Hmm, several posts I should be addressing here. But first, I would like to
extend.A useless followup from a useless question. Your "context" could have been provided much better by asking a meaningful reading question. In any case, there were 5 other useless questions you asked along with that one (and another one to me straight afterwards).
I'm not going to put a context to a read
with a read. That is silly, and self forfilling. If he does something that could either be a newbie tell or a scum tell, I want to know beforehand if he is a newbie. I can't tell if he is a newbie by pressing for scum, it dosn't work like that.
As far as I can tell he gave a response to your question and then you shoved the words in his mouth while voting him. So I have no idea what this is supposed to mean.
If I shoved the word in he's mouth, he took them happily. He agreeded with both points before I voted for him. He had a chance to defend himself before I voted for him, and he didn't take it, so if he now thinks I am putting words into he's mouth, it is clearly because he dosn't like the vote I put on him.
We're on a forum. That allows you to look at old threads (indeed, that's how I worked out which game it was).
It is a lot easier to ask you what game you were in than to go through every mafia game, check the player list and roles, and check when you joined. When you want to know something about a player, why not ask? I wanted to know what game you had last played as town, so I asked. But for some reason you seem to object to me seeking information.
None of them had any chance of producing a read on anyone. I could see this before the complete lack of meaningful followups. The fact that there were no meaningful followups is what proved me right. One of the questions was also (hilariously ineffective) buddying.
By themselves, no, they did not. I did not expect a single one of those questions to produce a read. They
did however provide me with useful infomation for when the game gets out of RVS.
Because you started asking about exactly why your questions were useless, and it seemed like a relevant point to that (in case you tried to cite your horrible misrepresentation as a success for your questions). You asked me the question, and now you're confused as to why I answered it, as far as I can tell.
That dosn't answer my question. I did not ask you why you were bringing it up now, I asked you why you did not bring it up before. Once again, if you think I am putting words into Josh's mouth, why not say so until I start to question you?
I remain unimpressed by Max's explanations. For all his floundering, though, he doesn't look that different from in the last Paranormal... where he acted like this and was town. Which still confuses me.
You know what makes me happy, Panda? When people bother to at least question me about my floundering. Because to be perfectly honest, it dosn't make me comfortable when people vote for pressure, or RVS or what ever, then just sit the vote there without pushing, and put it all down to floundering.
Panda: Do you have a second pick?
So this is the progression of MaxWhite's ideals on his questions, from newest to oldest. Now the newest MaxWhite is pretty solid on that his questions are good. Before that he was already getting a bit touchy about the subject of questions, but has yet to actually say that 'he' thinks they are good. Before that he is saying that he always gets told his questions are useless and shrugs it off.
MaxWhite-Tell us what merits you think there are in each particular question that make them 'good'.
Very well.
Jim: Always a pleasure! You know, I think I find your style of play the most entertaining to watch, glad to see you in this game. So, not much info given about each of the roles... How do you feel about that?
I have never played this game type before, as such I'm not exactly sure how everything works, and I'm totally in the dark about what scum we are facing. I don't know about you, but this worries me. Jim answeres honestly even when he is scum, from what I have seen, so asking him if this is something to be worried about was a safe way to get some hints on how to handle this, and boy did I get a useful reply!
The limited town role information isn't as much of an obstacle as it would have been if this were the first Supernatural Mafia, because there are previous games to look at and the town roles, as far as I know, haven't changed between them.
The problem is that the scum roles are still mostly unknown. So far there's been two rounds of Verevolves (1 and RP) and they act like a pretty standard scum team, with special verevolf roles to help them. There's been a Cult (2), and I don't quite remember how dangerous they were. And then there's been one round of Vampires (3), and they were viciously dangerous because they were a cult (in functionality, not name), and also because I was the Vampire Lord and converted Toaster who was a SK on Night 1.
What the makeup of the scumteam is drastically affects how dangerous they are, and unfortunately, there's no way for us to know how dangerous it is until Night 1, when we find out what the flavor of the kill is. This still doesn't tell us how many scum there are, and there's always the possibility of dangerous third parties.
Doing an excellent job of scumhunting is generally the best course of action, and especially so in this game.
To me, at least, this was a wealth of useful tips. I dare say this question was very well justified.
Vector: Good morning! I don't think I have ever asked you, do you enjoy playing as scum, or town more? Do you like to hunt or be hunted?
Vectors play tends to change depending on her mood. I wanted to know a little more about the relation there. Knowing how she feels playing as town and scum is handy .
Dariush: And here we are again. Did you learn anything from roguelike 2?
Just wondering if he was going to try to learn from past mistakes. Turns out the answer was no. Sort of disappointing, but it means we can expect the same level of useless town for games to come.
CrownOfFire: Hello! Hmm, have I seen you play before? Are you a good player or a new one?
We both know a new player plays differently from an old one. Knowing what one he I am dealing with helps, as you no doubt know by now. Just because you made the mistake of attacking a newbie for newbie tells dosn't mean we all want to.
Pandar: Panda? Pandar? Do you prefer with or without the r? Well, either way, who makes for a better lynch, somebody who seems a little scummy but there is nobody more clearly scum, or the guy that has been lurking all day?
Well firstly now I know what he likes to be called, but that wasn't the important part. I wanted to know a little about he's priorties when it came to lynches. How is that not useful?
jakeread1: First game... Well ok! How do you best plan to learn?
This was just a soft question to pull him into the game. Just as Josh said, when nobody is asking you questions you feel a little like an outsider, so I thought this would make for a nice welcome.
All I see in this is just a causal question to get someone possibly talking a bit, not to much unlike your own. What makes this such a crap question when yours are so good?
What would we ever expect from this sort of question beyond 'I don't have a scum buddy because I am not scum'? Well I don't know, so I asked him what he expected to get. Turns out he didn't know either, he was just trying to be Webba. I said I thought it was crap, and asked him to explain why it wasn't, rather than asserting that it was crap.
Interesting what he says about your opening questions here.
Is it? Tell me why? What did he say about my opening questions and why is it interesting Kilakan?
And then goes on to say that your questions are fine. Now in between these he does say that he was using it to judge your defensiveness, but frankly it didn't hit you as odd that he would go back and complement you after saying that your questions were buddying. It's also odd that when you ask if he meant the statements were buddying he says yes but you don't bother saying anything about that.
Oh, do you mean him saying my opening questions were buddying is interesting to you? Maybe you should read the thread.
Max:
Max: Why do you open RVS with buddying questions?
Wait, were the questions buddying, or the statements that went before them? I mean I come here to have fun, so I would rather be nice and sociable to the others playing, even if I am willing to hang their scummy ass, so the opening statements were friendly because I like a friendly game full of backstabbing.
Although if your sure it is the questions your talking about, I don't see it, could you clarify?
Yes, I meant the statements. Since you've done it as town, I see it as a null tell. Mostly I was looking for defensiveness. I'd say you're lightly defensive- enough to note, but not enough to hang.
You see Kilakan, he didn't think my opening questions
were buddying at all. There was no contradiction, but you would know that if you were paying attention.