-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
Popcorn Mafia 4 - Cycle 3 Deadline August 23 at 10PM EDT
- Thread starter Aura Guardian
- Start date
I just think it’s more likely that mafia posts will have less substance or more distraction/filler content since that seems like it would be beneficial to them.
Also I never said I was definitively sure that one of you is maf while the other isn’t, just saying that if it comes to that I side with you over him
It stands for “oh my god you suck”, but it’s when a player basically scumread someone back when they scumread you
It has a label of being a scumtell traditionally but not necessarily true that it always is
At what point do you want to shop the lower activity players?
This post was really bad btw, just to highlight it
It’s just buzzword shade over a real substantial read
I guess when we have to? It feels really data deficient to do it now because there's nothing to parse in a lot of their posts. At least shooting an active person gives us a useful confirmed town if we missed as opposed to someone who'll probably just show up to hipfire
tbc the reason why I think Texas is rationally (I.e. not just the vibes part) giving scum is cos he’s doing too much. There is not that much content in the thread, and it’s popcorn mafia there’s not really supposed to be.
It comes down to the conclusions he’s drawing are too strong for the justification he’s put behind them. The wording of his justifications is pretty absolute, he’s writing discursively and with sway, but the content of the justifications is pretty insufficient.
That’s why I’ll apologise if I’m wrong because if he is just town putting this much effort and WIM into things then it would feel bad asf to shoot him. And I think that’s what he’s gunning (hehe) for, every gunman will psych themselves out of actually shooting him because he is playing so high effort.
OTOH there’s an argument that it’s a low risk shot, particularly early in the game, because he’s either done or looks like he’s done the most solving in the game of anyone so far. Where most players are mulling about with only a couple reads at most, Texas has cast a wide net and has some confident conclusions despite the early game state. That’s a better gunman than most players right now. Does scum!Texas do that analysis, idrk. It’s a very gamebotty pov anyway, probably not one he’d expect town to land on early in the game so even if he considered it the risk vs reward would still give heavy scum incentive to play like this.
He didn’t push back on my game theory about how town should play this game, which is the opposite of how he’s playing it, which I feel like he should’ve done if he had the amount of conviction in his solving that he portrays he does in his posts. Yes it was a reaction test. What I said is technically true though, I’m not putting my undercooked takes in this thread til I’ve got the gun
It comes down to the conclusions he’s drawing are too strong for the justification he’s put behind them. The wording of his justifications is pretty absolute, he’s writing discursively and with sway, but the content of the justifications is pretty insufficient.
That’s why I’ll apologise if I’m wrong because if he is just town putting this much effort and WIM into things then it would feel bad asf to shoot him. And I think that’s what he’s gunning (hehe) for, every gunman will psych themselves out of actually shooting him because he is playing so high effort.
OTOH there’s an argument that it’s a low risk shot, particularly early in the game, because he’s either done or looks like he’s done the most solving in the game of anyone so far. Where most players are mulling about with only a couple reads at most, Texas has cast a wide net and has some confident conclusions despite the early game state. That’s a better gunman than most players right now. Does scum!Texas do that analysis, idrk. It’s a very gamebotty pov anyway, probably not one he’d expect town to land on early in the game so even if he considered it the risk vs reward would still give heavy scum incentive to play like this.
He didn’t push back on my game theory about how town should play this game, which is the opposite of how he’s playing it, which I feel like he should’ve done if he had the amount of conviction in his solving that he portrays he does in his posts. Yes it was a reaction test. What I said is technically true though, I’m not putting my undercooked takes in this thread til I’ve got the gun
And the vibes part is we literally haven’t mindmelded once afair and with the content quantity he’s put out that feels unlikely asf if he’s town but that’s not strong bc one or both of us could just be bad at the game, focus on the rational argument
Counterargument I had an undercooked s!clouds vibe whereas I think Texas townread him at some point (might’ve made the last part up idr lmao) so if I’m playing good, the lack of mindmelds is supporting evidence for me specifically GG
can you point to examples
it's not that he's confident in his conclusions, it's that he's confident in his justifications for those conclusions, and there's a big disparity between the strength of his justifications the strength he's portraying them with
when you make a full argument you also open yourself up to having more content to critique which is why I'm not telling Hydro to shoot him, I also just prefer having higher effort players in the game, but "other people are just saying stuff" isn't the same sphere
when you make a full argument you also open yourself up to having more content to critique which is why I'm not telling Hydro to shoot him, I also just prefer having higher effort players in the game, but "other people are just saying stuff" isn't the same sphere
fwiw I started typing that post and then a call came in LOL it was meant to be a chain
but no that's not what it is idk how else to word what I'm saying tbh
You clearly ignored the part where I agreed with your game theory post as technically optimal and practically irrelevant
i think in the end the idea that you could perceive someone's internal confidence in their own reads and that it's AI enough to make a call about it is wild. i wish i was more confident in my early reads, rofl. thats not AI(alignment indicative) that's AI(assertive indicative)
I don't agree, I think my justifications are sound and deserving of clear assessment, I've made clear where I'm uncertain of things and clear where I'm more certain.
Particularly in your case I read you accurately in the past as town and hard pocketed you as scum, and feel confident in my capacity to assess your emotional states.
You have indeed made that up. I had a slightly off feeling about clouds' post that wasn't concrete enough to pursue, no point bringing it up after he's flipped because it's not credible after the fact.