Megaman X: Day of Death. ~ EVERYBODY DIED. SCUM WINS. GAME OVER.

[Nicholas1024]

@OS
Got any advice for me based on this game? I think my reads are improving, personally. (A basic understanding of newer scum really helps, but vets are more of a case by case basis, IMO.)

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

I'm gonna move away from this and let it go. Ryker is a cool dude, I just don't above what he did this game.

I learned why my sheeping is awful and what I can do to change it.

 

[Overswarm]

To Ryker:

Get a buddy. I buddied people I thought were scum during the day and pushed hard on whoever I was pushing on hopnig scum would keep me around; it works for me because I can get town off my back.

You get scum off your back by having a slow start; they don't f eel like killing until you're a threat. Town is the threat to you too then. Get a buddy, town or scum, and get it early. Cultivate your image and make sure people see you how you want them to see you rather than how someone else does. You weren't very scummy this game, and AB managed to paint you in a bad light. It took him 5 days to follow through but his tunnel vision was only possible because you weren't cultivating your image. The best way to do that is to get a buddy that will defend you. If someone else is willing to step up to the plate and defend you FOR you, it's less likely that town will want to kill you. It's easy to follow a group, hard to pick sides. If you read most of my town games you'll find when I'm under pressure I'm almost always mysteriously silent and someone ELSE is defending me. This generally is when I come in, giving the illusion that there is a group that feels that I should stick around. Then it becomes an opinion thing rather than a "right or wrong" thing.

So, cultivate your image carefully. It's easy to blow other people off and do your own thing, but then you're at the mercy of the whims of madmen.

 

[Overswarm]

@OS
Got any advice for me based on this game? I think my reads are improving, personally. (A basic understanding of newer scum really helps, but vets are more of a case by case basis, IMO.)

You did fine. You made a few mistakes but nothing major and didn't do any worse than anyone else here. Probably the biggest mistake was letting AB be crazy

 

[Shadow Moth]

Yea ryker admitted when under pressure that it wasn't dude. That was the deciding point when it shifted from "most people want jtb" to "everyone except tery wanted boat".

You forget that I was half of that slot.

I was the one who came up with that read so it makes sense that Ryker wasn't as sure of it as I would be.

 

[Overswarm]

That's all very informative OS, but what do you consider my strengths/weaknesses, so I can focus on the good and work on eliminating the bad?

You're not a force; you're always an observer. That is a weakness in some respects and a strength in others. If I were you I'd make other people be forced to convince me to do things and use that to get information. Painstakingly post your reads consistently, and post your thought process. You don't have the "umph" that some players have that can make a lynch happen and tend to make yourself a target when you do; your analytical behavior is just fine though, and if you approach things from an analytical standpoint and let someone else lead the charge, you can just supply the evidence and be a huge boon to town.

OS, seriously, you can do both at the same time. Figure out whose more likely to be scum, figure out what that implies, then lynch your best bet.

You can't, really. You spent five days going after the same guy and never changed your mind!

You were so concerned with getting reads that you never actually pushed for a scummy player, and that prevented any real progress in terms of scything through the lynch pool.

What are you talking about? My actions alone cleared FF and you and my Day 2 play limited the scum pool to four people. Had I survived we would have had an Inferno lynch on D2 and then had three people left alive, one of them scum. The only one that would have survived from that group was Nabe.

I also broke the game and told you who was scum based on claims. Everyone could have claimed right then and won. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that only three people have had obscure claims.

To be more accurate, half of mafia is getting reads based on flips and wagons, half is actually lynching scum, but you can at the same time.

You'll figure it out someday

I want an answer to this as well directed at me. Also this is the third time im asking, but how did you catch me?

I didn't get to see much of your strengths or weaknesses this game really. The first thing that caught my attention was your sporadic activity; you seemed really "into" certain subjects. At one point you mentioned something about copping Circus and he flipped "immune reploid". Me being the cop and seeing "immune", I wondered if that meant godfather. If I had known that's what that meant, I would have had you lynched immediately, but it was only a suspicion that lead me to look at you more closely. I found you were never a driving force but didn't shy away from what you DID join up with. Someone who is being carefully inactive but very confident about the few actions they take is generally going to be scum.

Think of it this way: Town makes mistakes. When someone plays in a fashion that assumes they aren't making a mistake, it should catch town's attention. You and Raziek both did this in different ways; Raziek was literally everywhere, meaning you couldn't get any real reads on him, and you were a bit more focused but still couldn't get a read on you because your reads weren't yours. That's a hard pill to swallow for a townie, and the confidence you showed made me ever cognizant of that.

Town Inferno might have been confident, but it would be stupid confident that has holes in it, like every other townie's confidence. Scum Inferno has confidence that makes sense and is unwavering because he knows it's wrong and doesn't care.

 

[#HBC | J]

I remember reading this game a bit.

OS/Nich were really towny imo. o_O" I really liked OS' play this game but haha dying as the cop again on N3? Bad luck duder.

 

[Overswarm]

I remember reading this game a bit.

OS/Nich were really towny imo. o_O" I really liked OS' play this game but haha dying as the cop again on N3? Bad luck duder.

Go find a town game of mine where I live to D4. It's SO HARD. I'm always considered a threat by someone, somewhere, no matter what. I painstakingly buddied scum, made myself scummy and townie at the same time and back and forth, all while getting town to listen to me AND THEN THE INDIE KILLS ME.

 

[#HBC | Acrostic]

Ah nevermind.

Didn't even see you say that, haha. I was aiming for a vig claim later, so I was literally just pandering to town sentiments when I shot you.

 

[Inferno3044]

Giving the idea to cop circus was definitely a mistake. I didn't think the circus lynch was actually gonna go so I tried to save him. That was definitely a mistake that could've biten me more than it did. It was also kind of hard for me because I wasn't sure how to make reads when I knew who was town and who was mafia. I definitely tried to push mislynches though. Thank you for the advice though.

 

[adumbrodeus]

You forget that I was half of that slot.

I was the one who came up with that read so it makes sense that Ryker wasn't as sure of it as I would be.

Then don't have your hydra-buddy defend your lynch choice, you defend it. No wonder ryker came off as gleefully cackling "yes my pretties, lynch raziek and ignore me, mwahahahahaha!"


Why do you think I literally said "I'll let gheb explain this in depth" like 50 times.

 

[Omni]

Also I read Crono Trigger mafia. Still think that town was ****ing dumb for lynching a confirmed town that led the lynch on the mafia boss, but Omni's play was just brilliant.

 

[JTB]

Soup, what was Xatres' role?

 

[Gova]

He could pick any role he wanted and if you rolecopped him that is what he would appear to be to you.

 

[#HBC | ѕoup]

Essentially, a trump role.

I gave this game room to dominate and room to fail to either side, mafia had some incredible defense and town had some offense, I also gave Indy strongman to counter this.

I'll talk more about it when I get home.

 

[#HBC | ѕoup]

I'm sad about the mistakes I made though, next game I have a better idea what I'm doing.

Even though town did ****, I think a certain mafia player deserves MVP, Inferno did a fine job even though town ate themselves, it shouldn't be burden or bias if scum can just happen to not have town focus on them, its good play in the sense they weren't noticeable.

Of course, JTB was at times but Inferno had a lot of people fooled.

I'm giving MVP to Inferno if nobody disagrees.

 

[Inferno3044]

I'm sad about the mistakes I made though, next game I have a better idea what I'm doing.

Even though town did ****, I think a certain mafia player deserves MVP, Inferno did a fine job even though town ate themselves, it shouldn't be burden or bias if scum can just happen to not have town focus on them, its good play in the sense they weren't noticeable.

Of course, JTB was at times but Inferno had a lot of people fooled.

I'm giving MVP to Inferno if nobody disagrees.

Yay!! Also I forgot to give you the most important shoutout for giving me Zero. He was definitely the character I was hoping to get.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

I disagree

 

[Raziek]

Disagree.

A good scum performance is not worthy of MvP just because Town exploded, and Inferno would have been ****ed had Nabe not killed OS.

 

[Gova]

I also disagree.

 

[th3kuzinator]

Disagreed heavily.

Not that Inferno played bad, but this game has several things severely wrong with it that hindered how the process played out. He wasn't instrumental in doing anything huge, town just ate itself alive and scum lucked out that they were able to fly under the radar long enough.

 

[JTB]

Disagree too, town was the biggest factor in their loss, not scum

 

[#HBC | FrozeηFlame]

I disagree.

Not that inferno played poorly. He didn't. He was far and away the best scum in this game. That doesn't mean he deserves an MVP though.

MVP should be reserved for exceptional play that was the absolute crux of your team's victory (or near victory if you happen to give the MVP to the losing faction).

MVP play should absolutely stand out. You shouldn't have to justify giving someone MVP like you are now Soup. A true MVP performance will stand out, make you think "Holy **** this guy played like crazy well, there's no way his faction would have won/performed as well as it did without him", and basically make you remember not just the game, but specifically WHAT THAT PLAYER DID in the game. MVP performances shouldn't just be considered "good", or "better than everyone else in the game". They should be performances that have a distinct impact on how mafia is played here or really change your mind about just what a certain person can do.

You'll have to forgive me for dragging on and on about this but I really feel it needs to be articulated. A lot of people don't really seem to grasp the concept of what an MVP performance truly is, and as a result are somewhat cheapening the honor that getting the award is supposed to be.

Again, you shouldn't have to justify giving someone MVP (unless like, two people played absolutely brilliant games and you need to justify giving it to one over the other or to both or something). The performance itself should speak for itself and make it obvious that the person deserves it.

And don't take this personally infern, but simply coasting by, maintaining solid distance from your partners, letting a tunneling, confused town eat itself alive, and making a somewhat ballsy but conventional fake claim near the end that never really ended up mattering is absolutely not MVP play. It's solid scum play no doubt, and a smart and effective way to abuse the shortcomings of this town, but yeah, nothing spectacular there.

Oh, and playing the noobcard a bit too would really put a bad taste in my mouth if someone got MVP after doing that. Not that playing the noobcard is unacceptable or unfair, but I have some serious qualms with rewarding someone as heavily as giving them MVP after doing something like that. It would be almost as bad as giving Mister Eric MVP of Newbie 3 simply because he was the only anti-town to survive and won it for his faction after town had played a perfect game until it was only him left as scum. He simply coasted and did nothing for the following days while the town let him live and ate itself alive. Its just a really bad "strategy" that's unhealthy for the metagame that we shouldn't be rewarding, regardless of how well it impacted his faction's outcome for the game (he did in fact completely turn the game around from a perfect town game to a scum victory). Playing the noobcard is similar in this regard. Acceptable in small doses and not something you can really criticize new players for using, but it isn't something we should be rewarding in any sense, especially not with something like MVP.

 

[th3kuzinator]

Oh, and playing the noobcard a bit too would really put a bad taste in my mouth if someone got MVP after doing that.

For the record, inferno, FF gave me this same speech after my first ever game/scum victory in DnD mafia. I thought I deserved MVP too because I tricked everyone by playing I was too dumb to be scum but it wasn't so. You'll get dice in time, I'm sure.

 

[#HBC | Acrostic]

How many mafia are there?
Wait who died again?
Why are there two deaths? I thought mafia could only kill one person per night.
Oh wow he was mafia?
Wait who was mafia again?
I thought mafia couldn't communicate during the day.
Can mafia communicate during the night?
Can mafia communicate at all?

 

[#HBC | FrozeηFlame]

Are these Infern quotes from the game or something?

Im confused o_O

 

[Inferno3044]

Well I'm assuming you guys have a better idea of MVP material than I do so I will trust you all. Thank you everyone for complimenting my game. Tbh, playing as scum is kind of fun. Wait until I'm an experienced scum *smirk*

 

[adumbrodeus]

Most valuable player is most valuable player, not "amazing performance".

If you want something that actually means something and isn't the result of town imploding on itself, then make it a performance award.

 

[JTB]

If we are talking most valuable player, then it would have to be you for tunneling Boat the whole game and giving scum the win. You contributed the most to our win-con, so it makes sense, right?

 

[Inferno3044]

I definitely didn't say any of those. I definitely did a "golly gee" thing when Circus was lynched and we hit you. I would be scared to see an active Frozen. D1 you said there had to be at least 2 scum members between Circus, Raziek, and myself. That was the reason we wanted to kill you. Get rid of a strong player and it wouldn't be too damning on me. We would've killed OS N1 but we thought he was an obv doc target. Turns out there wasn't a doc lol.

 

[adumbrodeus]

If we are talking most valuable player, then it would have to be you for tunneling Boat the whole game and giving scum the win. You contributed the most to our win-con, so it makes sense, right?

lol alright, but that's LVP not most, I'll share one with boat and tery for this game.


Point stands though

 

[#HBC | ѕoup]

too much disagreement, and i agree with some of the things said.

No MvP

 

[#HBC | FrozeηFlame]

Most valuable player is most valuable player, not "amazing performance".

If you want something that actually means something and isn't the result of town imploding on itself, then make it a performance award.

Now adum come now you should know more about semantic intention and textualism than you're letting on here.

Sure, MVP in the strictest sense means "Most Valuable Player" which devoid of context would likely lead one to believe that it only means the player who was most valuable in the game, relative to everyone else.

That's a fair interpretation, again, devoid of context and precedent.

It would be ridiculous to assert that based on how we've traditionally treated the MVP award and the context in which we describe "MVP" performances and what we as a community have interpreted to be the semantic intent of the term, that we actually mean "MVP" in the strictest sense of its meaning.

The award may be called the "MVP" award, but we DO NOT give it to players simply for playing the best in a game where everyone blew ****. And we HAVE NOT ever reached a consensus that suggests that the strict interpretation of "MVP" is the definition that the award abides by.

I think you'd be hard pressed to find support for an interpretation of MVP that says that whoever did the best in any game, regardless of how bad it was, gets MVP, no questions asked.

If that WAS the interpretation we used, how in the world could we support decisions for NO MVP? By your strict definition, every game MUST have an MVP, since no matter how bad everyone was, someone MUST have been the best, in some way shape or form.

Again, this is the context and precedent I'm talking about that should help you recognize that a strict definition of MVP is absolutely not appropriate here.

 

[Gova]

MVP has always been a performance award.

 

[Inferno3044]

I'll just take the honor of being the only person thought of to be MVP.

 

[Overswarm]

lol alright, but that's LVP not most, I'll share one with boat and tery for this game.


Point stands though

You own your LVP on your own

I'll just take the honor of being the only person thought of to be MVP.

I would have gotten MVP if Nabe hadn't shot me :B

 

[adumbrodeus]

Now adum come now you should know more about semantic intention and textualism than you're letting on here.

Sure, MVP in the strictest sense means "Most Valuable Player" which devoid of context would likely lead one to believe that it only means the player who was most valuable in the game, relative to everyone else.

That's a fair interpretation, again, devoid of context and precedent.

It would be ridiculous to assert that based on how we've traditionally treated the MVP award and the context in which we describe "MVP" performances and what we as a community have interpreted to be the semantic intent of the term, that we actually mean "MVP" in the strictest sense of its meaning.

The award may be called the "MVP" award, but we DO NOT give it to players simply for playing the best in a game where everyone blew ****. And we HAVE NOT ever reached a consensus that suggests that the strict interpretation of "MVP" is the definition that the award abides by.

I think you'd be hard pressed to find support for an interpretation of MVP that says that whoever did the best in any game, regardless of how bad it was, gets MVP, no questions asked.

If that WAS the interpretation we used, how in the world could we support decisions for NO MVP? By your strict definition, every game MUST have an MVP, since no matter how bad everyone was, someone MUST have been the best, in some way shape or form.

Again, this is the context and precedent I'm talking about that should help you recognize that a strict definition of MVP is absolutely not appropriate here.

No, this has been debated a number of times with two primary camps, some people want it to be an indicator of spectacular performance, others disagree and treat it like an indicator of the best performance in a given game.

Given the division, it should revert to the semantic value, especially since people giving it out for a lower threshold already devalues the award.

As I've stated before, when modding a game, I'd never not give out an mvp. By the same token there should only be one mvp, ever.

 

[#HBC | FrozeηFlame]

I disagree. Just because people disagree about the definition doesn't mean that "non-context strict definition is the default". Not even close.

We use precedent and other contextual indicators to determine the semantic intent of what "MVP" meant when we created the system. When it was conceived, and throughout its history of existence here in Dgames, one can very clearly see that it has never been understood according to your definition. Again, I point to the instances of multiple MVPs and no MVPs in many, many games.

We have no means to regulate how people give MVPs out as mods, so obviously, as a mod, you've been free to interpret it however you like. Soup obviously has that same strong discretion. That doesn't mean that you aren't breaking away from its conventional use and interpretation though.

Mods are free to use it as they will, for better or worse, but there are very real grounds for disagreement with and criticism of use of the MVP award that doesn't line up with the intent the award was created with.

 

[adumbrodeus]

You own your LVP on your own

Lol whatever you say OS

I would have gotten MVP if Nabe hadn't shot me :B

That honestly really annoys me, I was somewhat questioning my read, but not enough for you to be a valid vig-shot. I was mainly trying to make scum think you were an attractive lynch so you wouldn't get nk'd.


Nich was against you, but the sentiment wasn't that widespread, I think it would've come off as more opportunistic then anything else, so it was a really bad choice for posing as a vig-shot.


edit:

I disagree. Just because people disagree about the definition doesn't mean that "non-context strict definition is the default". Not even close.

We use precedent and other contextual indicators to determine the semantic intent of what "MVP" meant when we created the system. When it was conceived, and throughout its history of existence here in Dgames, one can very clearly see that it has never been understood according to your definition. Again, I point to the instances of multiple MVPs and no MVPs in many, many games.

We have no means to regulate how people give MVPs out as mods, so obviously, as a mod, you've been free to interpret it however you like. Soup obviously has that same strong discretion. That doesn't mean that you aren't breaking away from its conventional use and interpretation though.

Mods are free to use it as they will, for better or worse, but there are very real grounds for disagreement with and criticism of use of the MVP award that doesn't line up with the intent the award was created with.

And I can point to many games where there was strictly one mvp when more would've been valid under your definition, and an mvp when there "shouldn't" have been.

Frankly, since the award has been concieved, there's always been this dictionomy, some people interpretted as I did, others didn't.


But the point is, the award has already been devalued to the point that it's similar in value to if everyone treats it like I do simply because enough mods have been treating it like I do. There's no point in denying inferno his mvp now when the award really doesn't mean that much. And yes soup has discretion here, I'm merely asking him to use his discretion in this way.

 

[Inferno3044]

I would have gotten MVP if Nabe hadn't shot me :B

I wouldn't have been able to fool the town if Nabe hadn't shot you. It's no fun when a cop sees through my tricks :B.