That's not what I am concerned with and I'd never hint at a modkill. That's against the rules.In post 135, Servant Beast wrote:In post 132, Servant Saber wrote:I'm going to head to bed and pray that what I fear will happen won't actually happen. Don't ask me as I don't want to manifest that energy into the universe.I'm not going to get mod-killed (I hope) for asking why they started off with a catch phrase from a player that can't be in this game.
Can you quote these posts in the same post? I play on mobile so that's hard.In post 149, Servant Assassin wrote:I mostly dislike posts #85 and #100, the first being what the kids call LAMIST and the 2nd is simply that if you are town, you understand the pull that would draw one to wanting to become master. Even if me and Saber did not have strong mechanical reasons to want master, there is a pull that wants to get townread and make the most of your slot, and becoming master achieves that immediately. The "Why is that?" from Lancer basically should already be understood from a town perspective.
That's my job and I can practically guarantee (unless blocked) that this won't happen as master.In post 154, Servant Berserker wrote:Someone central to prevent us going off on the wrong track via tunneling and the like.
I can't go along with that as it neuters my role and we can sort him by his content, which there is a lack of.In post 155, Servant Alter Ego wrote:I think the risk/reward is in our favor regardless and I wouldn't mind voting there because it sorts them early.
I am not sure how much I buy this. Specifically the last line about how town would react - are people that worried about being in someone's scum reads, this early in the game, on a game day where are not even voting scum out anyways?In post 194, Servant Caster wrote:when you're scum, and you get accused of being scum, you can brush it off as a lucky guess or a reaction test without merit - you don't feel the pressure and you can just fire back a question etc.
when you're scum and you get accused of being scum with your scum-teammate, it puts more fear into you that the person accusing actually knows what they are doing and has a tendency to cause paralysis in reacting.
when you're town and you get accused of being scum with someone else, you tend to at least ask if the read is associative or specific on behavior.
I agree, which is why I don't claim anything that I can't back up or is extravagant. Second, I don't want to be a miselimination for overpromising and under delivering.In post 164, Servant Foreigner wrote:Scum in this situation can promise everything. Once they win elections they are tree stumped anyway, no risk of being killed for lieing. It shouldn't be used as indication.
I don't find this true at all. Responses depend on personality.In post 194, Servant Caster wrote:when you're scum, and you get accused of being scum, you can brush it off as a lucky guess or a reaction test without merit - you don't feel the pressure and you can just fire back a question etc.
when you're scum and you get accused of being scum with your scum-teammate, it puts more fear into you that the person accusing actually knows what they are doing and has a tendency to cause paralysis in reacting.
when you're town and you get accused of being scum with someone else, you tend to at least ask if the read is associative or specific on behavior.
Why do you want to be master? I haven't seen it, and it would help me read you.In post 197, Servant Berserker wrote:Foreigner, would you be interested in voting me to be master?
I am uncertain on Caster and I disagree with their conclusions. Can you explain why they're town?In post 202, Servant Berserker wrote:I agree that caster seems town. Don’t want them as master though.
I started to soften on the idea of you being the choice, based on the caginess -- but this feels off to me again :/In post 208, Servant Saber wrote:I agree, which is why I don't claim anything that I can't back up or is extravagant. Second, I don't want to be a miselimination for overpromising and under delivering.In post 164, Servant Foreigner wrote:Scum in this situation can promise everything. Once they win elections they are tree stumped anyway, no risk of being killed for lieing. It shouldn't be used as indication.
Or maybe I’m not egotistical and don’t believe that I have to control the game in order for town to win? And can consider possibilities for other slots feeling the same way, so a player who says they have a “duty” to go for master either thinks very highly of themselves as a player or has reason to believe their mech will outweigh all other mech abilities.In post 149, Servant Assassin wrote:Giving this another once over, Lancer is pinging me for scum.
I mostly dislike posts #85 and #100, the first being what the kids call LAMIST and the 2nd is simply that if you are town, you understand the pull that would draw one to wanting to become master. Even if me and Saber did not have strong mechanical reasons to want master, there is a pull that wants to get townread and make the most of your slot, and becoming master achieves that immediately. The "Why is that?" from Lancer basically should already be understood from a town perspective.
Honestly, it's a bit of both. All abilities I'm not certain of but it rivals most abilities. I have already said too much about it though.In post 214, Servant Lancer wrote:And can consider possibilities for other slots feeling the same way, so a player who says they have a “duty” to go for master either thinks very highly of themselves as a player or has reason to believe their mech will outweigh all other mech abilities.
Correct. There is something behind that process. Namely my role is likely useless by the time my NP charges up and it's great for town if used correctly. I have the confidence to believe I can.In post 216, Servant Lancer wrote:Even further than that, the word “duty” makes it sound like saber believes that town would be hurt by them not being selected as master, as opposed to a purely self-driven reason for wanting it. So there has to be something behind that thought process.
I kind of agree with archer’s 213 re: saber.
This caginess take is then inconsistent in the same way...Servant Archer wrote:I started to soften on the idea of you being the choice, based on the caginess -- but this feels off to me again :/In post 208, Servant Saber wrote:I agree, which is why I don't claim anything that I can't back up or is extravagant. Second, I don't want to be a miselimination for overpromising and under delivering.In post 164, Servant Foreigner wrote:Scum in this situation can promise everything. Once they win elections they are tree stumped anyway, no risk of being killed for lieing. It shouldn't be used as indication.
It does not feel totally consistent.
For starters "I don't claim anything that I can't back up or is extravagant" - when you already claimed "My NP is one of the strongest in the game" in post 51
And also, the second half does not make sense to me "I don't want to be a miselimination for overpromising and under delivering." In what scenario is this actually a worry? If you "over promise, and under deliver" do you mean that you think we might miselim you AFTER we make you an IC - just because your power does not pay off the way you promise? Or are you saying that if you tell us how great you would be as an IC, then if we don't make you an IC, we would then kill you for not living up to the promise? - Because that also does not make a lot of sense.
Either way, this seems like a non-issue worry to have - so I find it hard to look at it as a genuine worry coming from you
Berserker, were you going somewhere with this question?In post 81, Servant Berserker wrote:Did you read the flipped roles from the first game, caster?
Pedit-
I have agreed with most of Egos posting.
There is a difference between "I am trying to avoid revealing what my NP does, in case I am not chosen" - which is the caginess that lead me to soften my opinion on Saber once Ego pointed it out in post 111 --- and being worried about something that does not seem like an issue regardless of the outcome of today's vote.In post 219, Servant Foreigner wrote:This caginess take is then inconsistent in the same way...Servant Archer wrote:I started to soften on the idea of you being the choice, based on the caginess -- but this feels off to me again :/In post 208, Servant Saber wrote:I agree, which is why I don't claim anything that I can't back up or is extravagant. Second, I don't want to be a miselimination for overpromising and under delivering.In post 164, Servant Foreigner wrote:Scum in this situation can promise everything. Once they win elections they are tree stumped anyway, no risk of being killed for lieing. It shouldn't be used as indication.
It does not feel totally consistent.
For starters "I don't claim anything that I can't back up or is extravagant" - when you already claimed "My NP is one of the strongest in the game" in post 51
And also, the second half does not make sense to me "I don't want to be a miselimination for overpromising and under delivering." In what scenario is this actually a worry? If you "over promise, and under deliver" do you mean that you think we might miselim you AFTER we make you an IC - just because your power does not pay off the way you promise? Or are you saying that if you tell us how great you would be as an IC, then if we don't make you an IC, we would then kill you for not living up to the promise? - Because that also does not make a lot of sense.
Either way, this seems like a non-issue worry to have - so I find it hard to look at it as a genuine worry coming from you
