Conquer Club

Ragian wrote:@dakky & ZaBeast, to me, Pershy always plays a bit defensively (but more so when he is town), so while one of you thinks it's scummy, it's normal to me, and while the other subjectively thinks it's a failed attempt at joking, it seems sincere and per MO to me.

I understand that you have meta about Pershy, but that reminds me of Madmitch... he was playing every game exactly the same, thus being unreadable... and if someone is unreadable whether they are town or scum, you can't say "it's how they play" because then you will never have an opinion on those people... "it's how they play" is not a valid starting point.

BTW. Is the thread going to die over the weekend as always?

dakky21 wrote:BTW. Is the thread going to die over the weekend as always?

I'll be more available over the weekend... I just took all my turns in a billion games and I'm here! (I hate the snow)

Metsfanmax wrote:

But you agree that we shouldn't, bandwagonning and still leaving your vote on me instead of the person who suggested a mass claim 7 minutes into the game.

How is my vote on you a bandwagon? I was the first person to do so. If anything, the people bandwagoning are the people who are just mindlessly repeating mass claim bad, lynch the mass claimer!

I think you're acting scummy. Vote Mets

Oh hello there Mr. OMGUS.

I didn't say the vote was a bandwagon. I was saying that you agreeing to not mass claim was bandwagoning after multiple others did the same even though you posted and said nothing in between. Was a genuine vote.

Metsfanmax wrote:

chapcrap wrote: Speculating on game mechanics at the beginning of a new game seems pretty normal to me... I'm not sure why that is scummy.

My opinions are similar to aage's. There's not a whole lot of meaning in a standard game, saying "well there's Y players so there's probably X mafia." In this game, every suggestion has meaning, and particular suggestions have a way of planting themselves in people's minds and perhaps subconsciously driving the flow of the conversation. Even suggesting "freshwater are villagers and saltwater are scum" has a way of doing this sort of thing. If you agree that the flavor claim is bad, it's for the reason everyone has been saying. And if that's true, then you agree that any commentary which would give away your own flavor is a bad idea. Which means that either you're doing the very thing you're condemning when you make a comment like that, or you're actively speculating something which you know isn't true or for which you have no evidence to be true, in which case what's the point of saying it?

Because it was responding to another response and I wanted to bring up the fact that freshwater was a thing. All of the speculation by Ragian (? I can't remember if it was him) was about saltwater species.

From chapcrap>>Because it was responding to another response and I wanted to bring up the fact that freshwater was a thing. All of the speculation by Ragian (? I can't remember if it was him) was about saltwater species.

chapcrap is correct, and I am the one who listed all of the marine species. I went back and re-read the opening scenario. It would appear, as chapcrap alluded, that the freshwater fish and other critters who got flushed into the saltwater bay are the prey, along with the hip and knowledgeable reef dwellers. And the dark shadows etc. are marine (salt water critters). It would be easy to conclude then that the marine things are mafia scum, and the freshwater things and reef dwellers are town, but it is probably not that easy. However, that's how I read it now.

chapcrap wrote:I didn't say the vote was a bandwagon. I was saying that you agreeing to not mass claim was bandwagoning after multiple others did the same even though you posted and said nothing in between. Was a genuine vote.

OK, so your vote on me is because I "bandwagoned" by agreeing with other people that a bad idea is bad. Got it. Next time as scum I'll be sure not to make that mistake, and try to make the bad ideas look good.

chapcrap wrote:Because it was responding to another response and I wanted to bring up the fact that freshwater was a thing. All of the speculation by Ragian (? I can't remember if it was him) was about saltwater species.

That's exactly what I'm calling out. Tobikera concluded that post with "Might be hard to assign a town vs scum designation based on the role." Which is... exactly correct. The only thing that idle speculation to the contrary does is intentionally sow confusion.

dakky21 wrote:I understand that you have meta about Pershy, but that reminds me of Madmitch... he was playing every game exactly the same, thus being unreadable... and if someone is unreadable whether they are town or scum, you can't say "it's how they play" because then you will never have an opinion on those people... "it's how they play" is not a valid starting point.

I don't think that's exactly what Ragian is saying. It's more that he's saying you can't use this particular behavior (being defensive) as a scumtell in the same way you would other players. That doesn't mean there aren't other scum tells, or that you even can't use this behavior to judge.

With that being said, you don't have to accept Ragian's reasoning or play his way, but saying that Ragian's decision isn't a valid starting point is a bit extreme. It seems like solid reasoning to me. Not using knowledge about the metagame is just being intentionally ignorant.

Also, while madmitch did get away with his play some of the time, most of the time he ended up doing silly things that hurt the team he was, so I don't think you're making the point you really want to make there.

dakky21 wrote:

Ragian wrote:@dakky & ZaBeast, to me, Pershy always plays a bit defensively (but more so when he is town), so while one of you thinks it's scummy, it's normal to me, and while the other subjectively thinks it's a failed attempt at joking, it seems sincere and per MO to me.

I understand that you have meta about Pershy, but that reminds me of Madmitch... he was playing every game exactly the same, thus being unreadable... and if someone is unreadable whether they are town or scum, you can't say "it's how they play" because then you will never have an opinion on those people... "it's how they play" is not a valid starting point.

You're closer to mitch than Pershy if you wanted to play that game I would elaborate why my input is important, but mets did it much better in the post above mine that I would.

chapcrap wrote:Because it was responding to another response and I wanted to bring up the fact that freshwater was a thing. All of the speculation by Ragian (? I can't remember if it was him) was about saltwater species.

It wasn't me. I'm not a big fan of speculating on the setup with no evidence. I don't hold it too much against whoever does so, but in my experience, players do so because they want to seem as if they're participating when really they're not. Sort of what Mets is getting at in his post above.

Maybe I should just refer to Mets whenever I want to make a point

Ragian wrote:

dakky21 wrote:

Ragian wrote:@dakky & ZaBeast, to me, Pershy always plays a bit defensively (but more so when he is town), so while one of you thinks it's scummy, it's normal to me, and while the other subjectively thinks it's a failed attempt at joking, it seems sincere and per MO to me.

I understand that you have meta about Pershy, but that reminds me of Madmitch... he was playing every game exactly the same, thus being unreadable... and if someone is unreadable whether they are town or scum, you can't say "it's how they play" because then you will never have an opinion on those people... "it's how they play" is not a valid starting point.

You're closer to mitch than Pershy if you wanted to play that game I would elaborate why my input is important, but mets did it much better in the post above mine than I would.

chapcrap wrote:Because it was responding to another response and I wanted to bring up the fact that freshwater was a thing. All of the speculation by Ragian (? I can't remember if it was him) was about saltwater species.

It wasn't me. I'm not a big fan of speculating on the setup with no evidence. I don't hold it too much against whoever does so, but in my experience, players do so because they want to seem as if they're participating when really they're not. Sort of what Mets is getting at in his post above.

Maybe I should just refer to Mets whenever I want to make a point

EBWOP

What is EBWOP and IGMEOY?

Please don't kill the rookie 1st round

TX AG 90 wrote:What is EBWOP and IGMEOY?

Please don't kill the rookie 1st round

Mod Note
EBWOP = Edit By Way Of Post.
Since you are not allowed to edit your posts, if you find a mistake, the way you can correct it is by writing your post again with the mistake corrected.

IGMEOY = I Got My Eye On You.
Fairly self-explanatory.

Have I really been scum that many times?

unvote vote skoffin

Surely, the post above is an admission of guilt

Ragian wrote::

Surely, the post above is an admission of guilt

How so?

Tobikera wrote:

From chapcrap>>Because it was responding to another response and I wanted to bring up the fact that freshwater was a thing. All of the speculation by Ragian (? I can't remember if it was him) was about saltwater species.

chapcrap is correct, and I am the one who listed all of the marine species. I went back and re-read the opening scenario. It would appear, as chapcrap alluded, that the freshwater fish and other critters who got flushed into the saltwater bay are the prey, along with the hip and knowledgeable reef dwellers. And the dark shadows etc. are marine (salt water critters). It would be easy to conclude then that the marine things are mafia scum, and the freshwater things and reef dwellers are town, but it is probably not that easy. However, that's how I read it now.

I believe this speculation is a complete waste of time.

But to me it doesn't sound like it's coming from scum.

The person who was agreeing and encouraging it is possibly scum though. I could see motivation in scum trying to agree with premature speculation about town flavor to appear as if they also fit in the same group.

On that note [v]chapcrap[/v]

Also blacky you didn't answer my question. Why is it suspicious that Tobikera knows so much about sea creatures?

BuJaber wrote:On that note Vote chapcrap

Also blacky you didn't answer my question. Why is it suspicious that Tobikera knows so much about sea creatures?

Ebwop

I keep forgetting it has to be red too. It's been too long since we played lmao.

vote chapcrap

BuJaber wrote:

Ragian wrote::

Surely, the post above is an admission of guilt

How so?

Skoffin wrote: The lads are correct in that majority of the time speculation is used to appear more active than you really are, and it is certainly a tactic used frequently by scum - I certainly speculate a lot as scum. Although I really only join these games to speculate the f*ck out of them anyway huehue.

Have you read that?

I don't even know how to defend myself on the dumb speculation thing. I was just trying to get out of the joke stage because it's annoying to me. I guess it that, but now people are all FOS chappy!! Ugh.

For me, I think the speculation of ratio numbers is good for this game because of noobs and people who haven't played in forever (me). It is good to kind of understand what initial ratios might be so that we know when to lynch and when to wait. I wasn't asking for any kind of mass claim. Just a general numbers discussion and game mechanic discussion. Going into day 1 and attempting to understand the game seems like a good thing. Don't know why understanding is bad.

In general, I'm in favor of no lynching on day 1. I think this is more so in this game with no VT. Maybe I should have joined DBD for games...

You should've defo joined DBD for mafia!

Anyway, I see how you would want to speculate, but my issue with it is that it serves as a distraction at best, since there's no evidence to hold it up against. Moreover, speculation often turns into their own truths, which would be bad.

Normally, I'm dead set against a no lynch as I am of the belief that a D1 lynch (whether random or not) helps establish voting patterns that can be used for town in the long run. However, in a game with no VT (vanilla town - roles with no night actions), we might be better off going to night time without lynching anyone. Barring whoever accidentally reveals themselves as scum, of course.

How are you on claims?

I agree Rage... Pursuing possible scumtells and slips Day 1 and even mislynching can yield some results like vote patterns and vote changes. If we lynch a townie, at least we will know who was on that lynch and if we hit scum at least we will know who didn't vote them or did vote out of misery. I don't want to go into D2 without knowing anything but a night kill, it's just like a day kill D1 and D2 is continuation of the D1.

I agree with dakky that a no lynch vote doesn’t help, because we will be in the same position on D2.

BuJaber wrote:Also blacky you didn't answer my question. Why is it suspicious that Tobikera knows so much about sea creatures?

Truth is it isn’t... but it’s D1 and I pointed half a finger half heartedly and just for the (unfunny?) bants!
Sorry I must have missed ure Q earlier.

vote Ragian
Simply for being the hammer that just lynched me in DBD

Ragian wrote:You should've defo joined DBD for mafia!

How are you on claims?

Obviously!

I don't understand the question.

dakky21 wrote:I agree Rage... Pursuing possible scumtells and slips Day 1 and even mislynching can yield some results like vote patterns and vote changes. If we lynch a townie, at least we will know who was on that lynch and if we hit scum at least we will know who didn't vote them or did vote out of misery. I don't want to go into D2 without knowing anything but a night kill, it's just like a day kill D1 and D2 is continuation of the D1.

This is a good point and I think I have flipped my position on day 1 lynching. Man, it's been so long since I played, I can't even remember my own beliefs. I'm basically a noob at this point.

Ragian wrote:

Have I really been scum that many times?

unvote vote skoffin

Surely, the post above is an admission of guilt

vote Ragian

I find him scummy all the time.

BuJaber wrote:I keep forgetting it has to be red too. It's been too long since we played lmao.

vote chapcrap

As far as I can tell you're still voting for Ragian as there wasn't any unvote associated with that vote. Which makes it a bandwagon of 5 votes with the recent votes from blacky and jfm (L-4)

Skoffin wrote:Ragoo in my "surely he can't be scum again?" list.

I'll just point out that this shouldn't be a thing. It's like in roulette in which the previous rolls have no incidence on the next one so you can't go "it's been xx for yy times, surely it's time for it to turn to zz"

About the lynch debate: my stance on it is we should lynch. First, even with knowing there are no VTs, there is no way to know we have an appreciable number of players with a night role instead of having passive abilities (though the rules talk about interwebbing roles, which are more likely to apply to non-passive abilities). But assuming town's night game is stronger than other games, I would expect the opposing factions to have something to make up for it. Therefore we should still lynch as that's a more favorable outcome than waiting to get information from the NKs (night kills). Trying to lynch, even if it doesn't happen in the end, would also give information and generate discussion, so all is not lost if we end up no lynching. I'd still rather lynch as knowing the affiliation of the lynchee is arguably the most important information you can get from a lynch.