SootShade 说:
Xardob: His discussion regarding Face's first post with Mag seems pretty innocent to me. Even though the argument was referencing his own play, I don't see a wolf really wanting to interject in favor of Face there.
I don't read Xardob as strongly as you do but I concur on the read. I will say I find it more common at least in my experience that a wolf interjects in favor of someone, as it tends to strengthen their diplomatic position and appear conscientious and easier to work with in the long term than someone who wagons thoughtlessly or stubbornly tunnels. No one likes those aspects of villaging, and they are weak aspects, but they are often villagery. Wolves appearing to be better and more suitable to work with and more reasonable than villagers are attempting to defeat villagers in the game of persuasion. Basically, flowery words to defeat stubborn/tunnelly villagers' tendencies to annoy other villagers. Helps at the very least in the short term.
Magorian: I don't like Mag's interpretation of Neoxardobism, if that's what caused him to poke at Vieira's behaviour and then completely abandon it, and then later pop into the Pizza/Face argument to offer something of no real weight to the discussion. In fact, where the latter went slightly beyond stating the obvious, I feel like it sabotaged Pizza's questioning of Face if anything. If I was prone to making rushed conclusions (totally
not the case, I might add
) I might say that this is a possible packmate interaction between Mag and Face. Beyond that, I just don't like the way he seems to be using his style to excuse floating past any discussion.
I am listening to this portion with great interest, and I've re-read it about three times. I might just not be following you on this. Can you go over your impression of Magorian again? I disagree with it but I am also not sure I fully understand what you're driving at. I read "NeoXardobism" as a joke and have not considered it in any way as part of my read, because I think referencing another player's style is amusing even if I don't understand the reference entirely.
Good jokes I tend to leave alone- 'humor' that causes utterly zero reaction in my gut reads wolfy to me, because certain things are only funny from a wolf perspective, and wolves force humor that isn't there to appear lighthearted, and often hide behind the excuse of this post is a joke.
I don't agree Mags sabotaged any part of our interaction.
I like that you're finding Phone to be a possible wolf and looking for his packmates, however, and examining people's reactions to my push on Phone. Please continue to do so, because even if I were wrong about Phone (
somehow, at this point) people's reactions to my push on Phone should indicate something about their process.
Pizza: A man after my own heart, his approach to the game is exactly what I like to see. Sadly he got stuck in an argument with Face right away, but I guess that was inevitable.
Why is it sad? If you are reading Phone as a lean of wolf greater than rand (mentioning possible packmates), then my pushing a wolf shouldn't be sad. Elaborate?
That interaction doesn't actually give me a lot to read him on, but his initial approach to the game seems distinctly innocent to me
Can you weigh this lean for me- how strongly are you reading me villager? Curiosity.
Face: I'm impressed by how he avoided full on misunderstandings this time around - maybe a consequence of adapting a more readable format for his quote wars? In any case, I appreciate both, and it gave me a chance to actually get a read on him this time around. To me it appears that he's arguing from a genuine standpoint, and I think this whole argument would offer him no benefit to engage in if he was scum - and despite similar behaviour regardless of role, I think his scum play is more considered. I also liked his initial reads.
No comment on his initial reads, as I'll have to look back and see them, but I entirely disagree. His argument appears to be purely smokescreen, manipulation, and dishonesty. Obviously you don't need my permission to read him genuine, but if I am attacking a villager in Phone I'd like to reverse.
What part of his argument do you find remotely genuine specifically, which posts, which quoted sentences? I see huge, glaring, downright obvious dishonesty. I can point you to specifics if you'd like. I kind of feel like if I'm right here, Phone is having a really bad wolf games due to not knowing how to handle an unknown player's style of pushing.
Llandy: I was happy to see a third player really interject into the Pizza/Face argument, but then I realized that Llandy did so only to argue her preferences. I know she likes to do that, and I know she doesn't like to make quick conclusions, but I would have thought she could make at least some kind of read on either of them based on the topic being discussed.
Yeah, I didn't see anything wolfy there but I thought that the interaction did not even break the surface and even misinterpreted the surface read. I would have liked to see deeper investment in what was happening, and a more serious attempt to read my posts for comprehension. I felt like Pharaoh did not deliberately misinterpret what I was saying, but seemed to wholly misunderstand me repeatedly, and thus I would like to interact more with Pharaoh and get on the same page.
Vieira: Vieira is definitely more nervous than he should ever be at this stage of the game. The extent he feels he has to justify his every word when questioned is excessive to say the least. But, even though this is something I generally think is extremely scummy, I have to admit that this is not uncharacteristic of Vieira regardless of his role.
Agreed, but here is my overall issue with this post- You say much that I agree with, some that I disagree with, but I don't see much in the way of risks being taken.
I'd love it if you went out on more of a limb and colored in your villager picture with more reasons and more blue, and your wolf picture with more reasons and more red. I don't think you're hedging, but I think you're being too cautious.
It's early Day One so I can't fault you that hard for it, but you've got a lot of thought contained within a somewhat neutral post. I usually see more and stronger leans from that much work. But this may be a difference in playstyle.
