Lurker > turbopuns3

Wait can TCs not close threads any more lol

Well that's embarrassing

Okay back to vacation

And now I'm closing the topic because last night's decision wasn't made for the best of reasons.

Gg all, Corrik I have no clue why you attempted to summarize the events of the thread without reading it. You failed but better luck next time I guess?

I'm saving this thread for a few reasons:

1) I'm on vacation so "lol life"

2) I'm mildly disappointed that Chris and Dels haven't offered thoughts

3) ????

turbopuns3 posted...

I've been playing some standard games with a blue green deck I hobbled together

I still haven't crafted a single card, just collecting resources and getting exposure to the meta and whatnot

I faced someone named mtg_punker who was running that green landfall bug that duplicates itself

They were clearly running away with tempo etc as my draw was awkward and I was having to deal with threats suboptimally just to survive

I played Stolen by the Fae for X=3 on 5 mana to last one more turn

During this turn mtg_punker amassed a board of 50 creatures against my board of four 1/1 flying creatures (I had a silver raven also)

But they had nothing to deal with flying and I won with exact lethal from Return of the Wildspeaker

'oops' I guess, fun stuff

In other "cool story, bro" news

Same deck newer iteration, I somehow managed to beat someone after they activated world tree and put about 12-15 gods on the board

Again because nothing to deal with flying

I get way too obsessed with perfecting whatever my first idea for a deck is without ever branching out. I've earned 25 different decks and used 0 of them

to be fair to MU I wouldn't recommend myself as a reviewer of the site or the community LOL

Final Thoughts, For Real (For Real):

Your stance on why my play wasn't good sounds an awful lot like this: "Why yes, 11 out of 11 town players believe Turbo's play was towny, however I've decided that none of these 11 players were playing in the way a truly skilled player ought to, therefore Turbo's play was actually not towny because I don't think it was, and hypothetical elite players agree with me."

And, similarly, "Why yes, few players in this game saw any reason to believe Gorf was town. However, if these players had been playing in the way truly skilled players ought to play, they would have town read him."

And like, it's borderline vomit inducing how conceited that sounds.

5 of those 11 town players I mentioned are about to play in the Mafia Universe Championships final. How many tiers above these players exist in terms of skill and how many players consistently play at those tiers? I mean I get that the champs pool is not a sample of the utmost elite players by definition but like...what higher skill are you appealing to here? It seems like a stretch to say these players aren't good enough to have valid reasons for making reads.

If you think my play wasn't towny, but 11 of 11 town think it was, then maybe you should be asking yourself "what am I missing that's working for him here" rather than to turn up your nose and go "wow, buncha scrubs".

If it was a more discrete behavior like the vig shot, ok I can understand not putting much weight on it because it's reasonable to think an individual such as myself might have made a last minute change to the decision and got lucky. But when the town has unanimous agreement against you...buddy...those are some powerful blinders you're wearing to maintain your point of view.

Furthermore, your point about my play is extremely stunted and short-sighted and seems to willfully ignore evidence from later in the game that blatantly contradicts it. I was "well on my way to being VI by my fifth post" well guess what my dude, I ultimately wasn't labeled as VI. In fact I was leading the town in the mid-late game. That's a fact! Are you just judging my whole game based on the first 12 hours?

"Playing in a way that gets you labeled as VI" is such a fluid thing. What do I mean by that...like, "claiming VT then rescinding and claiming doctor" is a concrete "play". You can look at a bunch of mafia games and clearly and objectively identify which players displayed that behavior and which players did not. "Being on your way to being labeled as VI" is more like, a subjective interpretation of my personality that one cannot hope to consistently identify from one game to the next. Like, if you made all MU archived games available to 100 people, and said OK go label the games where someone claimed VT then claimed doctor...you'd have a pretty darn good consensus on which games qualify. If you told those 100 people to identify games where someone was VI...nothing remotely close to as solid of a consensus.

Furthermore, I object to the sheer weight you are placing on simply being town read as worthy of advancing. I asked you what else did Gorf display as skill and you offered nothing. Nobody has offered anything.

Give me something to clearly put Gorf above Ephemera. Give me something to clearly put Gorf above AngryPotato. Give me something to clearly put Gorf above Chingles. Heck, give me something to concretely put Gorf above Hornet (not Sara). All of these players displayed ability to be townread better than Gorf displayed ability to be townread. I can't help but think you're using "don't be results based" as a shield to hide your bias if you can't justify why any of these players who literally displayed more competence at the ONE thing you're evaluating skill on didn't get more votes.

It seems like you MUST be relying on outside knowledge of Gorf unrelated to this game to defend him because you offer nothing to justify it. His 1 column he did well in (not actually did well but hypothetically did well in your head canon) he's been outperformed in by multiple other players who didn't get as many votes.

I also scoff at your apparent inability (or unwillingness) to recognize that had town reacted differently to my play, then maybe, just maybe, I would have done something a little different. Softened up on the bucket strat thing. Or actually claimed. Or looked elsewhere other than Silver, etc. It's gross how you're like "well I can't logically deduce what you would have done differently, I can only judge based on what you display" - this seems like a contradiction to the fact you can seemingly have no trouble imagining what other, hypothetical players would have done in your made up game that isn't real. You account for behaviors of other fictional players that weren't exposed to me in order to judge against me, but can't account for hypothetical behaviors from me because I didn't explicitly display those behaviors in game.

Everything about what you have presented here seems to come from a perspective of "hey, gorf advanced and earned it, now go justify that" rather than "let's take an unbiased look at what happened, and see if we arrive at the same conclusion based on real events".

I'll close with this, a bit of self-awareness. I have a long history of being very abrasive and obtuse (often deliberately) as a mafia player. I know full well that my personality and posting style cause others to misunderstand me and walk away with misguided impressions of me. And that's talking about people in my home community here. So...I get it. It's not /surprising/ to me that MU players don't see past my personality to recognize what levers I'm pulling, especially when I'm intentionally being coy about claiming my role and etc. But, one thing I've kinda picked up over the years of mafia is sometimes it's more effective to sit back and watch someone confidently lean into something they're wrong about, and gently deflect all their points until they look around and realize they're out of ammo and haven't gained an inch of ground, as opposed to full tilt out the gate blasting them with all the reasons they're wrong.

I hope you can see my perspective on this, but if not, no harm done and we're all just in the same place we started anyway.

c4e5g3d5 posted...

Saying your play getting you townread in this game is a counterargument when you came immediately off of another game where you played the same way and got vigged is a good demonstration of the point you're missing.

Like this is just using a broom the size of a mountain to sweep stuff under the rug in an invalid way.

Emphasizing that you advanced from the game where you got poor results but not from the game where you got good results is a good deminstration of the point you're missing.

And this is just failing to perceive my sense of humor in the irony of it. Literally got vigged as town then vigged a wolf. It's just funny no matter what so I'm gonna point it out. I'm not really /emphasizing/ it, but it is LHF for someone to argue against me to be fair.

I think I can settle on a compromise of, people aren't necessarily consciously /aware/ in an immediate way that they're just voting for the person playing the way they prefer, but that there's still a very real bias to overlook the actual impact a player had if they rubbed you the wrong way. The end result in terms of how the votes fall is the same, it's just calling it something different. I can accept it's not deliberate spite voting (except in the case of a couple wolves it very well may have been.)

I don't have anything against you here. If anything you're my favorite for actually coming here and letting me talk about it.

If anything, if my play between the two games WAS the same and there's any validity at all to the idea that SF player lists are better mafia players overall than quals player lists, the only logical conclusion would be that better mafia players townread me where worse mafia players might not.

Do you disagree with that?

Like, they lynched a doctor claim over me, my dude.

I did not play the same way in both games. That's a pretty unfair summational statement. Why can I say that? Because I had a different role. In SF1 I had a PR claim in my pocket and that goes into my approach. Being townread on page 2 wasn't exactly a concern of mine.

It's also a bit disingenuous to point out I was vigged and act like that's equivalent to getting voted out by the town. Come on, JKBear was not exactly an outstanding player in that game. Yes some people voted me but the situation was entirely different.

I'm not missing any point. I get the point and I scoff at it. You can say I didn't "display" the skill and my counter to that is here you are putting on a blindfold in order to avoid having to perceive the skill. When I point out that based on SF1 itself your arguments hold no water, you turn to a separate game and my comments here on a completely different website.

It's so silly to me to act like the only way to judge my play is to invent a hypothetical town in your mind and cut/paste my exact behavior into that game that you made up. It's like the classic argument of saying a wolf didn't play great because spec chat was onto them but town wasn't. Fooling viewers and hypothetical towns isn't in the job description. Just like me being townread by hypothetical towns wasn't in the job description for SF1.

it's extra funny because in this situation I'm both the person who realizes the vote was based on popularity and the person who had the gun

I had a funny realization after sleeping on this stuff again.

c4e5g3d5 posted...

You were on track to get treated as a VI all game by your fifth post. Plenty a town won't even find you as town if you play like that, no matter how objectively towny you are.

^

I just double checked. I didn't get voted one time in the entire game except by the scum who counter-voted me.

lol

Literally not even one town player voted me at any point for all of day 1.

And you're standing on the ground of "a hypothetical town might not have townread you"

Like, there's "being strictly results based" and there's...having common sense.

Every single player in the game townread me and you just insist it was for invalid reasons, I guess?

I think that illustrates pretty clearly there's severe bias at play here regarding wanting to vote for your preferred playstyle and preferred player. Of course this one user doesn't necessarily represent the community as a whole but I mean come on.

c4e5g3d5 posted...

Yo. I'm not Para, but I have thoughts. You may or may not recognize me.

A few things.

Voting isn't to determine the MVP, as I'm sure you've been told plenty. Voting isn't even to determine who played the best. Voting is to determine who's the best player.

I look at your play. I look at Gorf's play. I ask myself, "In a random game of mafia, which of these approaches is more likely to produce good results?"

Gorf was playing like an open book in a way that basically guarantees him strong townreads in any half decent list. You were on track to get treated as a VI all game by your fifth post. Plenty a town won't even find you as town if you play like that, no matter how objectively towny you are.

Docking someone's play for being busy during one specific EoD is both an unfair assessment of that player's play and a sign of a flaw in your own play if you genuinely think it's reasonable to expect that.

Diplomatic play isn't just useful for persuasion. If the game's environment is more diplomatic, town is more likely to towntell. Diplomacy doesn't just help you push your reads. Diplomacy helps everyone else push their reads too. If the game's environment is diplomatic, people can more easily correct you when you're wrong, and vice versa, because it's easier to realize when someone else has a point. The fact that it's easier to tell what points are good or bad vastly mitigates the "but this helps wolves push reads too" risks of this strategy. These things are often even more important than accuracy.

I appreciate your attitude of keeping it about the game and your opinions without demanding justice or anything. You seem to come off as much saltier than you actually are.

Like, okay I am bordering on getting too caught up in this stuff again but honestly.

Strip down what you've said here.

You are seriously saying the best thing Gorf did was play in a way that would get him townread...in a game where he got mislynched day 4.

Like, that's all you've got? Your greatest supporting argument to suggest gorf played well relies on strongly implying the player list was worse than "half decent"

Step back and take a fair assessment of that point of view.

I just want to share this one with the community here. I was pretty satisfied with this one. This is within the first 500 posts of Day 1, pointing out the exact way scum is inclined to react to a town making screwball reads/votes early



It's the kind of thing I just expect to be rejected by the MU community as "you got lucky whatever" but it's like do you see the same thing I see.

When I saw Silver make that "this is interesting" post, my ears perked up and I'm like, oh I've got one here. From that point forward, me tilting into Silver was not OMGUS like some people want to dismiss it as. It's me deliberately leaning into a confident read to draw out poor reactions from a scum who hasn't stabilized themselves in the game yet.

Then later you see Thunal noticing "hey Silver's reactions to Turbo are actually quite scummy"

Soneji gets on board too

Silver ends up with 9 votes. Became so obvious that he got greater than majority day 1.

But I pressured him "randomly" and had nothing on him

Oh yeah, Silver saying I pressure "random" people, shew that one was rich haha.

Voxx smh-ing me in chat for "not claiming" despite being unclear on whether I'd get to shoot again if I got blocked is a good example of this.

1) I felt it was pretty clear I was the PR I mean, come on. Scum knew day 1.

2) Walk me through the actual realistic worst-case if I do get blocked N2 and I'll point out how it's not actually detrimental.

Just wanted to take a shot at me, I think.

But yeah, the fact that your response to me pointing this out is "dafuq" says a lot about why I didn't bother arguing my case in spec chat. The community there just can't or won't see what I'm talking about mostly, somewhat because the style is so different and somewhat because they just want to collectively hivemind me out of relevance.

c4e5g3d5 posted...

I guess some part of it is that you can't reward what you don't see

If you told most players in SF1, and most people in spec chat, that the things you did intentionally drew out these effects you're describing, and it wasn't just you screwing around and these things happening concurrently, they'd mostly say "dafuq"

Much less vote for it

To be clear, it's not like I knew "if I push AP EOD3, then scum will shoot off to create an opportunity for mislynch, which will lead BJ to finding Ephemera as town"

I'm not clairvoyant to such a degree

More like, creating waves in the game - particularly during a point where town is complacent on a mislynch - can just be inherently good. Create the waves, then assess and ride the waves and see where it leads. Most of the game were sitting on their thumbs.

Beakerjoe was suspicious of Ephemera all game. What led to him finding them as town? It was my push on AP. Did anyone recognize that? Any credit due to me for creating that?

Beakerjoe also found Billy as a wolf for how he followed me onto BJ. So my push on BJ also created a good result for other town players. Any credit due for that?

Day 4 people in town were listening to me and being persuaded by my push on gorf. They didn't have to agree just because I was outed PR by that point. Any credit for leading town and getting them to consolidate on a vote before EOD? Guess not, since I was wrong on gorf? Results based maybe?

I could keep going. Just lots of stuff getting ignored due to my attitude.

If the consensus opinion is truly "gorf wasn't town read but should have been most of the time, and turbo was town read but shouldn't have been most of the time" then I'll just lol my way right on by and let y'all keep thinking that. Seems like mental gymnastics to justify a particular outcome to me.

c4e5g3d5 posted...

I look at your play. I look at Gorf's play. I ask myself, "In a random game of mafia, which of these approaches is more likely to produce good results?"

Gorf was playing like an open book in a way that basically guarantees him strong townreads in any half decent list. You were on track to get treated as a VI all game by your fifth post. Plenty a town won't even find you as town if you play like that, no matter how objectively towny you are.

I guess I just have to ask myself - hypothetically, how many games in a row would I need to catch a scum and get them lynched day 1 before my approach "counts" as good even if I occasionally miss.

People locked me town because I was a force of nature in removing scum day 1. I think there is legitimacy in that. You can say it's results based so that you can still vote for the player who was nicer to you, but at what point does it get recognized as actual skill?

And it's not like, "how dare you miss EOD, trash player"

No, it's just on a list of checkboxes of good things done, being there isn't checked. So I mentioned it with the rest.

I get the results based thinking and I feel it's used to leverage a double standard moreso than it is actually relevant to my play in champs.

If the day 1 lynch in SF1 was wrong, and Thunal just mischopped and died, do you think she'd still be voted #1 there?

My early play, while unorthodox compared to others, proved effective in outing scum early in the game in both of my champs games. Seriously, same approach by me, same reaction from scum, almost down to they used the same phrasing and everything. This happened before I went in on Silver and he broke down so much that the rest of town found him.

You say I was on my way to being read as VI by my fifth post - serious question, does that imply I'm being village read? I don't actually know when you say VI if that could be a scum read still.

My day 2 play is overlooked as being skillful basically because of my attitude. People didn't look beneath the surface and see the actual intent and results.

I'm not bothered by it in the least at this point but I do think people are lying to themselves a wee bit.

Came back here for the LK class action stuff. Got a letter today.

The language makes sure to say there's technically a legal possibility of "negative" outcomes if I remain part of the class.

I'm assuming there's no practical chance of any real downside to staying in it, right?

Sorry I don't intend to come off as rude in this case, but it just seems as though you're bashing your head against a wall intent on being derisive without any legitimate point that hasn't already been observed (by me no less)

So it's kinda exhausting

foolm0r0n posted...

I made my 1 comment multiple times since you seemed to miss it,

Seems like I'm not the one missing anything here

Yeah I veered a little off target in my last post, but basically I don't think the amount it increases EV is worth the trade-off in the level of fun

Lopen posted...

My thought would be ideally play along with bucket strategy until it comes to a conclusion you don't like (unless you think it's fundamentally a bad strategy, then you gotta pick the fight immediately otherwise you lose credibility when you do), THEN pick the fight with it. Not that I'd necessarily be able to have that restraint either-- seems like the exact kind of fight I'd pick in a mafia game <_<

It comes to a conclusion I don't like pretty quickly when my chances of firing plummet by claiming day 1 (I'm being a little facetious)

Thing is - I don't think it's a bad strategy

It is an optimal strategy

But what bugs me is the reasons it's optimal

When you start drilling down

What makes bucket strategy good? It confirms a few town early.

How does it confirm town early? Because scum are pretty much outing themselves one way or another if they counter. If this wasn't true, faking PR would be a viable counter to the strategy. But everyone agrees it's not a viable counter.

So now we're at, it's good in part because it disallows scum from being able to fake being PR (oh yeah - flips were alignment only in this setup. So VT getting cute faking PR then dying without rescinding can be problematic, PR dying without having claimed can be problematic, etc.)

Okay. So why is it good to disallow scum from faking PR? Because faking PR makes it less likely for that scum to get lynched.

And now we've finally reached the bottom which is - bucket strategy is good because it stops town from having to read a player's alignment based on their role claim.

And fundamentally, I just wanna be like "man up, fuck claims, read their play and go based on that"

I know this is watering it down to a certain extent. But day 1 when people were like "if the 3rd PR doesn't claim, then what if we're about to lynch a scum and they claim PR at the last minute!!!"

Like, headdesk so hard at that notion. Oh fucking no. They claimed PR we can't lynch them now.

If PRs were that important that lynching one is detrimental, then why are we suggesting all PRs reveal themselves day 1 in the first place? Obviously losing their advantages isn't a big deal. Yet the reason the strategy is good kinda stands on the idea that we need to not risk mislynching PRs.

It just feels like we're really splitting hairs to avoid maybe possibly making a mistake in a game where those mistakes are inevitable anyway.

More thoughts rattling around now

I don't think many people realize I wasn't really making a point to start a huge fuss over the bucket strat stuff

To illustrate what I mean

Around midday 1 someone posted "I think the 3rd PR should reveal now"

This was followed by a second player posting "I also think the 3rd PR should reveal now"

I then posted "I also think the 3rd PR should reveal now

Wait no I don't"

The intent of that post was not to start a huge debate. I was just making a snarky day 1 shitpost

But ya know several people had to put their big brain optimal strategist ideas out there in reply to me

So I acknowledge their posts and then yeah

It wasn't like I came out firing with a big anti-bucket wall post thesis or something

Yeah I think that's all fair

One thing I'll say is, to the extent that playing diplomatically is good (in game), the reason it's good is because it gets people to agree with or follow you, less likely to lynch you etc.

Well that just makes diplomatic play a means to an end

If I have other means to that same end, then not playing diplomatically isn't a negative (in game)

Now for voting, obviously people don't want to vote for the town who pantsed them on page 2 or for the vig who they thought would go rogue with a shot but then put it square between their eyes or for the town who told them their strategy was dumb

Anyway that's basically exactly it

I knew going against the grain (especially loudly) would hurt my chances of advancing, but I wasn't about to be assed to play their way just because they think I should play their way

And that's largely because, to me, playing my game well was something I cared more about than advancement

Like if I rolled vig and then before game started they told me if you refuse bucket strat you won't advance, how do you think I'd have played it?

Exactly the same except probably slightly more obnoxious somehow

Yes, it's true (and I said it in game day 3 as para somewhat disingenuously observed) that one reason I wanted the vig shot was I knew it was a way to potentially impress/advance. But I also wanted it because it's just the coolest role and was something I wanted an opportunity to do for the hell of it. Shooting scum is fun.

Now that said

Once the game was finished, I fully believe (and if the temperature in the thread/discord over there were different, you bet I'd be arguing it because I have plenty of ammo for valid arguments with specific examples) that my play qualified me over nearly everyone else in the game. That wasn't something I would think by default out of arrogance, but there wasn't a lot of impressive play to be seen out of the pool of players, imo, and when you start putting together a checklist of what all I achieved or contributed to, it's in my eyes apparent that "he was a rude meanie" had a lot to do with people's perspective of me

But to circle back, and to pre-empt foolmo's meaningless line of attack - I did that with eyes wide open

It's like when Johnny Depp first showed up for Pirates of the Caribbean and they were like "wtf is this character you're doing, be more like we wanted" and he was like "nah, this is what I've done with the character. If you don't want it, find someone else"

They decided they wanted Depp. MU decided they wanted...gorf. Good for them. On with life.

Lopen have you read the description of my semifinal jw lol

well

technically

I think 3/5 of them deserved to advance

foolm0r0n posted...

On my point that you played the metagame poorly, of course I do

nobody is disputing that - just gtfo honestly lol

you took a jab that was irrelevant, I pointed out it's irrelevant, you pivoted, I pointed out there's evidence to disprove your suggestion, you're pivoting again

why are you here

Aecioo posted...

Aecioo posted...
You have brought much shame to B8

But I'm proud and smug and don't care what the haters think tbh

(I'm seriously baffled about Gorf > Ephemera like it's just...wut, like...wut...but yeah)

Para I have a couple questions I'd like your perspective on if you're still reading.

1) what did Gorf do well? Here's a list of things I can't give him any credit for, so I'm wondering what he possibly does get credit for:

-having any impact
-catching any wolves
-lynching any wolves
-convincing anyone of anything
-getting people to realize he's town
-using a role well
-voting / being present while he's up for lynch

2) If the game was played out the same except instead of Silver as scum, it was one of BJ/AP/Chingles/etc. - in other words if day 1 was a mislynch - does Thunal still get first place?

I'm asking these questions to better inform my perspective for a private conversation I was having with someone else in the game.

I mean, that's basically what I did. It's not like I've been arguing with the wolf team about it.

I'm referring to things that were said in spectator chat after the wolves died but before I died

Yes I posed a question to Centuries after I died but after his reluctance to acknowledge anything I did as good was apparent I just dropped it

And same with Silver basically

turbopuns3 posted...

Dels posted...
being well-liked matters, but that's not entirely separate from skill. mafia is a social game, and if people find you agreeable, they will be less likely to lynch you, and more likely to listen to your cases. (which are things you want as both town and scum)

I think a lot of people forgot I was universally cleared day 1 for reasons having nothing to do with PRs or bucket strat.

I was literally cleared for pushing on a wolf all day 1 and lynching them.

Then day 2 I squared up scum and said I'm vig and I dare you to let me shoot, and they said sure go for it hot shot, and I shot the roleblocker.

Oh yeah that's not to mention the fact town was still listening to me day 4. Like, I ultimately pushed the wrong player that day, yes, but the players in the game were still respecting me and/or my reads and whatnot. So it's not as if I'd committed such heinous offenses that nobody wanted to work with me.

I said it before but I'll say it again, I went into the abrasiveness thing with eyes wide open. Not like I expected people to love me for gloating. The biggest reason I focused more on the wolf bias thing in my reaction posts was that was the part that was less accounted for by me ahead of time. It was relatively "new" info. Yes I knew Silver had blatantly denied that I had any legitimate tell on him, and yes I knew Centuries had the audacity to say he could reasonably see me as 8th best (convenient...) in the town during the phase right after I goaded him into letting me shoot him and before I'd gotten anything wrong - I knew those things, but I didn't know if the result would be affected much or not until all was said and done.

Dels posted...

being well-liked matters, but that's not entirely separate from skill. mafia is a social game, and if people find you agreeable, they will be less likely to lynch you, and more likely to listen to your cases. (which are things you want as both town and scum)

I think a lot of people forgot I was universally cleared day 1 for reasons having nothing to do with PRs or bucket strat.

I was literally cleared for pushing on a wolf all day 1 and lynching them.

Then day 2 I squared up scum and said I'm vig and I dare you to let me shoot, and they said sure go for it hot shot, and I shot the roleblocker.

But people really didn't like it when I went "woo yeah I did great" so

It's funny to me, even if some people believe I can't find it funny and want to talk about it without feeling salty

DoomTheGyarados posted...

These are fun get-togethers for sure though, take them for what they are.

That's what I'm doing but you know me. I'm gonna be overly verbose and end up the last person talking about the game after literally every game no matter what happens.

banananor posted...

i'm curious as to the story (role, length of survival, personality, etc) behind the 5 advancers. what scores did you give them?

93 - I ranked them 2nd. First PR to claim in response to the VT claiming PR. This player was the first after me to vote the scum who got lynched day 1, and it was for reasons of that scum reacted very poorly to my pressure. They were shot night 1.

86 - I ranked them 3rd. The other PR. Was in sync with PR #1 during day 1. Good reads. Posted a legendary meme that should single-handedly win them the whole event tbqh. Was shot night 2.

68 - I ranked them 1st. VT who is credited with being the spark of the late day 1 switch to the other scum I'd been parked on all day. Was widely cleared after the day 1 scum flip due to this. Was pretty on point but relatively low impact for the remainder of the game. Was shot the night before me despite being less confirmed.

63 - I didn't have this player in my top 7. VT who was mislynched day 4. Was 4th to join the initial scum wagon on day 1, the one we pivoted away from. Pushed hard on a VT most of day 2 then swung onto a different VT who ended up lynched in the eleventh hour. Went back to pushing the previous VT on day 3, and mislynched them. Was in essentially every town player's POE day 4, never cast a vote that day, and was absent for EOD.

53 - I ranked them 5th (nice). Replaced into the game day 2 when a VT bailed for reasons unknown. Was universally cleared by everyone after the N2 scum flip based on the way the two dead scum interacted with the slot. Asked a ton of probing questions to everyone, had the right gut on day 4 when we mislynched but caved to consensus without much of any resistance. Was pretty secure in lynching the last scum day 5.

foolm0r0n posted...

How about if the wolves voted you really highly since they were impressed, but the town punished you for not being a team player, so it wasn't enough to get you to top 5.

...okay but again

Public discussion

A few town expressed surprise and even "shock" that I didn't advance

More than one town went so far as to say it bothers them that I didn't advance

Meanwhile multiple scum have publicly displayed negative bias

You just have no ground to stand on here if you're informed and paying attention

Point distribution by the way

93
86
68
63
53
46
44
19
18
15
10
5
3
2

Top 5 move on, I missed by 7 points

3 wolves, 11 non-me town

11x + 3y = 46

x = my average score from town; y = my average score from mafia

It's apparent that mafia were biased against me (I'm not just being vain, anyone can go read the discord where it was openly talked about by them)

If the bias brings y down > 2.33 points from x, or if it brings y down ~2 points from x and moving me up 2 spots across the 3 wolf rankings would move the 5th place player down on a couple lists (obviously I can't know this but it's not a stretch)

Then yeah

This isn't salt from me, it's just me spelling out in crystal clear terms exactly what information I was considering when I made the statement that "/some/ wolf salt" kept me out

I'm literally not denying that? The first thing I said to summarize my play round 2 was I acted like a jerk.

votes supposed to be based on mafia talent not who you like, hence why I said "if everyone is being honest", but that misses the point here

It's all good, you did get under my skin a little too. I was actually just thinking this is a spot I can be quite content to hang it up and call that a career for mafia.

And I apologize if I offended any of your friends or embarrassed you by association.

But of course people who disliked my play take every single thing I say to imply the worst even though I pretty much never am implying those sorts of things

There's an example of Silver doing this in spec chat an hour ago lol

Saraberry also did it before. Went on a whole mini-tirade in spec chat defending herself against claims that I wasn't making

I recognize these facts. I don't care to transform my online communication style to cater to everyone to get them to like me. I understand how this has an impact on my vote total.

I'm still just shooting it straight at the end of the day, and not claiming to be an all-around swell guy.

Heck I'm not even suggesting I got done wrong or anything

Like, I voted SK and Ephemera lower in g10 because I was salty about their success in game lol

I don't even deny that. It's a product of human nature

turbopuns3 posted...

Everyone in thread knows some wolf salt is what kept me out

Let me rephrase this

Everyone who followed the game and spec chat closely (especially including post-advancement reveal) would reasonably agree wolves thought less of my play than town did on average

There's beyond sufficient evidence to suggest that

Then, separately, in comparison with the vote totals, it is not a leap to say that if wolves on average weren't biased against me I very likely would have advanced

I understand addition enough to recognize not everyone in town put me at the top

This does not escape me, and I'm saying nothing to suggest wolf salt is the only reason I didn't advance

Paratroopa1 posted...

sorry that nobody respects you for getting a lucky vig shot and then acting like god's gift to mafia

lmao!

People are sensitive tbh, and I'm aware but don't care to go easy on them despite that. I'm just speaking realistically fmpov