Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 23 24 [25] 26 27 ... 80

Author Topic: Supernatural 7 - Game over - Town Win!  (Read 183977 times)

Toaster

  • Bay Watcher
  • Appliance
    • View Profile
Re: Supernatural 7 - Day 1 - [1 REPLACEMENT NEEDED]
« Reply #360 on: June 15, 2014, 10:06:27 pm »

This is more of an "I am alive" post than anything else, and to tell NQT that I will be reviewing him (and most certainly a few other people) tomorrow.  Not enough brain to do it tonight.  That said, there are two things I pulled from a skim to toss out there:


Flabort:
Imperial Guardsman: Starts out scummy, very scummy. I have to soft claim to get him off my case

So... why do the attacks of a "very scummy" person do so well to drive out a claim from you?  If he's that scummy, his cases will go ignored.


NQT:
If everyone gives their reads on all the other players, it's easier to sniff out aggregate suspicions and spot incongruities in player's understandings of the game. It's pretty uncontroversially a Good Thing to have.

What value do you expect from aggregate suspicion?
Logged
HMR stands for Hazardous Materials Requisition, not Horrible Massive Ruination, though I can understand how one could get confused.
God help us if we have to agree on pizza toppings at some point. There will be no survivors.

Persus13

  • Bay Watcher
  • 6th King of the Mafia
    • View Profile
Re: Supernatural 7 - Day 1 - [1 REPLACEMENT NEEDED]
« Reply #361 on: June 15, 2014, 10:09:20 pm »

Forgot to post this in my last post. Extend.
Logged
Congratulations Persus, now you are forced to have the same personal text for an entire year!
Longbowmen horsearcher doomstacks that suffer no attrition and can navigate all major rivers without ships.
Sigtext

flabort

  • Bay Watcher
  • Still a demilich, despite the 4e and 5e nerfs
    • View Profile
Re: Supernatural 7 - Day 1 - [1 REPLACEMENT NEEDED]
« Reply #362 on: June 15, 2014, 10:29:04 pm »

flabort, you haven't answered my question.
Does weighing in affect your read of either of the players involved? Does stating your opinion of either of them affect who you are going to vote?

It does not, and not directly.
The point of weighing in is to get involved in a new discussion, to stimulate discussion that has not been gone over multiple times.
By stimulating said discussion, it gets other people to change and/or state their opinions on it, and those opinions, and the discussion as a whole, does affect who I may vote.

Flabort:
Flabort: Devilishly handsome
Freudian slip?

Persus13: Has as much of a problem with PPE "You may wish to review your post" as I do, so maybe he's filling out a spreadsheet too? Nah.
More of replying to people and after writing a post, finding bits of it are redundant or no longer relevant.

Flabort- Not sure about him either. Scum finder seems like it ignores meta and context. Last used it as scum. Have seen him play well as scum, to good effect. Should ask more questions. He attacked IG using a post from JAck A T, and I still find that pretty scummy..

You do not find undeath attractive? Nah, I didn't mean "devilishly" as in "DEVIL", I just meant as an adjective. (Also, undeath just refers to avatar, not to role either). :P

Yeah, at least you didn't get "warning, at least 24 people have posted". I had to completely rework that post.

You should ask me more questions, or I should ask more questions? I'm going to anyways, but just in case you meant otherways...

Jim What do you think of NQT, Persus, and 4mask? Who is likely to die to the scum tonight?

NQT What do you think of Persus, 4mask, and Jim? If there were more than one third party, which one is most likely for there to be?

Persus What do you think of 4mask, Jim, and NQT? If you were an informative role, would you claim in the morning?

4mask What do you think of Jim, NQT, and Persus? Could you post a list of reads?

Flabort:
Imperial Guardsman: Starts out scummy, very scummy. I have to soft claim to get him off my case

So... why do the attacks of a "very scummy" person do so well to drive out a claim from you?  If he's that scummy, his cases will go ignored.
The way he saw it, he didn't "do so well", he didn't want me to claim. However, I was trying to prove that he was lying (he was), which I thought would prove he was scum (it didn't). And I see it less as he drove a claim from me, and more of I gained a rise from him.
Logged
The Cyan Menace

Went away for a while, came back, went away for a while, and back for now.

4maskwolf

  • Bay Watcher
  • 4mask always angle, do figure his!
    • View Profile
Re: Supernatural 7 - Day 1 - [1 REPLACEMENT NEEDED]
« Reply #363 on: June 15, 2014, 10:30:32 pm »

4mask What do you think of Jim, NQT, and Persus? Could you post a list of reads?
Please direct all questions to my extremely competent replacement, TheWetSheep.  Thank you.

Mephansteras

  • Bay Watcher
  • Forger of Civilizations
    • View Profile
Re: Supernatural 7 - Day 1 - [1 REPLACEMENT NEEDED]
« Reply #364 on: June 15, 2014, 10:42:19 pm »

Sure.

TheWetSheep has replaced in for 4maskwolf.
Logged
Civilization Forge Mod v2.80: Adding in new races, equipment, animals, plants, metals, etc. Now with Alchemy and Libraries! Variety to spice up DF! (For DF 0.34.10)
Come play Mafia with us!
"Let us maintain our chill composure." - Toady One

Jiokuy

  • Bay Watcher
  • Morning comes whether you set the alarm or not
    • View Profile
Re: Supernatural 7 - Day 1 - [1 REPLACEMENT NEEDED]
« Reply #365 on: June 15, 2014, 10:54:56 pm »

Jim:
More of your posts are dedicated to questioning players that voted you than questioning new players.
You also abstained from most of the IG debacle.
You have a low post count, and an even lower question count.
I may be wrong, but I have yet to find a post where you question someone who isn't voting you.

Normally I wouldn't want a lynch over only one tell.(abet it's a strong tell)
But this has not been a normal game.
Your posts all seem self-serving.
Do you have an explanation?

IG:
Lynching Guardian Angels doesn't help town win. For now I will chose to believe your pro-town claim.
But I sincerely recommend against using your Resurrection. We cannot implicitly trust that ability especially with the chance for bad stuff.
If you use that ability without telling us, I will consider you dangerous.
Logged

zombie urist

  • Bay Watcher
  • [NOT_LIVING]
    • View Profile
Re: Supernatural 7 - Day 1 - [1 REPLACEMENT NEEDED]
« Reply #366 on: June 15, 2014, 11:18:12 pm »

Top scummy people:

Persus13: Almost none of his posts have any useful comments. He has never built a serious case on any person he voted for. Voted IG in the beginning for Jack not asking him (IG) about thirds, but Jack himself already responded to that a few posts before. link Then votes Jiokuy asking to clarify something. This vote never really goes anywhere. link. A bunch of his other posts are basically just asking for clarifications. 1 2 3

Zombie Urist: What's your case on NQT?
I'm sure this question has never been asked before.

NQT: Lots of IIOA, asking for lots of information without really doing anything with it. Called Tiruin out for lurking way too early because he was too excited. I don't really understand why he being excited would lead him to call out a lurker. Asked about an IG lynch and 4mask lynch even though they were at that time very unlikely to be lynched claiming that everyone needs to be responsible for a mislynch. He said he was asking early because
...if no one had done anything else at that time he would have died and I wanted people's opinions on this.
Its super unlikely that there would have been no activity at all after that it makes no sense for him to be worried about him being lynched.

I also disagree with his reasoning that everyone needs the blame for a mislynch. The people voting for the target are obviously responsible, but often if you aren't voting for the person and you have a legitimate case on someone else sometimes it just happens that more people agree with the other case.

Flabort: Goes from "IG is super scummy -11!!!" to "IG is confirmed benign third" way too fast. His "proof" that IG is scum is a post from Jack about people who are high post count low content.
It's clear he is scum, but wants 3rd Party victory far less than he wants a town victory.
Spoiler: Proof (click to show/hide)

He also never explained why he believes that IG is now benign third. Lastly he said
I have to soft claim to get him off my case, only for him to say that's not what he wanted from me.
I don't know why he feels like he needed IG to stop bothering him if he actually is town. He also hasn't ever really built a case. He admitted his case on Toaster was weak, promptly unvoted, then hasn't built a case. Still thinks everyone is town and seems afraid to accuse anyone as scum.

IG: Claimed third party, probably is third party, but I'm not sold on "benign". Also him voting Flabort as third party and then claiming he knows Flabort is town and needs him alive makes is too strange and needs to be considered.

Had dinner before finishing this post. PPE'd x10.
Logged
The worst part of all of this is that Shakerag won.

zombie urist

  • Bay Watcher
  • [NOT_LIVING]
    • View Profile
Re: Supernatural 7 - Day 1 - [1 REPLACEMENT NEEDED]
« Reply #367 on: June 15, 2014, 11:31:51 pm »

4mask is kinda scummy and defensive and angry. A decent amount of participation in the IG debate, but not too much else. Some pretty good questions.
Jack did pretty well causing IG to break and claim third, but of course this doesn't mean he's in the clear. But I don't think he's scum.
Toony is probably town. He made a decent case on 4mask, but him calling out lurkers at near day end is kinda strange.
Toaster is towny. I don't notice anything particularly strange about his play.

Not enough info from Jim, Tiruin, Jiokuy and Ottofar. I'll have to look closer in the coming day.
Logged
The worst part of all of this is that Shakerag won.

TheWetSheep

  • Bay Watcher
  • water covering (entire sheep)
    • View Profile
Re: Supernatural 7 - Day 1 - [1 REPLACEMENT NEEDED]
« Reply #368 on: June 15, 2014, 11:32:56 pm »

my extremely competent replacement, TheWetSheep.
the highly competent TWS
:D



23 pages of D1 is a lot to catch up on. Some gut reads from what I've read so far:

Jiokuy - Town
Jim Groovester - less content and scumhunting results than what I'd expect
IG - Probably telling the truth about his role
ZU - Totally lynch-worthy if brevity wasn't his usual playstyle
Flabort - Assuming IG is truthful, Town
Persus - Lots of scumhunting and content, but the kind that can be done by scum or town
Ottofar - Has a suspicious post early D1, see below, otherwise unknown

Ottofar:
Ottofar Who do you think scum will lynch tonight?
Eh, if you mean scum nightkills, I'm guessing Jim would be pretty high on that list.
If you mean D1 Lynch, I could guess 4maskwolf or this new guy, Jiokuy.

...

Jiokuy, what is your favourite role power?
Which role power would you most like to have right now?
Which power would you never want scum to have (pick one)?
What is your alignment?
What is your favourite alignment?
What colour is my drapery?
What kind of scumteam do you think we're against?
What do you expect from the game?
Who do you think is scum?
Who is the most likely person to be town right now, from your point of view?
Who are you?
Who would you roleblock at night?
Who would you protect?
Should Millers claim in their 1st post?
Should any other roles claim right off the bat?
Is claiming a Miller a towntell, a scumtell or a null one?
This really looks like you're trying to get the new guy to slip up on at least one of these questions - you even said in the same post that scum would try to lynch him.

ZU: Your Lurkertracker post preview isn't working perfectly. It says all your posts look like this one:
You Do The Hokey-Cokey And You Turn Around
In the US its Hokey Pokey.

PPE: ZU's latest post is better.

zombie urist

  • Bay Watcher
  • [NOT_LIVING]
    • View Profile
Re: Supernatural 7 - Day 1 - [1 REPLACEMENT NEEDED]
« Reply #369 on: June 15, 2014, 11:37:55 pm »

Why is Jiokuy town and why are you assuming IG is truthful?

Don't expect lurkertracker to be updated anytime soon.
Logged
The worst part of all of this is that Shakerag won.

Jim Groovester

  • Bay Watcher
  • 1P
    • View Profile
Re: Supernatural 7 - Day 1 - [1 REPLACEMENT NEEDED]
« Reply #370 on: June 16, 2014, 12:35:39 am »

I'll extend.

Define least impressive game.

Passive, non-confrontational, fluffy and contentless, interested in survival over scumhunting. Active enough, but really not trying to make a splash or get too much attention.

That was my impression of flabort when I completed my read of the thread.

I don't know, and I'd rather overestimate someone then underestimate when it comes to that sort of thing, ever since the last Supernatural, where I believed a fake-claim and it caused me and other town players to lose the game.

This is the most important question and you dodge it. Is Imperial Guardsman willing to attempt to use WIFOM or not? It doesn't matter if he does it well or badly.

Basically I don't believe you when you say you think Imperial Guardsman is fakeclaiming. You cast your vote here:

Imperial, I don't really think your flavor seems plausible. First, Meph has never really referenced any previous games in his Supernatural flavor (or if he has, I must have missed it), and that flavor doesn't sound like his style to me. Secondly, your claimed revive power sounds a lot more like a Priest then your claimed role. Plus, on looking back at your vote on flabort, it does seem more like it was intended more as a lynch vote then anything else. If you were trying to get him to back off, I would have expected it to be more of an OMGUS and without the part where you trumpeted to the skies that you had found a third party. I think you were convinced you were going to be lynched, and so you fakeclaimed a third party role in order to prevent yourself from getting lynched.

Firstly I think it's asinine to not believe a claim in a Supernatural game because it's unprecedented. There's precedent for that being a bad move. Consider the case of Toaster the resurrected Lone Vampire who was lynched because people did not believe his truthful claim.

Secondly, at what point do you believe Imperial Guardsman made the decision to fakeclaim? Because Imperial Guardsman was making insinuations and hints to the wincon he would eventually claim well before he actually claimed it. He votes flabort here, then flabort claims partially, then a mere twenty minutes after his vote on flabort Guardsman bemoans that flabort claimed here and continues to make these hints until a day later he explicitly makes his claim. So, where in the timeline of these events did Imperial Guardsman decide to fakeclaim to evade pressure?

Jim What do you think of NQT, Persus, and 4mask?

My reads haven't changed since I posted them.

Who is likely to die to the scum tonight?

It depends on who you choose to kill BWAR HAR HAR HAR HAR.

I don't know who is going to die and I don't feel comfortable publicly predicting it.

Why questions about those four people?

Jim:
More of your posts are dedicated to questioning players that voted you than questioning new players.
You also abstained from most of the IG debacle.
You have a low post count, and an even lower question count.

Holy shit, you're actually voting me because I was legitimately absent during the beginning portions of the game.

Should I repeat it a couple more times?

LEGITIMATELY

ABSENT

GONE

AWAY FROM KEYBOARD

NOT EVEN THERE

COULDNT GET ON THE INTERNET TO SAVE MY LIFE

What part of being LEGITIMATELY ABSENT makes me scummy?

I may be wrong, but I have yet to find a post where you question someone who isn't voting you.

You are wrong and you should feel ashamed for looking as lazily as you did, if you even looked at all.

Your posts all seem self-serving.

Please elaborate. I won't stand to be characterized in such a lazy way without significant evidence and reasoning.

Jim Groovester - less content and scumhunting results than what I'd expect

FOR FUCK'S SAKE PEOPLE
Logged
I understood nothing, contributed nothing, but still got to win, so good game everybody else.

Jack A T

  • Bay Watcher
  • Mafia is What Players Make of It
    • View Profile
Re: Supernatural 7 - Day 1 - [1 REPLACEMENT NEEDED]
« Reply #371 on: June 16, 2014, 03:23:23 am »

Extend.  We have much we need to hear.

Also, could you give me your reads please?
NQT: Sure.

Reads
*Jim Groovester: Has just become capable of posting.  Mostly just gives the impression of being Jim Groovester.  Null read.
*ToonyMan: Reasonable votes so far.  Currently focused on the quiet, lurky players, FoSing 2 and voting 1.  Wary neutal read.
*flabort: Having watched flabort apply his spreadsheet before joining NSBM4, I have a pretty good idea of how he used it.  His early play was largely consistent with him letting the spreadsheet control his play, rather than using it as a way to track his thoughts.  See, for instance, the odd -11 on Guardsman, gained through loads of poor posts (a weakness of post-by-post tracking of flabort's sort).  Even with that in mind, there were some oddities (the case on IG being an unrelated post of mine, for instance).  The collapse of his case on Toaster seems to have been enough to get him to change his play.  Reads now have details.  Nothing seems immediately all that off.  Flabort uses his spreadsheet whatever alignment he is.  Null read.
*Persus13: Seemed to be willing to rethink his read on IG early on, when new evidence came.  Has been generally pretty open in response to questions.  Slight town lean.
*notquitethere: (revoting for clarity at a glance) Spent quite some time sitting back and trying to keep attention on whoever was getting attention, while giving as little as possible in the way of his thoughts.  Defense, when confronted on this, has been a mix of generally competent, but weak, attempts to create doubt, coupled with desperate attempts to make facts seem to back his narrative (see, for instance, the astounding attempt to spin the fact that he was defending himself into proof that he wasn't holding himself to a lower standard of openness than he said everyone should be held to).  Moderate scum lean.
*Tiruin: Has been fighting real life for the past few weeks.  Real life has been winning.  Null read.
*Toaster: Has been scumhunting well, plus has been keeping people well informed about prior Supernaturals.  Reads list was low on reads, though.  Neutral read.
*zombie urist: Spent quite some time contributing little of value.  Made a ridiculously lazy vote on NQT  Did not respond to my request for a response to NQT, though my request was a bit outdated by the time I posted. Low-moderate scum lean.
*4maskwolf/TheWetSheep: 4maskwolf was a jumpy, hyperactive mess.  Of the player quirks to go with, ignoring nuance in votes is a pretty terrible one, especially when the nuance is necessary to consider when determining the intentions of attackers.  Most of his issues seemed to be more issues of competence than issues of alignment, though.  His successor, TheWetSheep, has come out with odd and unexplained preliminary reads (in particular, the Jiukoy one).  However, he is still working on gathering reads.  Neutral read.
*Ottofar: Lurky, an Ottofar tradition.  Has promised reads soon.  Let's see what he says.  Null read.
*Jiokuy: So.  We all spend a few days waiting for Jiokuy to post after this post.  A bunch of questions are asked.  Finally, we get this: no answers to any of the questions, minimal information, and a bad case on Jim that's vague and isn't even based on facts (for instance, Jim has questioned people who aren't attacking him).  Low scum lean.
*Imperial Guardsman: Twit.  Third party claim seems generally believable, but I cannot rely on the part about flabort being town based solely on Guardsman.


Questiony/Answery Stuff
ToonyMan: You said a while back that you had a feeling that NQT and 4maskwolf were working together.  Can you say why you thought and/or think this?
I'm happy with a few things NQT is doing so I'd like to give him a chance.
What are these things?

flabort: I notice that you lean towards Toaster being scum, but the only negative value in your reads is on Jim.  What caused the negative value for the latter?  What makes you suspect Toaster, but not suspect the lower-value Jim?  Is this the continuing issues with your scumometer?
(where does ZU work? What new product?)
Let's let ZU have his privacy.

zombie urist: Alright.  Until now, you were voting for NQT.  You still suspect NQT.  What do you think of his defenses against allegations against him so far?
Voted IG in the beginning for Jack not asking him (IG) about thirds, but Jack himself already responded to that a few posts before. link
What makes this evidence against Persus13?

Jiokuy: Answer my questions, NQT's questions, Persus13's questions, and Toaster's question.
Normally I wouldn't want a lynch over only one tell.(abet it's a strong tell)
But this has not been a normal game.
How is this game not normal?  What about that abnormality makes you willing to lynch Jim on your one tell?

If that were my intention, why would I go about consistently bringing up the need for reads and reflections from others?
notquitethere: To explain why you were trying to focus as much attention as you could on those who were already under attack.  To look like an active, helpful player.
Do you think I'd think no one would notice if I did none of that myself before the end of the day?
I think you hoped nobody would notice your behaviour, including your lack of thoughts, but had some vague idea of how to explain your actions in case you were noticed.  Standard on-the-fly mafia behaviour: no detailed plans, some room for error, you know.  Playing like actual people play, not like the I'm Too Good A Scum Player To Do That argument assumes scum players play (I don't much like that argument, but I see it all too often).  Your idea of a good explanation was likely an explanation that would fit with your known tendency towards heterodox play, a tendency you recently awkwardly shoehorned into one of your arguments in defense against Toaster ("I almost always play in ways people disagree with: am I scum in every game?").  (You really wanted people to remember that, didn't you?)
Logged
Quote from: Pandarsenic, BYOR 6.3 deadchat
FUCK YOU JACK
Quote from: Urist Imiknorris, Witches' Coven 2 Elfchat
YOU TRAITOROUS SWINE.
Screw you, Jack.

Jiokuy

  • Bay Watcher
  • Morning comes whether you set the alarm or not
    • View Profile
Re: Supernatural 7 - Day 1 - The Council of 13
« Reply #372 on: June 16, 2014, 03:42:36 am »

Jim Groovester:

I have reread the thread, and I revoke my criticisms regarding your involvement in the IG incident. My appologies there.

However, you have only cast one vote this game, and that vote was on (at the time) the only player voting you.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

You've made 9 posts this game. Of them I would consider only 5 of them to be playing the game. This can be partially excused by your absence, but I would still expect more activity from a veteran player.


Based on the content of your posts (in particular your questions); I think if you're hunting at all, you're playing a very weak game.

I might not know your meta as well as other players, you might be a player whom doesn't believe strongly in day one. But, day one is all I have to go on, and your day one play is not reassuring.

So Jim, who do you think is scum.
Logged

Jiokuy

  • Bay Watcher
  • Morning comes whether you set the alarm or not
    • View Profile
Re: Supernatural 7 - Day 1 - [1 REPLACEMENT NEEDED]
« Reply #373 on: June 16, 2014, 03:55:52 am »

My Reads, yay double post.

Reads:
Jack A.T. :
Towny-ish. Currently not suspicious.

Jim Groovester:
Very Passive. Scummy as heck. Not as Scummy as I am used to, but It's a learning process.

ToonyMan:
Neutral. Not currently suspicious.

flabort:
Neutral. Suspicious, but I suspect day 2 will reveal more.

Persus13:
Moderate hunter, low suspicion.

notquitethere:
Active hunter, very defensive. Low Suspicion. Collecting information. Could make it really easy to manipulate us if scum. Going to trust for now.

Tiruin:
Lurker, Seeking replacement.

Lord Toaster:
Super veteran, not super active. productive player. Not suspicious.

zombie urist:
Lurker, seems ok. Null leaning scum.

TheWetSheep:
The New guy. Seems legit. Null.

Ottofar:
Actively Hunting, sometimes. Low Suspicion.

Jiokuy:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Imperial Guardsman:
Highly Suspicious, Long-Term Threat.
Logged

Tiruin

  • Bay Watcher
  • Life is too short for worries
    • View Profile
Re: Supernatural 7 - Day 1 - [1 REPLACEMENT NEEDED]
« Reply #374 on: June 16, 2014, 04:02:58 am »

Tiruin:
Lurker, Seeking replacement.
I did say I bloody quit, didn't I? I'm "Luuuurking" moreso because my net is :I and I'm testing if I could actually post something longer than several paragraphs and pictures.

Also on the part of unvote--@Toaster: I unvoted primarily because upon re-reading IG's case, it makes more sense, and concrete sense at that [counter-basis: Why would he do all this if...{*looks at minute details*}]. It's incredibly...risky isn't the right word to describe it but something along those lines...to do such as scum.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 23 24 [25] 26 27 ... 80