ICs are actually useful IMO, and should help this process.

[Auro]

And a gladiation policy doesn't require 100% town co-operation, just a significant chunk - which is easily achievable.

[Auro]

Spoiler: Mechanics talk

Which implies that Merlin/Arthur can't easily be pushed to consensus gladiate, too - forcing them to look elsewhere for mislynches, which means that the case where Merlin/Arthur have to gladiate is less likely.

Even with a mislynch, if they don't get Merlin/Arthur in the NK, this means D3 ends up with 4 scum, 8 town, 1 Merlin.

The best-case benefit of hypoclaim+(no outing) is having an alive Merlin/Arthur+Swordholder in D3, which then narrows the effective lynch pool to 10 people - 4 of whom are scum (Assuming we'd follow an all-outing strategy then, although this could probably continue into further days). Seems pretty good compared to the cost of lack of associations to me, although I'll stop discussing mechanics for now and let better people figure this out.

[Auro]

What are your scumreads at the moment?

[Auro]

No one on the list of big personalities should be dueling people day 1. It's too galvanizing. Force of personality, in one direction or the other, will be a huge confounding factor and ruin too many connections.

I think a good day one duel would be Veridian v. Elsa, or Cakez v. UT or Auro v. Any of those names.

Make people take a stand.

1. What's your scumcase on me?
2. Is it that bad for a big personality to duel even if they have majority hurts? (Re-asking)
3. If town were to follow your plan of "make non-big personalities duel", this means I help my win-con as either alignment by asking a "big personality" replace into my slot - or any "non-big personality" slot who happens to be scumread by a few. Am I right?

[Auro]

You're polarizing in the reads catagory and I think that you've yet to give me a reason to believe your posting isn't scum hiding behind mechanics play. It's not a hard scum read, it's just a really good way of seeing where people fall and making them make a choice.

Agree on the "polarising reads" part, I think that in case I *am* lynched today that should give a

lot

of significant information to work off of.
Do you

really

feel like I've only been making mechanics-talk while not offering reads and engaging people outside of that? Because I feel like I've done that plenty,

in addition to

the mechanics talk.

Would a bunch of quotes from me where I'm not talking about mechanics *but* making reads and engaging people on what they said / making a stance on non-mechanic posts others have made, constitute enough reason?

Yeah, I think it is. You only learn about how people feel about them... without any of their reads being checked. It's too easy to put a hurt on someone in the public eye and parrot people's thinking at them. People want to be agreed with and seen as "right". Most people would ignore it. It can't go that way.

I'll disagree on this, I don't think it's so much feels-driven as to be completely useless. Everything is subject to useful analysis, and while the confounding factor exists, I don't think it's too much of a problem given sufficient content/interactions.

It's only a one day thing and if the whole town was "big personalities" the overton window would shift towards even bigger ones within that group. Having less loud less big personalities is required, inevitable, and over time it functions to assist the game. It's just day 1 you can't do it without being punished and losing a lot of valuable info.

I feel that this logic should extend to D2 as well, given the earlier assumption that D1 interactions are not fruitful -- vote analysis isn't exactly easy either when you have two options when you look at it isolated. What you're proposing, in the long term, applies with lesser strength IMO, and it feels like this sentiment would generally cause less loud "Big personalities" to get lynched over the course of the game.
I would argue that

removing

a "big personality" can be good just for the reason that they are a confounding factor.

[Auro]

Also, I really think people should look at viewtopic.php?f=11&t=77673 and try to evaluate if Auro's play here matches how he played in this scum win he literally got today. I'm way way way too close to it to make an unbiased judgment.

I have two completed town games and two scum games, and an overall read of my posts should help, too.

Before anyone makes a case on the 'tryhard' or 'posts too much' meta, do consider that I've done this as both alignments -- a small exception being Mini 2040 (where I was killed N1) for a bunch of reasons. (First closed game, confusing playerlist, etc) I did wall and make cases, just not as aggressive as I was in the rest.

I'll also point out here that I

know

I've been accused as scum with a meta-case from Ruby Red in the game Varsoon linked, so I'm obviously self-cognizant of the chance of it happening.

DVa actually seemed to frame this against me, fully well knowing that I'd effort in any case (something I think I told her off-games as well, before).

[Auro]

DVa's the only one I have decent confidence on. I recently played BoR (of which this setup is a watered down version in a lot of ways) and DVa's play there was entirely different.

Cool, so I'm not the only one seeing this.
HURT: Dva

[Auro]

@Something_Smart:

Spoiler: Mechanics talk, again

For one, I feel that *for* the suicides to work as copping mechanisms, you need 100% town cohesion/control on who takes the sword. Even *one* town player not following this makes the sword claimed, which destroys its copping ability. I think it's apparent already that a few town are going to try and claim it no matter what, so unless we have a very convincing plan in the first place with this, we won't have town cohesion anyway.

We also have to remember that this kind of plan requires commitment over the days, in that people shouldn't go "Oh I'm better than the rest, I'll save the BP for myself" anyway. The extreme amounts of cohesion and commitment required makes this hard. Although if we can find a mathematically proven strategy to increase town win chances assuming they can follow a plan, it's worthwhile to try and coax town to co-operate.

That apart, the best strategy right now, to me is:
1. Propose and achieve consensus on following a gladiate policy of top hurt players claiming role, announcing intent to gladiate someone, and the other claiming role. Policy vote if not followed. (Achievable)
2. Everyone (except Merlin) tries to get the sword, so the scum doesn't hone in on who could have it. (Doesn't even matter if people don't try)
3. Merlin remains quiet unless pushed to gladiate or about to be gladiated by someone, or Arthur is. Likewise for Swordholder.
4. Hypoclaim on D2 on Arthur. (Achievable)
5. Merlin and Swordholder out on the day before LyLo. If CC'd, lynch to check. If not, great.

One question is: Is an Arthur hypoclaim more useful in D1, considering the 1/13 chance Merlin gets NK'd? (3/13 if he's pushed to a gladiate and outs himself)

What do you think of this?

[Auro]

Spoiler: Correction

One question is: Is an Arthur hypoclaim more useful in D1, considering the 1/13 chance Merlin gets NK'd? (3/13 if he's pushed to a gladiate and outs himself)

Correction: 3/17 if he's pushed to gladiate.

(I'm spoilering Mechanics talk so it's clearer to everyone that I'm not "hiding behind" this, and can easily read my other posts on an ISO)

[Auro]

Dunnstrall isn't trying to rope me into more mechanics discussion when it's already pissed me off so much the mod warned me to stop.

Weird you didn't hurt me when I was engaging you into mechanics too, independent of my completed scumgame.

[Auro]

Oh OK, that makes sense.

[Auro]

I feel that this logic should extend to D2 as well, given the earlier assumption that D1 interactions are not fruitful -- vote analysis isn't exactly easy either when you have two options when you look at it isolated. What you're proposing, in the long term, applies with lesser strength IMO, and it feels like this sentiment would generally cause less loud "Big personalities" to get lynched over the course of the game.

@LLD: Discard this part of my earlier post to you, I misread your post.

[Auro]

what caused this change of heart?

The threat of policy votes makes it less likely. Also makes the game a lot less fun. While in some cases I may scumread the yolo gladiator less than the challenged, I'll still policy vote the yolo-er.

[Auro]

-I think the meta case on D.va is pretty weak. One or two games does not make a good sample. cases that revolve around "oh you were funny earlier that game but not this one" always fall flat to me. like auro's analysis of "chumminess" based on like two games feels pretty flawed.

It's not based on just one or two games. It matches with pretty much every game DVa has played. Around 5 games at least, just observable evidence - check her profile.

She's an alt, and she would admit that she finds it significantly harder to be "chummy" as scum.

Do these reasons make it stronger to you, Cakez?

[Auro]

I mean 5 games where if she's town, she's a bit chummier, and as scum, pretty serious.

You said my push on her felt genuine to you. Is this something you can explain a bit more in specifics? What would change in my push for it to look fake, for example?

[Auro]

Also I think we should limit ourselves to 2 Hurts at maximum and FoS for the rest.

[Auro]

Also I think we should limit ourselves to 2 Hurts at maximum and FoS for the rest.

I could actually be persuaded to do the whole Hurt thing if we only have one or two and keep track of it like an actual VC.

Hell, I'll even volunteer to be the person who keeps track.

That would be awesome!

[Auro]

But he's still scum because pushing a "you're not funny" meta case on me when he's townreading me based on play suggests that he has an agenda and is beneath his townplay frankly. He would consider a lot more scenarios than the one's he's been willing to entertain here; his cases as scum tend to read a lot weaker and his attempts to pocket me earlier today are also why I wasn't townreading him earlier.

And where exactly was I "pushing" that hard or strong? I just FoS'd you because of it initially, and literally stated I'm open to changing my mind if others disagreed. This was never my strongest of pushes.

I was open to considering more scenarios. I frankly expected town!DVa would react differently to my bringing it up. It wasn't a tunnel. I didn't like most of that exchange.

Also, umm, I believe meta cases in general aren't particularly strong -- so my aligning towards a read because of meta reasons would always be "not strong" and therefore, according to you, scummy.

Also yeah, my pocketing agenda was amaaaazing, what with me directly agreeing with Varsoon and expressing extreme disdain for perfect town cohesion. No. Pocketing would mean I actually fully agree with your philosophies and fight for them. What scum motivation did I have to agree with Varsoon? Actually, what I said before still holds -- case me and explain the scum motivations behind what I did.

And I didn't townread you based on play, oh no. I weak-townread you at that point because I could see how your thoughts would naturally lead to the posts you made. Something I've later decided was a wrong judgment.

[Auro]

Is that necessarily a meta thing though or could the difference in her play be possibly be a result of the different and complex mechanics in this game?

But you’re right about her being more serious than usual in this game.

Have you played with scum!DVa before and is “seriousness” a part of her scum meta?

Not necessarily a meta thing, and not a strong tell, as I have stated.

I've played alongside scum!DVa before, and "seriousness" is a part of her scum meta -- just check her games. What makes this stronger is that she won't deny that she *finds it harder* to be chummy as scum. Just ask her that.

This makes it not a small-sample meta, but an admission that there's a certain behaviour she finds it HARD to adopt as scum.

What do you think now?

[Auro]

Being aggressive doesn’t make you town. Ever played with scum!Thor?

Did I townread someone for aggression?
Gladiating without town consensus is anti-town, not just aggressive.
What are you asking me, exactly?

Are you townreading UT for opposing hurt tags? Anti-town play more often than not=scum play.

No. Read UT's later posts. I can totally understand his perspective. You have people going "Oh stop discussing mechanics, just make reads and play the game" and getting TR'd for it. Why does UT get SR'd? Like hell, he even said he wouldn't yolo gladiate as an IC because he wants town for have fun, and is open to using hurt tags in a controlled way, and even volunteered.

Nancy, anti-town in *this* game is a lot less simple. "I don't want to cooperate on a lame ass town governed plan because I want to have fun actually playing the game's mechanics" is an argument that can genuinely come from a town player, no?

[Auro]

Dunnstrall isn't trying to rope me into more mechanics discussion when it's already pissed me off so much the mod warned me to stop.

I'm done talking about mechanics.

Also, I really think people should look at viewtopic.php?f=11&t=77673 and try to evaluate if Auro's play here matches how he played in this scum win he literally got today. I'm way way way too close to it to make an unbiased judgment.

Holy shit, he sounds very similar here. Can someone link me to an Auro town game for comparison purposes?

I'm just a 1.5 months old, just go to my profile and read. I only have two completed scum and two completed town games.

I'll be impressed if anyone makes an objective meta-case on me off my scumgames, *as town*. And flattered that my scumgame and towngame are that hard to distinguish. And relieved that next game, people are going to frickin' stop meta-casing me on effort because I played one CLOSED game as town and didn't post much.

DVa is posing it like it was the unfamiliarity with the playerbase in 2040 that made me play differently, I object. It's because closed games are *hard* to dive into the first time, as I hope you all would agree. And we had weirdly behaving players, like a VT fakeclaiming daycop -- making me all the more confused.

[Auro]

And DVa, you're miscontruing pocketing. I agree with you on a lot of things outside of this game, and also see you as a team player I like working with. I'm naturally going to want to trust you and work with you in any game. Do you genuinely not see me doing this? Every game you can throw a lens over my early interactions with you and say I'm pocketing.

Pedit: I'm not saying it's an RVS thing, I think chumminess is your general preferred style. I don't think added chumminess or cozying up with friends (say, me, for example) is going to be a detriment towards building town cohesion. When did I say my meta case was built upon RVS behavior?

Also, answer this: Set this game aside. DO you find it harder to be chummy as scum? To what degree?

I don't get the aggression. I was only FoSing you at that time and engaged with your objections to it, resulting in you calling my engagement a "scum push" and hurting me for that. After our last Newbie game, I would have totally expected town!DVa to say "I am behaving differently, but that's because I think joking around can be a negative and distract from focusing on building cohesion. I think these players {} would also concur".
This is because you *know* that I tunnel as town, mislynched someone off that, and stated that I'll be less stubborn and trust others' views.

[Auro]

DVa is posing it like it was the unfamiliarity with the playerbase in 2040 that made me play differently, I object

I am arguing that you making reachy, bullshit arguments that reflect a large number of baseless assumptions is ABSOLUTELY scum indicative for you

How is it reachy when I acknowledge that it's weak and I'm open to changing my mind?

What are the BS arguments that make baseless assumptions? In my scumgame with Varsoon, my fake case on Egix looked pretty legit, enough to convince everyone to go for him. So I'm capable of pushing strong cases when I need to, as scum.

[Auro]

OK, and I'm already familiar with the vast majority of this player list. So maybe I'm not being as "chummy" because I have already used most of my opening jokes with half the players in this game, and the ones I'm unfamiliar with haven't really inspired me to be funny

I don't like that this was your defense at that point of time, given now you say:

I did at first get his read on me because I do sound very different here than I did there, so I get he doesn't understand that I entered this game playing it to avoid a town gamethrow like BoR, which the mod clearly wanted to learn some lessons from.