Micro 624: Grey Flag Nightless (Game Over)

[karnos]

Also, I'd like to point out that what you just said, even if true, is a very anti-town thing to say.

Once you start claiming that a derp-hammer is likely town, before it has occurred, you are opening the door to a scum quick-hammer by giving them plausible deniability.

[RachMarie]

I did not say it never happens I said in my experience most of the time it does not happen

After all the game I have mentioned in my sig, shadow jumped in and hammered me on day 2 before anyone could push him or his scum buddy aubrey. Aubrey went on to win the game.

I could also say in my experience it is rare we lynch scum on d 1, and that it is really bad juju to have a NL on D1, that does not mean we should either NL to avoid hitting a townie on D1, nor that a NL on D1 is an autowin for scum.

A lot depends on the set up, what PRs there are, and most of all how the players play the game.

[GuiltyLion]

Why are you talking about NLs? They're literally impossible in this setup

[Franky]

I bet at least one of these players complaining about karnos L-1 - {javajoe, Hoopla, Franky} - is scum. Discuss

Also 88 is bad as Franky makes no mention of my subsequent townread on Karnos. It's as if he wants to just point out a flaw in my play rather than discern my alignment.

Why would you bet on that?

I didn't complain btw, I validated a good point with an example.

Is "X can be town" how you usually express town reads? To my knowledge, everyone "can be town".

[RachMarie]

Game theory in general not just THIS setup.

Karnos was saying my mentioning derp hammers often come from townies in games was antitown, and I was explaining further.

[RachMarie]

I could buy into a Karnos/GL team.

[GuiltyLion]

Yes, I meant it as "I'll allow him to be town in my eyes for now", but I didn't consider that it was ambiguous so that's not a bad point.

I'd bet on it because the idea that scum!karnos would use an L-1 vote as a hope for a town derphammer just feels shallow to me. It's the kind of surface level push that's easy to fake. IMO there's nothing alignment indicative in putting someone at L-1 early, if anything I'd say it's slightly townie as it forces people to start getting their teeth in the game.

[GuiltyLion]

Game theory in general not just THIS setup.

Karnos was saying my mentioning derp hammers often come from townies in games was antitown, and I was explaining further.

But why talk about game theory? I don't see how talking about NLs illuminated anything here, especially since they cannot happen in this game. It doesn't feel like it's contributing to helping develop reads.

[rb]

The point is that derphammer is NAI. Time to move on.

[rb]

Also, I'd like to point out that what you just said, even if true, is a very anti-town thing to say.

Once you start claiming that a derp-hammer is likely town, before it has occurred, you are opening the door to a scum quick-hammer by giving them plausible deniability.

How do you think a scum would use Rach's comment for plausible deniability?

Also, there's nothing really wrong with game theory talk early in the game since it allows people to understand where each player's understanding of the game is at and the perceptions people are likely to have on how a town should play. It seems pointless now but it's good for when it gets to late game and you're re-reading content to see who's actually consistent with what they think is a good playstyle. As long as it's not smothering discussion it's fine.

[GuiltyLion]

Also, there's nothing really wrong with game theory talk early in the game since it allows people to understand where each player's understanding of the game is at and the perceptions people are likely to have on how a town should play

So what have you learned about how RachMarie thinks about how a town should play?

[karnos]

How do you think a scum would use Rach's comment for plausible deniability?

Scum quick-hammers.

Day 2, some of us insist on lynching the quick hammer.

Guy who quick hammers says "i'm sorry, it was an accident, I am town, I just made a mistake by hammering too early... and look, in 95 Rach said most derp-hammers are town... she is right because I am town! sorry guys, please don't lynch me"

The best thing to say is

any quick hammer gets policy lynched. don't do it.

If you do it as town, you might cost us the game.

That leaves no outs for scum to be tempted. Saying a quick hammer is probably town is just so bad IMO.

[karnos]

Why do you want to know so badly?

Do you expect to lead a charge, getting someone on L-1, and then NOT be held accountable for it?

You are at L-1, and this is all you have to say? Do you want to be lynched, or are you just confident nobody would ever hammer you? What are your thoughts?

[karnos]

Saying a quick hammer is probably town is just so bad IMO.

Edit: I want to clarify. It's so bad to say the action is probably town before the action has even happened.

AFTER a hammer, there might be evidence or reason to say it's probably a town hammer. Before the hammer occurs? No. There is no reason to assume a quick hammer, that hasn't even happened yet, is probably going to be done by town. That is just non-logic to me.

[rb]

How do you think a scum would use Rach's comment for plausible deniability?

Scum quick-hammers.

Day 2, some of us insist on lynching the quick hammer.

Guy who quick hammers says "i'm sorry, it was an accident, I am town, I just made a mistake by hammering too early... and look, in 95 Rach said most derp-hammers are town... she is right because I am town! sorry guys, please don't lynch me"

The best thing to say is

any quick hammer gets policy lynched. don't do it.

If you do it as town, you might cost us the game.

That leaves no outs for scum to be tempted. Saying a quick hammer is probably town is just so bad IMO.

Do you seriously think scum would get away with using another person's post to justify their actions and that people would fall for it?

[karnos]

Yes, that is essentially how scum win every single game.

[rb]

Also, there's nothing really wrong with game theory talk early in the game since it allows people to understand where each player's understanding of the game is at and the perceptions people are likely to have on how a town should play

So what have you learned about how RachMarie thinks about how a town should play?

Nothing.

The point wasn't whether or not RachMarie was being helpful, it was that the act of blanket shutting down all game theory is bad. Which is the implication of posts like 107.

[rb]

Yes, that is essentially how scum win every single game.

Then those are some godawful towns you're playing in

[Javajoe24]

Yes, that is essentially how scum win every single game.

I won't deny that you have a point, but I think saying that is how they win every game is exaggerating it.

[RachMarie]

Actually to be fair town often shoots itself in the foot.

Game theory is often bandied about early on because people are sitting around and trying to figure out who is scum and who is town, if they are town. If they are scum they usually hunker low and try to not be too obvious. Game theory at least is some discussion and can sometimes cause scum slips where you can find the scum out. Shutting down discussion ESPECIALLY this early in the game, is scummy.

I am pretty happy with my vote.

[GuiltyLion]

I'm not "shutting down discussion", I'm taking a completely useless statement:

"I could also say in my experience it is rare we lynch scum on d 1, and that it is really bad juju to have a NL on D1, that does not mean we should either NL to avoid hitting a townie on D1, nor that a NL on D1 is an autowin for scum."

and bringing it back to

this particular game

.

I really don't like how rb interprets my posting as "shutting down discussion" when I am actually trying to get a read on RachMarie. His reason for voting Rosske was for a similar interruption, so I find it inconsistent that he didn't consider what I was doing here.

[GuiltyLion]

If they are scum they usually hunker low and try to not be too obvious.

So why do you think karnos - who made a very visible L-1 vote and has engaged in defending it repeatedly - is scum? I would not say he is hunkering low.

[rb]

Tbh we're talking about different posts now.

I specifically referenced your post 107 where you said, "why talk about game theory?" - which implies you don't find game theory useful so I'm not sure why you're being defensive about post 106.

Do you think all game theory talk isn't useful?

[RachMarie]

Amazing how GL is flailing about a comment I made toward Karnos...

[RachMarie]

Yeah Karnos is making noise, but he is not analyzing it just saying things like that is how scum wins every game.

And he is not at L1. Rosske is