|
|
Post by natiko on Jan 19, 2017 12:28:09 GMT -8
Thanks for the explanation Saw, that makes sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sawneeks on Jan 19, 2017 12:46:33 GMT -8
Also, as an amusing side note, we are only 5 posts away from beating the Scum Thread in size.
|
|
|
|
Post by verelios on Jan 19, 2017 12:51:57 GMT -8
Town always gets around to cannibalizing themselves if you let them flounder for a few days =/
|
|
|
|
Post by CzarTim on Jan 19, 2017 12:52:28 GMT -8
The role PM says that town wins when: "all threats to town are eliminated" so town may need to lynch the SK to win the game. And I just remembered that I asked the same question in the game and was dismissed very quickly by Sophia and never talked again. tbf I always make that town's win condition even when there are no neutrals as I don't like giving town too much info. |
|
|
|
Post by natiko on Jan 19, 2017 12:56:06 GMT -8
I'm surprised the scum thread even has that many posts. I bet at least half of them came prior to acohrs lynch.
No clue how that became a quote lol
|
|
|
|
Post by Sawneeks on Jan 19, 2017 13:06:28 GMT -8
A total mistake on AB's part to be sure.
....but would a Townie ever forget their vote like that?
Hmmm
|
|
|
|
Post by acohrs on Jan 19, 2017 13:13:19 GMT -8
haha Saw, you might as well land the plane and call out the destination name if you're giving them that much!
|
|
|
|
Post by Sawneeks on Jan 19, 2017 13:19:09 GMT -8
haha Saw, you might as well land the plane and call out the destination name if you're giving them that much! :p Teasing is so much more fun though. |
|
|
|
Post by natiko on Jan 19, 2017 13:35:40 GMT -8
They're supposed to wait until the final five minutes before forcing a three way tie.
|
|
|
|
Post by CzarTim on Jan 19, 2017 13:37:36 GMT -8
The whole point of lynching ccs was to get information and yet here we are voting for people who were on aco day one smh
|
|
|
|
Post by natiko on Jan 19, 2017 13:46:14 GMT -8
Yeah, I don't think a single person on the CCS vote has gone forward to try and use that info in a relevant way. GG lol
|
|
|
|
Post by Kawl on Jan 19, 2017 13:49:35 GMT -8
Yea I've stopped reading.
It's also easy to sit back and decry town tearing itself apart and say well next game I'm only lynching inactives when you know the answers. And that could be the winning play this time. But in a situation where those players are just low activity town like many of those players often are, it becomes an even worse move. Lynching someone who is barely active at all and ends up being a mislynch gives you nothing to build off of and is way more demoralizing in my opinion. Just because something is the right move in this game, doesn't mean it's the right move in the next one. The crux of the matter is as a whole we need to do better at forcing participation and not letting coasting happen. The answer isn't policy lynches it's not allowing coasting to happen. And demanding that town step they're fucking game up.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kawl on Jan 19, 2017 13:50:45 GMT -8
The whole point of lynching ccs was to get information and yet here we are voting for people who were on aco day one smh this is missing the point of the info ccs lynch gave. It gives you perfect knowledge of the options presented to scum day 1 at end. You can use that information and double down on acohrs voters and that's a completely logical decision. |
|
|
|
Post by natiko on Jan 19, 2017 13:54:16 GMT -8
Going in with the mindset of "lynch inactives" does not preclude lynching an active member that shows enough scum tells. In both of the games I've been in so far town has been smoked by scum not even trying to put up a good face. An active scum is more likely to make a mistake. An inactive scum will blend in with an inactive townie with more ease.
|
|
|
|
Post by CzarTim on Jan 19, 2017 13:56:58 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by Kawl on Jan 19, 2017 13:57:39 GMT -8
Going in with the mindset of "lynch inactives" does not preclude lynching an active member that shows enough scum tells. In both of the games I've been in so far town has been smoked by scum not even trying to put up a good face. An active scum is more likely to make a mistake. An inactive scum will blend in with an inactive townie with more ease. the majority of people pushing lynches this game have been doing so because they feel they have scum nailed, that never changes. You are going to feel that way for active posters because they are posting more. Whether you are latching into some weird shit of a townie or an actual scum slip who knows until the flip. There is no universal actual accurate scum tell, especially with a new slew of people playing anti town. Unless you hold inactivity as a higher driving force than scum tells you won't be lynching inactives. |
|
|
|
Post by CzarTim on Jan 19, 2017 13:58:09 GMT -8
Yea I've stopped reading. It's also easy to sit back and decry town tearing itself apart and say well next game I'm only lynching inactives when you know the answers. And that could be the winning play this time. But in a situation where those players are just low activity town like many of those players often are, it becomes an even worse move. Lynching someone who is barely active at all and ends up being a mislynch gives you nothing to build off of and is way more demoralizing in my opinion. Just because something is the right move in this game, doesn't mean it's the right move in the next one. The crux of the matter is as a whole we need to do better at forcing participation and not letting coasting happen. The answer isn't policy lynches it's not allowing coasting to happen. And demanding that town step they're fucking game up. agree with this |
|
|
|
Post by Kawl on Jan 19, 2017 13:58:27 GMT -8
man in mafia try's to sway others into taking his side. News at 11 |
|
|
|
Post by ccs on Jan 19, 2017 13:59:01 GMT -8
Sometimes though you have to lynch inactives Kawl, if only to send a statement. Not a single inactive player has come even close to being lynched, scum team could cruise this by basically not saying anything all game and at some point you have to risk a low information lynch by disrupting that. Day one or two preferably, depending on if there is am obvious scum day one.
|
|
|
|
Post by CzarTim on Jan 19, 2017 14:00:27 GMT -8
man in mafia try's to sway others into taking his side. News at 11 still love you bro |
|
|
|
Post by Kawl on Jan 19, 2017 14:03:46 GMT -8
Sometimes though you have to lynch inactives Kawl, if only to send a statement. Not a single inactive player has come even close to being lynched, scum team could cruise this by basically not saying anything all game and at some point you have to risk a low information lynch by disrupting that. Day one or two preferably, depending on if there is am obvious scum day one. or you can make a concentrated effort to get them more involved in the game. Lynching isn't the only way to apply pressure on other players, but it is the only way to get verified info. |
|
|
|
Post by Kawl on Jan 19, 2017 14:05:37 GMT -8
man in mafia try's to sway others into taking his side. News at 11 still love you bro lol you're the worst. Still I believed ccs was more likely than most to be scum and it was a large part of the reason for pushing his lynch. |
|
|
|
Post by ccs on Jan 19, 2017 14:09:16 GMT -8
lol you're the worst. Still I believed ccs was more likely than most to be scum and it was a large part of the reason for pushing his lynch. I'm still genuinely not sure why you thought that  |
|
|
|
Post by Kawl on Jan 19, 2017 14:09:19 GMT -8
Low activity from town or scum makes the game a lot less fun to play and is the main reason I get frustrated especially playing with Gafia sometimes. I remember being pretty frustrated when hearing the state of this game and shit. But idk.
|
|
|
|
Post by ccs on Jan 19, 2017 14:10:12 GMT -8
Like, did you really think scum would risk two players, including a three shot ninja, on an incredibly risky strategy straight out the gate when neither player was really under pressure?
|
|
|
|
Post by CzarTim on Jan 19, 2017 14:11:43 GMT -8
I was also having a hard time motivating myself to play day two due to all the inactivity. When so many are awol, reads lists are "fuck it, I dunno"
|
|
|
|
Post by Kawl on Jan 19, 2017 14:13:02 GMT -8
Like, did you really think scum would risk two players, including a three shot ninja, on an incredibly risky strategy straight out the gate when neither player was really under pressure? as a former scum member of a team that opened the game with a fake claim and then proceeded to no kill night one, yes I found it as likely as a town player being such a shit wreck of a poster. So I guess I'll adjust my personal meta of you and try to not make that mistake again. |
|
|
|
Post by ccs on Jan 19, 2017 14:14:53 GMT -8
Hey, I'm proud of being a shit wreck Just because you're facing death doesn't mean you can't laugh. |
|
|
|
Post by Kawl on Jan 19, 2017 14:15:48 GMT -8
Ok. Nothing more to be gained from discussing then.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sawneeks on Jan 19, 2017 14:17:05 GMT -8
One of the major issues this game, besides coasting, is the laser focus on activity. Having coasters but forcing them to come out and play is the best thing Town can do but they aren't, instead opting for a 'hey remember this person is in the game? yeah me neither' and then moving on.
CCS lynch did not help either. It sorted out the Day 1 votes but as a couple of you have pointed out, nobody has been using that information at all. Day 2 was arguably a null since they did not learn anything other than just CCS.
|
|
