lol ;)

1. Ok, then, but wouldn't you concede the point that in that case you chose that opener (as either alignment) precisely because it was a cover vs. trying to make a legit play and screwing up? And in general (certainly exceptions exist) isn't non-town more likely to need cover than town?

2. I mean, it sounds good, but it's the flub dilemma in a nutshell. There's no guarantee that penalizing the behavior would actually lead to change, and if ZFR is town and you (or anyone else piling on) is Maf, it makes easy cover to say "I'm voting him because he always does this even though it's NAI!" etc. Could blabber on but...

1. FTFY
2. Ohhh. Well...I confess I'm still not a fan but I can see where it made sense to you. Which is...something.
3. To be fair to you, it's non-gog lingo so it was a bit lazy of me to use in a game where cristi's probably the only player who would be familiar with that type of short-hand. I should probably be more cognizant of who is playing.

It just means that, for the standards of judging RVS, voting for a non-player (moreso with a nonsensical reason) is more likely than random to be non-town, for similar reasons as voting randomly. Could give a lecture but see response to SPF above.

Could town do the same? Sure. The same as town could use random.org to vote. Or a townie could flip out and claim to be wolf (I've seen it). But all things being equal, it's cover-seeking behavior vs. making an in-game play risking attention from someone actually in the game.

If I'd understood that you were making a reference to an interaction in the sign-up thread, I probably would have voted HSL instead of the two of you, but you voting wyrm at all still would have merited an eyebrow.


He is always town.

Sigh.

Looking at your post as a whole you make way too many assumptions, esp for a newish player. Whether that's confused town, or a dodge, IDK. It's still problematic.

On the first, I was prepared to acknowledge that perhaps I'd missed something, but going back and re-reading what you seem to be referring to is this? Which merits a solid "meh."

"That is suspicious because xyz! Why did you do that?" is questioning ZFR. Great. Nice work.
"I find that suspicious!" is at least making a statement you can be held to later if it's relevant. Of some value.
While technically, yes, you have "asked a question" in that line, you're not questioning ZFR, at best you are making a fuzzy bid to throw shade without actually having to commit to anything.

So, no, no points for that even if ZFR were to flip non-town later on.

FWIW, you also didn't respond to flub's direct question of you as far as I observed.

As for the cop thing, a) your proposition is at best a maybe, because it depends on what info the cop has relative to the gamestate, which could range from awesome to literally nothing of use, and b) it sounds awesome in principal, but the average townie has to try and observe and sort all the players at the table for the entirety of the game and is more likely to miss breadcrumbing unless it's super clear. Maf, again, are typically cop-hunting, and have a smaller array of players to sort. They also know some info on what is true and what is not. So breadcrumbs that are clear and unambiguous raise the cop's risk profile significantly.

So yes, the IDEAL is that the cop breadcrumbs info that will help solve the game after they're gone. The rub is doing it in a way that's clear enough to be useful to town while subtle enough that maf won't see it and end them sooner. And again, there's no standard cop, so why are you wasting text on this?

If you're town, please pull it together. If not, swell.

vote scene

1. Ah. That's fair enough.
2. No, because I don't assume you are playing just for my benefit. I just want to be able to assess what you're bringing to the table, and two posts is - while perhaps signalling - certainly thin and potentially random noise in the overall scope.
3. The context of a game setup that is more or less open, and the particular set of players at the table, of course.
4. Not necessarily. It would depend on whether I was playing to wincon, which I admit I probably would not make a priority. I also think there are some key differences in strategic context between you and I that made me think you were neutral and deliberately signalling.

Which...I wouldn't blame you for if I'm right. Which, of course, I may not be. ;)

EBWOP: For what it's worth, if you really want to know I can explain (probably in more detail than anyone wants) why I gave SPF and P1na different ratings for openings that pinged me as similarly relaxed/likable. The short answer is familiarity with the source.

So I guess I don't view it as "too good to be true" but I can also fathom your reaction better based on your follow-up.

/shrug

I did? Where?


By lynched, are you referring to the Neutral Lyncher? If so, why does it matter who their target was once the Lyncher is dead?



Heh.



You mean like you did in the last game?



Not sure I follow on the getting a pass part. Clarify?


Is there a case/situation/scenario where you would like my (anyone's?) vote based on reasons given?



cough... cough

If you were referring to cristigale's question, however...

lol - woops. I was not.

I've never claimed to have perfect attention to detail. ;) In this case my defense is that I've been sick and haven't slept well for several nights (thus why I'm at home posting and not at work).

But I definitely just straight whiffed that one.

I will say, though, to your question that as much as I don't like where Scene is going, he has been pretty clear that he thinks the lyncher's target is indicative of something about game balance. So I'm a little worried about what rabbit hole your question will take us down.

I tend to assume the lyncher target was drawn randomly, myself, but that is 100% purely an assumption.

Speaking of which, why did you vote P1na, again? Did we get to that? RVS yes/no? Particular reason there?

No.

As noted in the post previously before yours, I missed that response, and that was definitely my mistake. I was not attempting to throw shade, particularly on something so easily disproven. lol. It was a mistake. Relax.

Sigh. I get what you think you're doing, but seriously. Just stop.

Parity Cop:
[Town intro]
Power and win-con: You always had a sixth sense whether two people would get along well. Each Night you can contemplate someone and figure out, whether she belongs to the same faction as the person you contemplated in the previous Night. You get one N0 action. You win if all the witches are eliminated.

IF there was an N0 (probably, but not guaranteed), then yes, it's possible the parity cop could complete this N1 if they investigated either you or I N0. If they did not, they can't. Best case scenario if they didn't visit you or I N0, would be that they use their investigation N1/N2 to have a result for you on D3, which, depending on how things go between now and then, and assuming we're both still alive, would probably be too late to initiate your gambit even if you are town and we read different.

Beyond that, directing PR action is generally perceived as a non-town action. If you or I is the Parity cop then the maneuver can't be executed period, and again, you're just creating chaos then for no positive benefit.

No offense, but i just am not sure I can continue playing with you if this is your style. And here I thought I was a wrecking ball.

Inside the hall things are starting to get more heated, while outside the weather remains cold and grey. Accusations are starting to fly back and forth. Only JoeSapphire sits moping in a corner and hasn't said anything yet. She seems to be taking this incarceration very badly and appears to be almost catatonic. Noon comes and some gruel with gravy is handed into the hall. After all, no one wants you to starve before they get to hang you. The food is bland and it doesn't do anything to improve the mood.

________________________________________________________

Official Vote Count:

supplementscene 1 - bler (91)
Ixamyakxim 1 - cristigale (65)
ZFR 1 - P1na (19)
JoeSapphire 1 - SirPrimalform (6)
P1na 1 - Hypersomniac (24)
SirPrimalform 1 - ZFR(83)
bler 1 - supplementscene (96)
cristigale 1 - muddysneakers (30)

Not voting: agentcarr, Ixamyakxim, JoeSapphire, flubbucket
Not appeared yet: JoeSapphire

If I missed anything, please let me know.

Why would you want me to stop confirming whether you and I or on the same or differing teams? The Parity Cop get's to find out if we're on the same team or if you are in fact Neutral Lyncher or Scum. It doesn't matter if it happens over 1 or 2 nights. If we're on the same team he stays in the game hidden and if you're not on my team you're proven to be Scum. It's a win-win for town.

No suggesting town tactics for roleplayers isn't none town, it's called teamwork, which is very much what Town need to do to win. Why would a parity Cop not want to investigate the 2 most vocal and opposed players in the game thus far? It makes perfect sense.

Being condescending and arrogant seems to be your way of deflected logical criticism. I wonder why......perhaps you have something to hide.

Argh!

Vote Supplementscene.

Worked out well for me last game...

Look, trying to dial things back here since this is just a game. Rule #4 and all.

I really don't know what you think you're doing.

If you're town, then...ok, wow. That's something.
I didn't follow your prior game closely (you were maf, correct?) and I remember thinking you were all over the place, but perhaps that was just your mafia game. I should probably go re-read it, but honestly I don't care that much.
If you're neutral then, it's one approach, certainly.

If this is your town game though, as you seem to be indicating, I guess I'd say you should actively seek some pointers. Blunt, but no offense. Players who think they know best (myself included) and run roughshod over contrary feedback tend to lead to permanent tensions.

The longer you go in this game, the more I start to think maybe you do believe what you're saying and in what you're doing. I'd be curious what players who did play with you before think. If so, perhaps starts to point towards a town role, even if - being brutally honest - I think your play is strongly anti-town by almost every common standard we use at least on this site.

But again, being brutally honest:
1) engaging with the mod at length over other players who are present and whom you could engage with, even if you are seeking clarification on mechanics, is not pro-town. I read your reasons, and they would hold more value if you seemed to be absorbing what the mod said, but you still seem confused about a lot of fairly straightforward stuff. As town, it's important to be read as well as have an opportunity to read others, because town is also trying to sort you through play, hopefully without having to lynch you to see a flip or waste an investigation on you.
2) Directing PRs is strongly anti-town because it's easily manipulated.
3) Having at least implied that you hold neither town PR is definitely not pro-town (unless it's a feint and you are pc/vengeful, in which case, hey, well done!). If you are vengeful and you get lynched and you do want to target me (even if you're wrong), great, that's perfectly in keeping with normal play.
4) Treating feedback as scummy, generally not pro-town. Ironically, if you do flip mafia, half the room is going to think I'm mafia for coaching you.

I could go on. But I'm serious. I just...can't with this.


Wow.

Just. Wow.

I'm walking away to cool off before I start suggestion we've seen exactly this story before with a certain other player who is no longer here.

If you can't take feedback that MAYYYYBE you shouldn't be directing PRs (they know things you don't if you aren't the PR, and have different views than yours - they do want to hear your views, but they don't want to be told what their job is) and that some of your assumptions are far from the certainty you assume, I just don't know what to tell you.

Parity cop listens to you, investigates us both N1 and N2. We turn up same. Neither of us has flipped. What do we do then, exactly? They're not coming forward with that and they spent two nights chasing their tail because YOU thought it was important - in a game that can theoretically END on D3 in a variety of ways given the option for as many as 4 kills in a single cycle (tie double lynch, plus venge, plus NK).

I am literally trying to help you because I think it's important to town to try and sort players WITHOUT having to lynch all of them first whatever your alignment.

I'm done with him.

This seems like a huge deflection because you don't want to be investigated alongside myself to expose our alignments. Yet if you were Town it would almost certainly confirm you.

You've listed a list of spurious reasons why I'm 'wrong' in the same condescending manner. But if I am wrong, please test me alongside you and if you get lynched first and you're town, I'll get lynched. I have nothing to fear in being lynched

And another post and yet another lie, I have never claimed to not have a PR or otherwise.

thank you, thank you.

@bler144 I think you and I should cease posting for 12 hours in order for us not to further muddy the waters and thread spam in order to dominate the conversation as I believe you have been doing. Other posters should be able to look at this dialogue without having further twists to blind them.

As it is you keep claiming you're missing things because you're sick. Maybe you just need rest?

Last game when you were sniping all targets that weren't in your faction it worked very well. Why take the same strategy this game?