I was personally thinking we should no lynch after like a week or so, then lynch 2 D2. This will give the investigatives time to maybe get something useful, while optimizing how much information we get to analyze in the thread.
How do you expect investigative types to benefit when there's no wagons to base their judgments off of?
KoolKoal: Feel free to take this with a grain of salt since self meta isn't particularly helpful, but I think I get scumread mostly for style over substance, but also for a certain lack of substance over style. It's not so much what I AM posting most of the time (though sometimes that can seem bad) but what I'm NOT posting. I've been told I come to non-obvious conclusions a lot, so when I post, quite a bit of the time there's jumps in logic that people can't follow and they think that's scummy. I get that accusation about a lot of questions I ask specifically. People call them "busy work" when the questions are legit etc.
As far as things to ignore, I can't think of anything. I would suggest you focus less on what I'm doing and more on how I'm doing it. That's probably more likely to be accurate. Like I've just said, what I do tends to come off a little weird, but if you look for how I do it, mindset comes into play and maybe you figure out something useful.
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
So, it seems like the best way to use this setup (at least as best I can tell) is to lynch one or two players every Day. Any more than that and I get uncomfortable without some colors in the OP.
Opening thoughts about the setup:
I think the Doctor, Ascetic, and Tracker should claim, possibly also the Watcher, and they should have lynch immunity for Day 1.
On Night 1, the Watcher targets the Doctor, the Doctor targets the Tracker, and the Tracker runs loose. We lynch on behavior and reconvene later on, and don't waste our investigations or protections on the Ascetic.
Any input on this? At the very least, the Ascetic should claim on Day 1 as they are effectively a Miller, here.
My idea on playing this one optimally:
No claims, no lynch Day 1.
Day 2 we massclaim in order: vanilla's - ascetic - bodyguard - doc - tracker - watcher.
We lynch a vanilla or ascetic. Watcher watches doc, doc protects tracker, bodyguard protects watcher/doc (wifoms between them)
Day 3 we masslynch.
@Mall: why not consider no lynch Day 1?
@Iso: why not include the bodyguard in your plan? Why call the ascetic miller? Sounds like you know his alignment.
I don't see a world where having wagon analysis is strictly worse than potentially having no information from a Night and losing PRs. I find it extremely hard to believe that you actually think this is a good plan.
-
Thinking further on it, I think only the Ascetic should claim toDay without being run up; if they're scummy, we lynch them, which is simple enough. The benefits outweigh the negatives, here; if the Ascetic is scum, they already know who the Ascetic is. If the Ascetic is town, that means that the scum only have one less slot to PR hunt for. In the extremely unfortunate circumstance of both scum being power roles, we have our work cut out for us - but I like the idea that if someone is scummy enough and claims a role, we have 0 reason NOT to lynch them because we know they can be scum. This setup flips the idea that PRs shouldn't be lynched on its head, which is something I'm always pushing in light of how many falseclaims we see on a regular basis.
-
As for how we should lynch: I forgot for a moment that there were 8 players and for some reason thought there were 6 and was going to say that we absolutely need to lynch 2 toDay, but then I scrolled up to the OP to double-check and that's not the case!
That said, I do kind of like the idea of lynching two people on Day 1; it's kind of like having a DayVig shot but with the benefit of an extra wagon to analyze!
After that, I think we have to see what our flips are before I can determine what the best course of lynch action would be.
Let's try to figure out who the two best wagons are for toDay and go from there. So far, I'm not terribly with the idea of Rhand or Grimclaw being town.
So, it seems like the best way to use this setup (at least as best I can tell) is to lynch one or two players every Day. Any more than that and I get uncomfortable without some colors in the OP.
Opening thoughts about the setup:
I think the Doctor, Ascetic, and Tracker should claim, possibly also the Watcher, and they should have lynch immunity for Day 1.
On Night 1, the Watcher targets the Doctor, the Doctor targets the Tracker, and the Tracker runs loose. We lynch on behavior and reconvene later on, and don't waste our investigations or protections on the Ascetic.
Any input on this? At the very least, the Ascetic should claim on Day 1 as they are effectively a Miller, here.
My idea on playing this one optimally:
No claims, no lynch Day 1.
Day 2 we massclaim in order: vanilla's - ascetic - bodyguard - doc - tracker - watcher.
We lynch a vanilla or ascetic. Watcher watches doc, doc protects tracker, bodyguard protects watcher/doc (wifoms between them)
Day 3 we masslynch.
@Mall: why not consider no lynch Day 1?
@Iso: why not include the bodyguard in your plan? Why call the ascetic miller? Sounds like you know his alignment.
My first thought when I read this was that only scum would want a no lynch, but the more I think about it the more I realise that no scum would openly push for something so obviously scummy. Giving scum a free NK is a terrible idea...
I don't see a world where having wagon analysis is strictly worse than potentially having no information from a Night and losing PRs. I find it extremely hard to believe that you actually think this is a good plan.
-
Thinking further on it, I think only the Ascetic should claim toDay without being run up; if they're scummy, we lynch them, which is simple enough. The benefits outweigh the negatives, here; if the Ascetic is scum, they already know who the Ascetic is. If the Ascetic is town, that means that the scum only have one less slot to PR hunt for. In the extremely unfortunate circumstance of both scum being power roles, we have our work cut out for us - but I like the idea that if someone is scummy enough and claims a role, we have 0 reason NOT to lynch them because we know they can be scum. This setup flips the idea that PRs shouldn't be lynched on its head, which is something I'm always pushing in light of how many falseclaims we see on a regular basis.
-
As for how we should lynch: I forgot for a moment that there were 8 players and for some reason thought there were 6 and was going to say that we absolutely need to lynch 2 toDay, but then I scrolled up to the OP to double-check and that's not the case!
That said, I do kind of like the idea of lynching two people on Day 1; it's kind of like having a DayVig shot but with the benefit of an extra wagon to analyze!
After that, I think we have to see what our flips are before I can determine what the best course of lynch action would be.
Let's try to figure out who the two best wagons are for toDay and go from there. So far, I'm not terribly with the idea of Rhand or Grimclaw being town.
Do you truly believe Rhand is scum or are you going for the easy lynch?
If we manage to lynch 2 town toDay and the Nightkill is successful, we need to pause and review the game, because then we'll be in a 3-2 scenario.
I think in that case, we would need to lynch once on Day 2. If we don't instantly lose, we hit scum - but if we lynch two, we run the risk of losing overNight, and the extra Day/Night of information would be a boon to the town in said endgame scenario.
I think that's the correct procedure in that situation.
So you advocate a plan that can very likely result in an auto-lose. Vote: Iso
So, it seems like the best way to use this setup (at least as best I can tell) is to lynch one or two players every Day. Any more than that and I get uncomfortable without some colors in the OP.
Opening thoughts about the setup:
I think the Doctor, Ascetic, and Tracker should claim, possibly also the Watcher, and they should have lynch immunity for Day 1.
On Night 1, the Watcher targets the Doctor, the Doctor targets the Tracker, and the Tracker runs loose. We lynch on behavior and reconvene later on, and don't waste our investigations or protections on the Ascetic.
Any input on this? At the very least, the Ascetic should claim on Day 1 as they are effectively a Miller, here.
My idea on playing this one optimally:
No claims, no lynch Day 1.
Day 2 we massclaim in order: vanilla's - ascetic - bodyguard - doc - tracker - watcher.
We lynch a vanilla or ascetic. Watcher watches doc, doc protects tracker, bodyguard protects watcher/doc (wifoms between them)
Day 3 we masslynch.
@Mall: why not consider no lynch Day 1?
@Iso: why not include the bodyguard in your plan? Why call the ascetic miller? Sounds like you know his alignment.
My first thought when I read this was that only scum would want a no lynch, but the more I think about it the more I realise that no scum would openly push for something so obviously scummy. Giving scum a free NK is a terrible idea...
I don't see a world where having wagon analysis is strictly worse than potentially having no information from a Night and losing PRs. I find it extremely hard to believe that you actually think this is a good plan.
-
Thinking further on it, I think only the Ascetic should claim toDay without being run up; if they're scummy, we lynch them, which is simple enough. The benefits outweigh the negatives, here; if the Ascetic is scum, they already know who the Ascetic is. If the Ascetic is town, that means that the scum only have one less slot to PR hunt for. In the extremely unfortunate circumstance of both scum being power roles, we have our work cut out for us - but I like the idea that if someone is scummy enough and claims a role, we have 0 reason NOT to lynch them because we know they can be scum. This setup flips the idea that PRs shouldn't be lynched on its head, which is something I'm always pushing in light of how many falseclaims we see on a regular basis.
-
As for how we should lynch: I forgot for a moment that there were 8 players and for some reason thought there were 6 and was going to say that we absolutely need to lynch 2 toDay, but then I scrolled up to the OP to double-check and that's not the case!
That said, I do kind of like the idea of lynching two people on Day 1; it's kind of like having a DayVig shot but with the benefit of an extra wagon to analyze!
After that, I think we have to see what our flips are before I can determine what the best course of lynch action would be.
Let's try to figure out who the two best wagons are for toDay and go from there. So far, I'm not terribly with the idea of Rhand or Grimclaw being town.
Do you truly believe Rhand is scum or are you going for the easy lynch?
If we manage to lynch 2 town toDay and the Nightkill is successful, we need to pause and review the game, because then we'll be in a 3-2 scenario.
I think in that case, we would need to lynch once on Day 2. If we don't instantly lose, we hit scum - but if we lynch two, we run the risk of losing overNight, and the extra Day/Night of information would be a boon to the town in said endgame scenario.
I think that's the correct procedure in that situation.
So you advocate a plan that can very likely result in an auto-lose. Vote: Iso
My first thought when I read this was that only scum would want a no lynch, but the more I think about it the more I realise that no scum would openly push for something so obviously scummy. Giving scum a free NK is a terrible idea...
Is your only reason for not acting on the scuminess because it's "too obvious"? Or do you have other reasons? Do you then agree it is scummy?
Do you truly believe Rhand is scum or are you going for the easy lynch?
Definitely noting the Rhand/Dota relationship, need to pay attention to that.
Dota: Why is what Rhand doing not scummy because it's too obvious, but what Iso is doing is scummy, but somehow not "too obvious"? Where do you draw the line for what behaviours are written off because they're too obvious?
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
My first thought when I read this was that only scum would want a no lynch, but the more I think about it the more I realise that no scum would openly push for something so obviously scummy. Giving scum a free NK is a terrible idea...
Is your only reason for not acting on the scuminess because it's "too obvious"? Or do you have other reasons? Do you then agree it is scummy?
Do you truly believe Rhand is scum or are you going for the easy lynch?
Definitely noting the Rhand/Dota relationship, need to pay attention to that.
Dota: Why is what Rhand doing not scummy because it's too obvious, but what Iso is doing is scummy, but somehow not "too obvious"? Where do you draw the line for what behaviours are written off because they're too obvious?
Rhand has stuck to his guns about his plan in the few posts he's made, while Iso has spent a lot of time on setup speculation and calling Rhand's idea a bad one. Then he proposes that we lynch 2 Day1, NK occurs, then we lynch 1 Day2, and IF we don't lose THEN we can POE for the scum. Rhand's idea has been shot down by multiple people and no one batted an eye at Iso's. Obvious vs not obvious...
Also since you're fishing for the Ascetic, do you think they should claim? Do you think all PRs should claim?
And before I forget, Vote: Dota.
Not fishing, just wondering why the sudden about face on the Ascetic role specifically, but no mention of the other that he recommended be given lynch immunity.
I don't think there should be claims at all this game. If a player gets to L-1 and claims Doc, there's no guarantee they're town and we can't test it since they can claim to have missed the NK target. If Doc and Tracker are scum together then we're really screwed since they can back each other up. Claims in this setup create too much WIFOM.
Why add the "before I forget" instead of just voting me if you think I'm scum?
Rhand has stuck to his guns about his plan in the few posts he's made, while Iso has spent a lot of time on setup speculation and calling Rhand's idea a bad one. Then he proposes that we lynch 2 Day1, NK occurs, then we lynch 1 Day2, and IF we don't lose THEN we can POE for the scum. Rhand's idea has been shot down by multiple people and no one batted an eye at Iso's. Obvious vs not obvious...
So the question I asked: do you then agree it is still scummy? You're pardoning it because it's "super obvious", but do you agree that it's scummy? I'd also like a response to Grimclaw's question (why you singled out Iso).
Not fishing, just wondering why the sudden about face on the Ascetic role specifically, but no mention of the other that he recommended be given lynch immunity.
Asking someone: are you the ascetic, is fishing. What other answer do you expect to get?
I don't think there should be claims at all this game. If a player gets to L-1 and claims Doc, there's no guarantee they're town and we can't test it since they can claim to have missed the NK target. If Doc and Tracker are scum together then we're really screwed since they can back each other up. Claims in this setup create too much WIFOM.
So you think we should just lynch people regardless of what they claim? So if someone gets to L-1 and claims doc, we should go on and lynch them? Thank you for making me feel even better about my vote.
I am not sure why two separate people asked me to explain why I wanted the Ascetic to claim when my most recent post said that I changed my mind and no longer thought that it was a good idea.
2. Mixed. Even with the available protection, there's definitely a player type that the heuristic "If the mafia haven't shot you by DayX, you're mafia" applies to. AND you've already said that you'd consider anybody that gets Ascetic to fall into that as well. Also, if you truly think "Scum are the ones that would push multi-night plans", I'm not sure why you keep pushing your cards to the middle of the table here, before everybody has even checked in. You can think I'm trying to have it both ways because I /am/. Strategic ambiguity is good here, letting both options seem viable in early discussions is good here.
3. No. If its GOOD that scum have to try to avoid protection like you said in your previous point, then its BAD if they know who has what, because its easier to avoid protection. I am NOT advocating for swinging the lynch off somebody just because they claimed doctor. I AM saying that fewer actual lynches will result in fewer claims. Weighting this as less important than having an additional flip before committing to lynch #3 is fine, weighting this 0 is not.
4. My only experience here so far has been Off the Grid mafia. Let's just say that it wasn't the shining pinnacle of activity that I would have hoped for. If you say that this playerlist is going to be better about that, I'll take you on your word. Until then, I'll be a bit dubious. And when I say, separation between wagons, I mean, I would be very disappointed if our second lynch today was just the counterwagon for the first lynch. If you're promising actual reconsideration, I'd ideally like to see 4 separate real wagons (3 would also be fine). First lynch and a legit counterwagon, second lynch on somebody completely different AND a counterwagon on somebody else completely different. That's how I try to play Day2, and I'm sincerely worried that doing Day2 on Day1 will result in that not happening.
I fully understand the difference between this setup and WH. But we're not arguing between the difference between no hard information and lots of hard information. We're currently arguing about the difference between 1 lynch w/flip + wagon information + night actions, vs 2 lynches w/flips + wagon information + night actions. I'm saying that 2 lynches has diminishing returns on wagon information and could affect night actions in a bad way, you're saying that you won't let there be diminishing returns on wagon information, night actions are irrelevant, and an additional flip worth of information outweighs everything else.
2. I don't find "alive too long" to be a reliable tell in any form of the word, and don't find the loss of that tell to be particularly significant. Iso is the player with the biggest rep in the game, but if he didn't die N1, I wouldn't be suspicious: hell, I wouldn't even be surprised. I'm pushing all of my cards on the table because it's a high priority to get everyone on the same page with the optimal strategy for this game. I don't have time to mess around and obfuscate things in order to trap scum because I don't know if pushing bad strategies is a scumtell for anyone here or not.
3. And I'm not advocating for claims, period. If you are the doctor and about to get lynched, your claim shouldn't save you, meaning that there is absolutely no point to claiming at all. The only only only claims that should possibly pop are are Ascetic or Bodyguard roles; both can confirm themselves by dying, and while it's not likely that scum will shoot a scummy player for the free kill, it's a possibility that could be worth exploring.
4. I understand your concerns with not being able to get lynches done in time, but I don't think that it's productive to give up on 2 lynches for Day 1 just because you think we can't hit the activity requirements. I don't care so much if counterwagons exist or not; I only care that the two lynches that are being pushed are on people who make sense and is for a good reason. I don't see the point in not considering multiple suspects at once.
I think the extra flip of information is very important because of how that extra flip affects our chances of hitting scum before night. I think your concern about diminishing returns is a valid one, but also a concern that it makes more sense to monitor while the game is in progress; if we can't do two lynches, we can't do two lynches and will adjust if we must, but there's no reason not to push for two lynches while hope is in the air. My opinion on night actions are not necessarily that they are irrelevant; I just feel that they are being severely overvalued this game and am probably overselling their uselessness based on that concern.
How would you respond to a situation in which a role needs to prove themselves, but claims they targetted the ascetic? Stall another day for them to try again? I'm sure there are other, better examples, but essentially: why would we want the Ascetic to be alive?
I don't think the Ascetic should claim.
If a role needs to prove themselves and they haven't, they die. I don't care what results they have or don't have unless it's a result on scum.
Wow you guys have been busy.
I wished you guys would trust me on the claim + lynch ascetic plan. It's really good.
My new cruise starts today. I probably won't be able to react to stuff before the late evening (Europe time).
Your plan sucks, and you haven't gone through any degree of effort in order to explain it.
We have limited lynches this game. Using one of those limited lynches for what is essentially a policy lynch is useless; you are the guiltiest of all players here as far as the overvaluing the strength of power roles goes, but, in your case, it seems like your overvaluing is genuine.
See my response to mallorean; it's dumb to assume that we won't be able to lynch twice before even pressing for two lynches. In your case, I think that having inactive games and having a reputation of people generally not being engaged in games is a plague to a mafia site and the best cure for that sort of thing is by being active and engaged and inspiring similar behaviors by example.
If we manage to lynch 2 town toDay and the Nightkill is successful, we need to pause and review the game, because then we'll be in a 3-2 scenario.
I think in that case, we would need to lynch once on Day 2. If we don't instantly lose, we hit scum - but if we lynch two, we run the risk of losing overNight, and the extra Day/Night of information would be a boon to the town in said endgame scenario.
I think that's the correct procedure in that situation.
You're correct the only two options are lynch one and go to night or blitz until the game ends.
Blitzing until the game ends provides more lynches.
If we lynch scum we're in a good place regardless. And if we don't lynch scum I'd still say that I'd rather be in a 4vs2 scenario without watcher results than a 3vs2 with.
If we lynch scum before night, we're in a pretty solid place. If we lynch scum after night, we're in a less solid place. I think two lynches improves the odds of lynching scum D1 enough were it should be a strong priority as something that everyone should be active and involved enough to get done.
I was personally thinking we should no lynch after like a week or so, then lynch 2 D2. This will give the investigatives time to maybe get something useful, while optimizing how much information we get to analyze in the thread.
Vote: Killjoy
I don't like how you came into thread, offered no input on anyone's idea for strategy at all, offered no piece of scumhunting at all. If I was trying to envision how I expected scum to enter the game, this is what I would picture.
Grimclaw, since you wanted me to ask you a question:
Quote from Grimclaw »
If anything, the ascetic seems the last person who should claim to me. The benefits are that the town power roles know who not to target right, but other than the doctor those are not particularly useful anyway. The negatives are that, if the ascetic is town, the scum get to know the one person who can't be protected nor watched at night. As the scum in this setup don't particularly care who dies at night, as long as someone does, that seems like the perfect way to make even the doc useless this game...
Is this something you still believe?
Your negatives seem to greatly outweigh the positive, which itself is barely a positive. If you're in support of this idea, and it has such a big risk, why take that risk?
KoolKoal: Feel free to take this with a grain of salt since self meta isn't particularly helpful, but I think I get scumread mostly for style over substance, but also for a certain lack of substance over style. It's not so much what I AM posting most of the time (though sometimes that can seem bad) but what I'm NOT posting. I've been told I come to non-obvious conclusions a lot, so when I post, quite a bit of the time there's jumps in logic that people can't follow and they think that's scummy. I get that accusation about a lot of questions I ask specifically. People call them "busy work" when the questions are legit etc.
As far as things to ignore, I can't think of anything. I would suggest you focus less on what I'm doing and more on how I'm doing it. That's probably more likely to be accurate. Like I've just said, what I do tends to come off a little weird, but if you look for how I do it, mindset comes into play and maybe you figure out something useful.
Like you are legitimately one of my favorite Mafia players - so what do you think of DoT and Grimclaw (and why?), since we clearly do not agree on Rgand, despite my asking you to explain why?
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
Like you are legitimately one of my favorite Mafia players - so what do you think of DoT and Grimclaw (and why?), since we clearly do not agree on Rgand, despite my asking you to explain why?
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
You can say that again...
Also, Iso's plan is the same as my plan, and if I'm not mistaken Nacho's as well. Why single him out?
I'm town reading you and Nacho and therefore don't believe you would recommend that course of action unless you truly felt it was the beat course. I don't get the same vibe from Iso, and the way he presented it highlights the fact that, unless we hit scum in the two lynches, we're in LyLo. So he agrees with the general consensus, but only because it gives scumIso the best odds of winning.
Rhand has stuck to his guns about his plan in the few posts he's made, while Iso has spent a lot of time on setup speculation and calling Rhand's idea a bad one. Then he proposes that we lynch 2 Day1, NK occurs, then we lynch 1 Day2, and IF we don't lose THEN we can POE for the scum. Rhand's idea has been shot down by multiple people and no one batted an eye at Iso's. Obvious vs not obvious...
So the question I asked: do you then agree it is still scummy? You're pardoning it because it's "super obvious", but do you agree that it's scummy? I'd also like a response to Grimclaw's question (why you singled out Iso).
It does look scummy, but as Nacho's said, would scumRhand do something so blatant? Rhand's working on his plan, one that gives town the most info and time. I don't agree with giving scum a free NK before any lynches occur, but I can understand why he believes it's a good plan. My personal belief is that we should lynch 1 toDay. If we get it right, we hit one of the scum with the lynch, leaving us in a strong position for toMorrow.
Quote from Ghosting »
Not fishing, just wondering why the sudden about face on the Ascetic role specifically, but no mention of the other that he recommended be given lynch immunity.
Asking someone: are you the ascetic, is fishing. What other answer do you expect to get?
I've realised that I blundered in asking that, thought I had caught onto something but I misread a post.
I don't think there should be claims at all this game. If a player gets to L-1 and claims Doc, there's no guarantee they're town and we can't test it since they can claim to have missed the NK target. If Doc and Tracker are scum together then we're really screwed since they can back each other up. Claims in this setup create too much WIFOM.
So you think we should just lynch people regardless of what they claim? So if someone gets to L-1 and claims doc, we should go on and lynch them? Thank you for making me feel even better about my vote.
If I was run up now and claimed Doc, would you unvote? My point is that claims carry a lot less weight in this setup since any role can be any alignment. Not lynching a scummy player just because of their role doesn't work here. If a player claims at L-1 we can discuss then how we should proceed, but it shouldn't be a "get out of lynch free" card as it would in a normal setup.
Further thoughts coming later (once my phone has charged a bit.)
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
I'm town reading you and Nacho and therefore don't believe you would recommend that course of action unless you truly felt it was the beat course. I don't get the same vibe from Iso, and the way he presented it highlights the fact that, unless we hit scum in the two lynches, we're in LyLo. So he agrees with the general consensus, but only because it gives scumIso the best odds of winning.
Why are you townreading two players who made a plan you have already admitted is scummy?
Are you ignoring the fact the plan is scummy simply because you're townreading them? Are you always okay with your townreads being scummy, and you just "believe in them"?
Why do you think scum Iso would so blatantly be in support of such an, as you called it, scummy plan?
It does look scummy, but as Nacho's said, would scumRhand do something so blatant? Rhand's working on his plan, one that gives town the most info and time. I don't agree with giving scum a free NK before any lynches occur, but I can understand why he believes it's a good plan. My personal belief is that we should lynch 1 toDay. If we get it right, we hit one of the scum with the lynch, leaving us in a strong position for toMorrow.
Before we go in circles, thank you for agreeing that you do think it was scummy and the only reason you are passing it off is "bcus meta", which really means there is no good reason to ignore it.
Should we all abandon the idea of Rhand being scum because of meta always?
I've realised that I blundered in asking that, thought I had caught onto something but I misread a post.
So basically, you agree it's fishing. Again, thank you.
If I was run up now and claimed Doc, would you unvote? My point is that claims carry a lot less weight in this setup since any role can be any alignment. Not lynching a scummy player just because of their role doesn't work here. If a player claims at L-1 we can discuss then how we should proceed, but it shouldn't be a "get out of lynch free" card as it would in a normal setup.
I would definitely unvote to at least discuss, and if you weren't CC'ed, we'd figure it out from there. But blatantly saying you don't think someone should at least defend themselves if they are a PR and we should just hammer anyway is overeager and inherently not very town.
>Dota admits he was fishing Iso's role
>Dota singles out Iso for a plan other people also made
>Dota protects Rhand because it's too obvious for scum to do, but admits it is scummy
>Iso is apparently obvious scum for being obvious
>Iso's townreads apparently support a plan he thinks is so scummy another player deserves to be lynched for it
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
Looking at how you and Nacho presented your cases for the plan, compared to how Iso did, yes. He outright admits that we end up in LyLo toMorrow if we have two mislynches and doesn't seem concerned about it. Compare that to who he's pushing as scum (You, me, Rhand, Killjoy) and it looks to me like a scumploy to maximise the mislynches and endgame town.
I see you obviously did not read my posts as I requested, DoT.
If you had, you'd know why what you're saying is a blatant misrep.
-
@Grimclaw: I like people to think for themselves. I'm very Socratic in my approach to Mafia. If I can get people to think that their reads are stemming from their own ideas by asking them somewhat rhetorical questions, it not only clarifies my own reads to myself, but also encourages them to take a step back and critically analyze the game. I realize this is unorthodox, but you either get "SocratesIso" or "BulldogIso" and nobody likes being on the receiving end of the latter.
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
"Iso seems to think something Grimclaw said could be indicative of a scum mindset. Golly gee, maybe I should re-read Grimclaw's posts and see if I can figure out Iso's angle, not only to give more depth to my Grimclaw read but also to determine Iso's mindset behind why he's approaching the game in the way that he is!"
^ This is about what I expect should happen whenever I make a post like that.
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
Not really. His posts are boring so far, and the way he plays as town makes me inclined to think he's scum when he's town, so I'm giving him some time to post something that doesn't make me sigh, roll my eyes, and keep scrolling.
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
The reason that's my thought on this is because of prefer not to tell the scum who the PRS are. They already know which ones are town. Telling them which to kill is dumb.
We should no Lynch because that decreases the number of town that will die. Scum are working together and if we lynch multiple times with minimal info, scum have the advantage. If we no Lynch first, scum have to kill someone without knowing who's a pr.
You could direct PRS ask you want but since scum really don't have to lot about targets, then coordinating targets with them (which is what this is) will prove ineffective.
KoolKoal: Feel free to take this with a grain of salt since self meta isn't particularly helpful, but I think I get scumread mostly for style over substance, but also for a certain lack of substance over style. It's not so much what I AM posting most of the time (though sometimes that can seem bad) but what I'm NOT posting. I've been told I come to non-obvious conclusions a lot, so when I post, quite a bit of the time there's jumps in logic that people can't follow and they think that's scummy. I get that accusation about a lot of questions I ask specifically. People call them "busy work" when the questions are legit etc.
As far as things to ignore, I can't think of anything. I would suggest you focus less on what I'm doing and more on how I'm doing it. That's probably more likely to be accurate. Like I've just said, what I do tends to come off a little weird, but if you look for how I do it, mindset comes into play and maybe you figure out something useful.
The reason that's my thought on this is because of prefer not to tell the scum who the PRS are. They already know which ones are town. Telling them which to kill is dumb.
We should no Lynch because that decreases the number of town that will die. Scum are working together and if we lynch multiple times with minimal info, scum have the advantage. If we no Lynch first, scum have to kill someone without knowing who's a pr.
You could direct PRS ask you want but since scum really don't have to lot about targets, then coordinating targets with them (which is what this is) will prove ineffective.
How does no lynch decrease the number of town that will die?
If you were scum, would you rather A) get the opportunity to shoot someone immediately, or B) only get the opportunity to shoot someone after trying to dodge the lynch for two weeks?
Like you are legitimately one of my favorite Mafia players - so what do you think of DoT and Grimclaw (and why?), since we clearly do not agree on Rgand, despite my asking you to explain why?
For clarification, just because I disagree with a specific point of yours doesn't mean that I disagree with the read; I don't think that Rhand giving a suboptimal plan was scummy, but I don't like that he's lurking now and, more importantly, I don't like that he let you attack him as much as he did. From how I understand the dynamic between you two, Rhand is usually active and usually pretty paranoid of you in general but is completely lacking that paranoia now while you attack him. I think DoT and Grimclaw are both town at the moment, Grimclaw over DoT at the moment; I really liked Grimclaw's approach to Ghosting recently and thought it looked super town so really don't understand your scumread there. I'm planning on making a reads list at the end of this catchup, so I'll answer your question in full by then.
I'm still confused why you aren't as gung-ho about two lynches as I am; I'm reading you as town, I was expecting you to read me as town, I don't see any way that we lose if we have two lynches today; one scum down today means we get a tracker clear, scum only get one shot at shooting one of us and have to deal with watcher/bodyguard/doctor and thus will probably not successfully shoot one of us, and I really can't see us losing in 5p LyLo when we have 3 lynches to catch one scum, even if we have to accelerate those lynches a bit. Again, I understand activity concerns, but giving up on 2 lynches before even attempting it when it is very likely to result in a win seems bleh.
I like DoT's opening a lot, actually. I like the aggressiveness he has in going after Iso, and I don't think his points are poor even if I think they are misguided. His asking if Iso was the Ascetic or not because of his contradiction in how he approached the role is interesting; I don't think that DoT as scum decides that he wants the Ascetic to out for a free kill and then finds such a creative and yet utterly ineffective way to rolefish. If he realized that he wanted the Ascetic to out and wanted to out him, I think it's far more likely he would agree with Iso's line of thought that was pushing Ascetic as a miller role that needed to out immediately as opposed to just blatantly asking. I also thought that his thought process on Rhand wasn't terrible; missing a step, but possessing that thought process and attacking Iso for going after an easy target makes sense.
@DoT: I believe that Rhand's plan is alignment neutral. If he is town, then he believes in the plan. If he is scum, then he still believes in the plan; I don't think that Rhand as scum would believe that he could get a suboptimal plan over on the town and thus is probably suggesting what he feels is the optimal plan for towncred. Does that make sense to you?
[It does look scummy, but as Nacho's said, would scumRhand do something so blatant? Rhand's working on his plan, one that gives town the most info and time. I don't agree with giving scum a free NK before any lynches occur, but I can understand why he believes it's a good plan. My personal belief is that we should lynch 1 toDay. If we get it right, we hit one of the scum with the lynch, leaving us in a strong position for toMorrow.
The lynching 2 Day 1 plan is all about getting as many lynches as possible before hitting LyLo; if we lynch one Day 1 and then go to night, Day 2 probably starts with 6 players alive, meaning there's a possibility we'd be in MyLo but wouldn't know it. Unless we no lynch first (which seems stupid because it gives scum a free kill), we have a chance of being in endgame if we don't deliver on a lynch today; thus, we should maximize our chances of delivering on a lynch. Does that make sense?
Quote from Ghosting »
Not fishing, just wondering why the sudden about face on the Ascetic role specifically, but no mention of the other that he recommended be given lynch immunity.
Asking someone: are you the ascetic, is fishing. What other answer do you expect to get?
I've realised that I blundered in asking that, thought I had caught onto something but I misread a post.
Why did you misread specifically?
Also addressing Ghosting's "if you ran someone up and they claimed doc, would you still lynch them?": **** yes I would lynch them. Claims mean nothing in this game.
@Ghosting: so what I was sort of getting at with my previous questions of you, is that you're doing the same with DoTA as he's doing with Iso. Several people including myself have outright said multiple times that claims would make absolutely no difference in this game. And yet you repeatedly bring that up as a major reason to attack DoTA, without even mentioning it for others.
Iso, this was the piece from Grimclaw that I really, really liked. I think that this was a bit of a Socratic Grimclaw post (where he urged Ghosting to look through his ISO in order to find that he was pushing that claims made no difference in this game); I think that this approach had a hell of a lot more depth than most scum approaches.
The fact that it hasn't is a pretty strong indicator to me that DoT isn't trying to solve the game.
Or that he doesn't understand your approach; I think that DoT is trying to solve the game as indicated by him not only suspecting you, but detailing your general strategy and the lynches you plan on taking to get there. I don't think his reasoning is rock solid, but his intentions are as pure as the driven snow.
Grimclaw - I think that Grimclaw's thoughts on strategy is pretty sound, makes it seem like he's working genuinely to arrive at the best possible way to play this setup. Two particular events make me think that his approach to strategy is genuine enough to get a townread for it - I think that his "ascetic should not claim" argument in particular was a damn good one that didn't actually cross my mind if I thought about it. The more important piece of this townread, however, is his approach to Ghosting - when he noticed Ghosting attacking DoT for his approach to claims, Grimclaw encouraged Ghosting to read through his ISO and ask him a question to see if that Grimclaw had an identical approach to DoT re: claims.
DoTArchon - I think that DoT's displayed aggression towards Iso was pretty impressive if he was scum; I can follow his thought process pretty clearly and think that he is earnestly attempting to game solve. I think that the major lines against him (rolefishing! isn't game solving! says claims don't matter!) suck.
TOWN WITH TREPIDATIONS:
Iso - I think that Iso as scum is far more focused on maintaining an image than he is here, and generally like his vibe. This is very a largely gut read for now, but I tend to trust my gut with Iso.
mallorean_thug - Mallorean has had a pretty strong opening so far; I like their (do you prefer he/she/their/other ?) strategy thoughts right now simply because of how thorough they are and how genuinely they seem to believe them. Right now, the only thing that worries me so far is the lack of scumhunting which is not such a big deal because I don't think anyone's exactly been doing a ton of that until recently.
SCUM WITH TREPIDATIONS:
Ghosting - His early aggressiveness was okay, but I didn't like how it was centered on DoT, who I feel is probably an easy target. His case seems to be "haha, your logic is wrong!" while he ignores approximately the rest of the game, which seems like a scum tactics. The things that hold me back from a full scumread of Ghosting is that his later confidence in DoT being scum seems believable enough.
SCUM:
Killjoy - His entrance to this game is equivalent to offering some useless commentary on the setup that doesn't take into account what anyone said and failing to scumhunt even a little bit. His entrance looks worse than anyone else's in the game.
Rhand - My scumread on Rhand is less based on his opening (I thought that was fine), and more based on his response after Iso started pushing him; if he was town, I'd expect that to send up a red flag in his head, and even if he didn't have the time to respond in full, I'd expect some sort of response or acknowledgement, but instead all we get is "wow you guys are busy".
Vote: Rhand FoS: Killjoy
I'm being especially aggressive with voting here because I think that it will help encourage the two lynch proposal for today, strongly consider everyone else doing the same. This is also the only time I've remembered actually using FoS in a long, long time, but I think that staying organized will also help people and so here I am. Sorry for the long posting; will probably make posts that are more readable when I don't have so much crap to catch up on at once.
Actually, once I get back to New York on Sunday night, I plan to explain why Grimclaw's opening and follow-up were iffy to me; that said, I rather like his recent exchanges with me, and was going to sit on that a bit longer to see if anything else shook out from that, but there's just not enough activity to justify keeping that up with as short a deadline as we have.
Nacho, do you think that DoT not reading my posts is indicative of his alignment? His issues with me are very easily answered upon careful reading of my posts, so I'm a little baffled that he hasn't tried to correct his tunnel. Do you think this is an experience thing, or what? As townDoT, I feel like I'd personally be a bit more excited if I felt like I caught scumIso; but his attention feels diverted, if you know what I mean - almost as if he doesn't actually believe his read on me. I just feel like he should be engaging me more if he thinks I'm actually scum.
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
Nacho, do you think that DoT not reading my posts is indicative of his alignment? His issues with me are very easily answered upon careful reading of my posts, so I'm a little baffled that he hasn't tried to correct his tunnel. Do you think this is an experience thing, or what? As townDoT, I feel like I'd personally be a bit more excited if I felt like I caught scumIso; but his attention feels diverted, if you know what I mean - almost as if he doesn't actually believe his read on me. I just feel like he should be engaging me more if he thinks I'm actually scum.
I think part of it is understanding your posts better (reading more closely) and some of it is asking better questions, which I do think is something that comes with experience. For example, you didn't explicitly say why you thought that Ascetic should get lynch immunity originally, meaning that DoT's intended question would have been a perfectly acceptable one.
His concerns about you pushing Rhand for the reasons you did early were worded poorly, but mirrored what I challenged you on early and was something that was already answered, which would have been solved by a closer reading of your posts.
His concerns about you pushing a plan that could lead to scum autowin lacked the comprehension that ALL posts had the potential to lead to scum autowin (as evidenced by him proposing a plan that could lead to scum win shortly after), but that seemed like the kind of point that people bring up when they've already convinced themselves of something.
I suppose you're right that he could be engaging you more thoroughly, but I think that what he's done so far shows that he's at least trying; I'm interested in his followups towards you once he answers my piece towards him in #107, though; your push on Rhand seems to be the meat of his case against you, so his response should result in something interesting.
------
@Grimclaw: I think that offering reads when I get them ends up being more productive than waiting for others to generate content, and don't think that it takes away from Iso's ability to read DoT; I've offered a possible defense for him, sure, but I've also forced him to evolve his read based on my response to his Rhand!town case. I also think it would be fairly silly of Iso to ask me for my DoT thoughts if he actually didn't want my DoT thoughts.
Fun fact: My original "claim with lynch immunity" list did NOT include the Ascetic but then I realized we would strongly benefit from the Ascetic claiming and being a lynch target, but as I was altering my post to reflect this, I forgot to mention that the Ascetic should claim but NOT have lynch immunity. I realized what happened and immediately clarified with my next post.
I also referred to Ascetic as Miller in the sense that I felt we should handle it like a Miller - lynch them if they're scummy or we don't have better options, but otherwise, whatever - it's immune to our investigations and so forth. My point was that we should not lynch the Ascetic just for being the Ascetic, but that we should at least know who they are.
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
I have a feeling Iso's push for the ascetic to claim has at least some significance (although no idea what honestly). It could be that the ascetic isn't scum, and scum are worried they're going to waste a shot. Alternatively, Iso could be fishing for others who also feel the same way, to out PRs. This is assuming Iso is scum.
Assuming Iso is town, the only reason he'd want to push for the ascetic to claim would be because he's a PR, right? But as a PR, I don't think you'd be so obvious about it.
I'd like Rhand to tell me what he thinks of Dota as well.
Also, I'm comfortable voting Rhand as I still believe the Rhand/Dota dichotomy will be telling, however I'd like to hear more from him seeing as we have almost nothing yet.
I have a feeling Iso's push for the ascetic to claim has at least some significance (although no idea what honestly). It could be that the ascetic isn't scum, and scum are worried they're going to waste a shot. Alternatively, Iso could be fishing for others who also feel the same way, to out PRs. This is assuming Iso is scum.
Assuming Iso is town, the only reason he'd want to push for the ascetic to claim would be because he's a PR, right? But as a PR, I don't think you'd be so obvious about it.
I'd like Rhand to tell me what he thinks of Dota as well.
...or he just thought that having the Ascetic claim was the best line of action.
Why do you think that this isn't the case?
Are you scumreading Iso? Do you think that DoT and Iso are scum together?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
How do you expect investigative types to benefit when there's no wagons to base their judgments off of?
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
"Hey guys, instead of giving the town analysis tools, let's just give the scum a free kill"
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
Are you the Ascetic?
My first thought when I read this was that only scum would want a no lynch, but the more I think about it the more I realise that no scum would openly push for something so obviously scummy. Giving scum a free NK is a terrible idea...
Do you truly believe Rhand is scum or are you going for the easy lynch?
[/quote]*insert dirty mom joke here*
I spoke with Johnny privately to say I was on holiday but would post as soon as I returned.
So you advocate a plan that can very likely result in an auto-lose.
Vote: Iso
Are you the Ascetic?
My first thought when I read this was that only scum would want a no lynch, but the more I think about it the more I realise that no scum would openly push for something so obviously scummy. Giving scum a free NK is a terrible idea...
Do you truly believe Rhand is scum or are you going for the easy lynch?
[/quote]*insert dirty mom joke here*
I spoke with Johnny privately to say I was on holiday but would post as soon as I returned.
So you advocate a plan that can very likely result in an auto-lose.
Vote: Iso
Is your only reason for not acting on the scuminess because it's "too obvious"? Or do you have other reasons? Do you then agree it is scummy?
Definitely noting the Rhand/Dota relationship, need to pay attention to that.
Dota: Why is what Rhand doing not scummy because it's too obvious, but what Iso is doing is scummy, but somehow not "too obvious"? Where do you draw the line for what behaviours are written off because they're too obvious?
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
And before I forget, Vote: Dota.
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
Not fishing, just wondering why the sudden about face on the Ascetic role specifically, but no mention of the other that he recommended be given lynch immunity.
I don't think there should be claims at all this game. If a player gets to L-1 and claims Doc, there's no guarantee they're town and we can't test it since they can claim to have missed the NK target. If Doc and Tracker are scum together then we're really screwed since they can back each other up. Claims in this setup create too much WIFOM.
Why add the "before I forget" instead of just voting me if you think I'm scum?
So the question I asked: do you then agree it is still scummy? You're pardoning it because it's "super obvious", but do you agree that it's scummy? I'd also like a response to Grimclaw's question (why you singled out Iso).
Asking someone: are you the ascetic, is fishing. What other answer do you expect to get?
So you think we should just lynch people regardless of what they claim? So if someone gets to L-1 and claims doc, we should go on and lynch them? Thank you for making me feel even better about my vote.
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
I'll be at school for the next couple of answers, but I'll make sure to in my next post.
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
Ascetic claiming is not a good idea.
2. I don't find "alive too long" to be a reliable tell in any form of the word, and don't find the loss of that tell to be particularly significant. Iso is the player with the biggest rep in the game, but if he didn't die N1, I wouldn't be suspicious: hell, I wouldn't even be surprised. I'm pushing all of my cards on the table because it's a high priority to get everyone on the same page with the optimal strategy for this game. I don't have time to mess around and obfuscate things in order to trap scum because I don't know if pushing bad strategies is a scumtell for anyone here or not.
3. And I'm not advocating for claims, period. If you are the doctor and about to get lynched, your claim shouldn't save you, meaning that there is absolutely no point to claiming at all. The only only only claims that should possibly pop are are Ascetic or Bodyguard roles; both can confirm themselves by dying, and while it's not likely that scum will shoot a scummy player for the free kill, it's a possibility that could be worth exploring.
4. I understand your concerns with not being able to get lynches done in time, but I don't think that it's productive to give up on 2 lynches for Day 1 just because you think we can't hit the activity requirements. I don't care so much if counterwagons exist or not; I only care that the two lynches that are being pushed are on people who make sense and is for a good reason. I don't see the point in not considering multiple suspects at once.
I think the extra flip of information is very important because of how that extra flip affects our chances of hitting scum before night. I think your concern about diminishing returns is a valid one, but also a concern that it makes more sense to monitor while the game is in progress; if we can't do two lynches, we can't do two lynches and will adjust if we must, but there's no reason not to push for two lynches while hope is in the air. My opinion on night actions are not necessarily that they are irrelevant; I just feel that they are being severely overvalued this game and am probably overselling their uselessness based on that concern.
I don't think the Ascetic should claim.
If a role needs to prove themselves and they haven't, they die. I don't care what results they have or don't have unless it's a result on scum.
Your plan sucks, and you haven't gone through any degree of effort in order to explain it.
We have limited lynches this game. Using one of those limited lynches for what is essentially a policy lynch is useless; you are the guiltiest of all players here as far as the overvaluing the strength of power roles goes, but, in your case, it seems like your overvaluing is genuine.
See my response to mallorean; it's dumb to assume that we won't be able to lynch twice before even pressing for two lynches. In your case, I think that having inactive games and having a reputation of people generally not being engaged in games is a plague to a mafia site and the best cure for that sort of thing is by being active and engaged and inspiring similar behaviors by example.
You're correct the only two options are lynch one and go to night or blitz until the game ends.
Blitzing until the game ends provides more lynches.
If we lynch scum before night, we're in a pretty solid place. If we lynch scum after night, we're in a less solid place. I think two lynches improves the odds of lynching scum D1 enough were it should be a strong priority as something that everyone should be active and involved enough to get done.
Vote: Killjoy
I don't like how you came into thread, offered no input on anyone's idea for strategy at all, offered no piece of scumhunting at all. If I was trying to envision how I expected scum to enter the game, this is what I would picture.
Sorry for multi-posts, got cut off a bunch.
Is this something you still believe?
Your negatives seem to greatly outweigh the positive, which itself is barely a positive. If you're in support of this idea, and it has such a big risk, why take that risk?
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
Lol.
I will say that massclaims are dumb because roles aren't alignment specific. Telling mafia who is who doesn't help town.
Like you are legitimately one of my favorite Mafia players - so what do you think of DoT and Grimclaw (and why?), since we clearly do not agree on Rgand, despite my asking you to explain why?
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
Like you are legitimately one of my favorite Mafia players - so what do you think of DoT and Grimclaw (and why?), since we clearly do not agree on Rgand, despite my asking you to explain why?
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
Nacho, my "can you clear that up for me" was with regards to your read on Rhand. Which I do not believe you have done, yet.
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
Killjoy (1) - Nachomamma8
Grimclaw
Rhand (2) - Iso, Grimclaw
DoTArchon (1) - Ghosting
Nachomamma8
Ghosting (1) - mallorean_thug
Iso
mallorean_thug
With 8 alive, it takes 5 to lynch. Deadline is July 17th 11:59pm.
The GJ way path to no lynching:
It does look scummy, but as Nacho's said, would scumRhand do something so blatant? Rhand's working on his plan, one that gives town the most info and time. I don't agree with giving scum a free NK before any lynches occur, but I can understand why he believes it's a good plan. My personal belief is that we should lynch 1 toDay. If we get it right, we hit one of the scum with the lynch, leaving us in a strong position for toMorrow.
I've realised that I blundered in asking that, thought I had caught onto something but I misread a post.
If I was run up now and claimed Doc, would you unvote? My point is that claims carry a lot less weight in this setup since any role can be any alignment. Not lynching a scummy player just because of their role doesn't work here. If a player claims at L-1 we can discuss then how we should proceed, but it shouldn't be a "get out of lynch free" card as it would in a normal setup.
Further thoughts coming later (once my phone has charged a bit.)
Can more of you at least pretend to be town? Between Rhand, Grimclaw, Killjoy, and DoT, I'd be glad to lynch all four toDay.
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
Why are you townreading two players who made a plan you have already admitted is scummy?
Are you ignoring the fact the plan is scummy simply because you're townreading them? Are you always okay with your townreads being scummy, and you just "believe in them"?
Why do you think scum Iso would so blatantly be in support of such an, as you called it, scummy plan?
Before we go in circles, thank you for agreeing that you do think it was scummy and the only reason you are passing it off is "bcus meta", which really means there is no good reason to ignore it.
Should we all abandon the idea of Rhand being scum because of meta always?
So basically, you agree it's fishing. Again, thank you.
I would definitely unvote to at least discuss, and if you weren't CC'ed, we'd figure it out from there. But blatantly saying you don't think someone should at least defend themselves if they are a PR and we should just hammer anyway is overeager and inherently not very town.
Also, Dota continues to not scumhunt.
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
>Dota singles out Iso for a plan other people also made
>Dota protects Rhand because it's too obvious for scum to do, but admits it is scummy
>Iso is apparently obvious scum for being obvious
>Iso's townreads apparently support a plan he thinks is so scummy another player deserves to be lynched for it
Btw Dota, do you think I'm town or scum?
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
If you had, you'd know why what you're saying is a blatant misrep.
-
@Grimclaw: I like people to think for themselves. I'm very Socratic in my approach to Mafia. If I can get people to think that their reads are stemming from their own ideas by asking them somewhat rhetorical questions, it not only clarifies my own reads to myself, but also encourages them to take a step back and critically analyze the game. I realize this is unorthodox, but you either get "SocratesIso" or "BulldogIso" and nobody likes being on the receiving end of the latter.
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
You'd also know why I'm scumreading you.
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
^ This is about what I expect should happen whenever I make a post like that.
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
We should no Lynch because that decreases the number of town that will die. Scum are working together and if we lynch multiple times with minimal info, scum have the advantage. If we no Lynch first, scum have to kill someone without knowing who's a pr.
You could direct PRS ask you want but since scum really don't have to lot about targets, then coordinating targets with them (which is what this is) will prove ineffective.
How does no lynch decrease the number of town that will die?
If you were scum, would you rather A) get the opportunity to shoot someone immediately, or B) only get the opportunity to shoot someone after trying to dodge the lynch for two weeks?
Do you have any reads?
For clarification, just because I disagree with a specific point of yours doesn't mean that I disagree with the read; I don't think that Rhand giving a suboptimal plan was scummy, but I don't like that he's lurking now and, more importantly, I don't like that he let you attack him as much as he did. From how I understand the dynamic between you two, Rhand is usually active and usually pretty paranoid of you in general but is completely lacking that paranoia now while you attack him. I think DoT and Grimclaw are both town at the moment, Grimclaw over DoT at the moment; I really liked Grimclaw's approach to Ghosting recently and thought it looked super town so really don't understand your scumread there. I'm planning on making a reads list at the end of this catchup, so I'll answer your question in full by then.
I'm still confused why you aren't as gung-ho about two lynches as I am; I'm reading you as town, I was expecting you to read me as town, I don't see any way that we lose if we have two lynches today; one scum down today means we get a tracker clear, scum only get one shot at shooting one of us and have to deal with watcher/bodyguard/doctor and thus will probably not successfully shoot one of us, and I really can't see us losing in 5p LyLo when we have 3 lynches to catch one scum, even if we have to accelerate those lynches a bit. Again, I understand activity concerns, but giving up on 2 lynches before even attempting it when it is very likely to result in a win seems bleh.
I like DoT's opening a lot, actually. I like the aggressiveness he has in going after Iso, and I don't think his points are poor even if I think they are misguided. His asking if Iso was the Ascetic or not because of his contradiction in how he approached the role is interesting; I don't think that DoT as scum decides that he wants the Ascetic to out for a free kill and then finds such a creative and yet utterly ineffective way to rolefish. If he realized that he wanted the Ascetic to out and wanted to out him, I think it's far more likely he would agree with Iso's line of thought that was pushing Ascetic as a miller role that needed to out immediately as opposed to just blatantly asking. I also thought that his thought process on Rhand wasn't terrible; missing a step, but possessing that thought process and attacking Iso for going after an easy target makes sense.
@DoT: I believe that Rhand's plan is alignment neutral. If he is town, then he believes in the plan. If he is scum, then he still believes in the plan; I don't think that Rhand as scum would believe that he could get a suboptimal plan over on the town and thus is probably suggesting what he feels is the optimal plan for towncred. Does that make sense to you?
The lynching 2 Day 1 plan is all about getting as many lynches as possible before hitting LyLo; if we lynch one Day 1 and then go to night, Day 2 probably starts with 6 players alive, meaning there's a possibility we'd be in MyLo but wouldn't know it. Unless we no lynch first (which seems stupid because it gives scum a free kill), we have a chance of being in endgame if we don't deliver on a lynch today; thus, we should maximize our chances of delivering on a lynch. Does that make sense?
Why did you misread specifically?
Also addressing Ghosting's "if you ran someone up and they claimed doc, would you still lynch them?": **** yes I would lynch them. Claims mean nothing in this game.
Iso, this was the piece from Grimclaw that I really, really liked. I think that this was a bit of a Socratic Grimclaw post (where he urged Ghosting to look through his ISO in order to find that he was pushing that claims made no difference in this game); I think that this approach had a hell of a lot more depth than most scum approaches.
Or that he doesn't understand your approach; I think that DoT is trying to solve the game as indicated by him not only suspecting you, but detailing your general strategy and the lynches you plan on taking to get there. I don't think his reasoning is rock solid, but his intentions are as pure as the driven snow.
Grimclaw - I think that Grimclaw's thoughts on strategy is pretty sound, makes it seem like he's working genuinely to arrive at the best possible way to play this setup. Two particular events make me think that his approach to strategy is genuine enough to get a townread for it - I think that his "ascetic should not claim" argument in particular was a damn good one that didn't actually cross my mind if I thought about it. The more important piece of this townread, however, is his approach to Ghosting - when he noticed Ghosting attacking DoT for his approach to claims, Grimclaw encouraged Ghosting to read through his ISO and ask him a question to see if that Grimclaw had an identical approach to DoT re: claims.
DoTArchon - I think that DoT's displayed aggression towards Iso was pretty impressive if he was scum; I can follow his thought process pretty clearly and think that he is earnestly attempting to game solve. I think that the major lines against him (rolefishing! isn't game solving! says claims don't matter!) suck.
TOWN WITH TREPIDATIONS:
Iso - I think that Iso as scum is far more focused on maintaining an image than he is here, and generally like his vibe. This is very a largely gut read for now, but I tend to trust my gut with Iso.
mallorean_thug - Mallorean has had a pretty strong opening so far; I like their (do you prefer he/she/their/other ?) strategy thoughts right now simply because of how thorough they are and how genuinely they seem to believe them. Right now, the only thing that worries me so far is the lack of scumhunting which is not such a big deal because I don't think anyone's exactly been doing a ton of that until recently.
SCUM WITH TREPIDATIONS:
Ghosting - His early aggressiveness was okay, but I didn't like how it was centered on DoT, who I feel is probably an easy target. His case seems to be "haha, your logic is wrong!" while he ignores approximately the rest of the game, which seems like a scum tactics. The things that hold me back from a full scumread of Ghosting is that his later confidence in DoT being scum seems believable enough.
SCUM:
Killjoy - His entrance to this game is equivalent to offering some useless commentary on the setup that doesn't take into account what anyone said and failing to scumhunt even a little bit. His entrance looks worse than anyone else's in the game.
Rhand - My scumread on Rhand is less based on his opening (I thought that was fine), and more based on his response after Iso started pushing him; if he was town, I'd expect that to send up a red flag in his head, and even if he didn't have the time to respond in full, I'd expect some sort of response or acknowledgement, but instead all we get is "wow you guys are busy".
Vote: Rhand
FoS: Killjoy
I'm being especially aggressive with voting here because I think that it will help encourage the two lynch proposal for today, strongly consider everyone else doing the same. This is also the only time I've remembered actually using FoS in a long, long time, but I think that staying organized will also help people and so here I am. Sorry for the long posting; will probably make posts that are more readable when I don't have so much crap to catch up on at once.
Nacho, do you think that DoT not reading my posts is indicative of his alignment? His issues with me are very easily answered upon careful reading of my posts, so I'm a little baffled that he hasn't tried to correct his tunnel. Do you think this is an experience thing, or what? As townDoT, I feel like I'd personally be a bit more excited if I felt like I caught scumIso; but his attention feels diverted, if you know what I mean - almost as if he doesn't actually believe his read on me. I just feel like he should be engaging me more if he thinks I'm actually scum.
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
I think part of it is understanding your posts better (reading more closely) and some of it is asking better questions, which I do think is something that comes with experience. For example, you didn't explicitly say why you thought that Ascetic should get lynch immunity originally, meaning that DoT's intended question would have been a perfectly acceptable one.
His concerns about you pushing Rhand for the reasons you did early were worded poorly, but mirrored what I challenged you on early and was something that was already answered, which would have been solved by a closer reading of your posts.
His concerns about you pushing a plan that could lead to scum autowin lacked the comprehension that ALL posts had the potential to lead to scum autowin (as evidenced by him proposing a plan that could lead to scum win shortly after), but that seemed like the kind of point that people bring up when they've already convinced themselves of something.
I suppose you're right that he could be engaging you more thoroughly, but I think that what he's done so far shows that he's at least trying; I'm interested in his followups towards you once he answers my piece towards him in #107, though; your push on Rhand seems to be the meat of his case against you, so his response should result in something interesting.
@Grimclaw: I think that offering reads when I get them ends up being more productive than waiting for others to generate content, and don't think that it takes away from Iso's ability to read DoT; I've offered a possible defense for him, sure, but I've also forced him to evolve his read based on my response to his Rhand!town case. I also think it would be fairly silly of Iso to ask me for my DoT thoughts if he actually didn't want my DoT thoughts.
I also referred to Ascetic as Miller in the sense that I felt we should handle it like a Miller - lynch them if they're scummy or we don't have better options, but otherwise, whatever - it's immune to our investigations and so forth. My point was that we should not lynch the Ascetic just for being the Ascetic, but that we should at least know who they are.
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
Assuming Iso is town, the only reason he'd want to push for the ascetic to claim would be because he's a PR, right? But as a PR, I don't think you'd be so obvious about it.
I'd like Rhand to tell me what he thinks of Dota as well.
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
...or he just thought that having the Ascetic claim was the best line of action.
Why do you think that this isn't the case?
Are you scumreading Iso? Do you think that DoT and Iso are scum together?