BEFORE I went to bed I typed something up for this but my computer ran out of battery so RIPBalki Bartokomous wrote: ↑Sat Jul 06, 2024 4:48 pm@Eden, I am going to respond point-by-point to your case. I know this will be a lot of text, but I hope you'll read it and engage with it. I am really writing it only for you because I doubt many others take the time to read it.
It seems like your first point here is that I fail to consider Sweet's fake claims last game. And your second point here is that my analysis is "questionable psychoabalysis."President Eden wrote: ↑Sat Jul 06, 2024 2:50 am1. His case on sweetandcool doesn’t seem organic to me. For readability I’m snipping the actual text, but leaving the hyperlink quote because for some reason this is the only URL tag that works on the forum now (click the green up arrow to follow to the post):
Balki starts with an acknowledgment that sweetandcool is a wild and crazy guy who isn’t afraid of bold gambits or public opinion about them. He then speculates about sweet’s possible motivations… but seems to focus entirely on the personal satisfaction sweet is set to gain from his antics. You’d think sweet is just some egomaniac big brain chasing the dopamine hit of Discord literally-whos fanning his balls over his brilliance. And sure, I imagine like most smart people, sweet enjoys a good ego stroke.
But sweet also wants to win, and fervently believes the current town meta regarding fakeclaims is net negative EV. We just watched him go for several dubious fakeclaims in the last game that got him miskilled and could have been the source of profound embarrassment. Balki knows all this. Why doesn’t he even discuss the possibility? Why does he analyze it through the lens of some questionable psychoanalysis?
On the first point, I am very much considering Sweet's prior fake claims and the profound embarrassment piece. These two paragraphs were in the middle of my analysis:
I don't think I can put it clearer than that. His claims this game were more of a rough facsimile, and timed in a way to garner eye rolls of a much different vigor.His gambit this game though looks different to me. He hard claimed Detective. Then hard claimed Desperado. Then hard claimed Detective. He did it all on a day when the real PRs would have no incentive to claim, and he did it assertively, without trying to avoid a daykill or vig shot.
To me -- this is "look at me" stuff that is very different than a normal Town!Sweet gambit, which is to role swap or fake a claim at a time when it makes sense, and has to be taken seriously. This is "look at me, look at me" for its own sake. And Sweet absolutely knew he was going to get eye rolls and frustration for it.
This is the whole point. Jumping into the start of the first day and hard claiming Detective is something that no "real" Detective in his right mind would do. Later hard claiming Desperado and insisting you are not joking is a joke itself.
These is an absolutely distinct and divergent sweetandcool, and you saying that I failed to account for sweet's prior fake claims is...not your best work.
On your second point, I am not going to trumpet by psychological credentials. I have none. But when I am stuck in a hole of confusion in this game, I find it useful to think about the God thread, and imagine the different scenarios of emerging from the game, and hearing who was Town and who was Scum, and trying to think about what makes more sense. That is the simple exercise that I am applying here.
I think that Sweet's prior embarrassment supports my case. I think he is more likely to engage in this parody of his prior play if he has a punch line he can say at the end. The only punch line I can think of is: "ha, I was scum! Gotcha!"
Of course I entertain the abvious tangible benefits of townies fake claiming PRs. I was fake claiming PRs well before it was cool. I have beyond "entertained" these tangible benefits, I have taken them back to my place and made them breakfast in the morning.President Eden wrote: ↑Sat Jul 06, 2024 2:50 amBalki doesn’t even entertain the obvious tangible benefits of sweet’s behavior. When a townie draws PR-related attention to himself but leaves the outcome ambiguous, that confuses town and mafia. We tend to focus more attention on town confusion because it’s more acute, it’s felt by more players, and because mafia players are historically risk-averse, temperamentally conservative creatures. What’s often lost, outside of the most dramatic examples, is that real value exists in confusing the mafia. If sweet had been nightkilled out of uncertainty over his role and flipped VT, sparing obvtown Vecna for a cycle, that’s a win for town. Even eating a roleblock is a minor win for town (and lo and behold, sweet claimed that he did, with no contradiction yet).
What you are ignoring is that I find Sweet's Day 1 to be of a different character than a fake claim in the ordinary sense. It is a parody of a fake claim. It is a fake claim when the actual players in those roles would never actually claim. There was no reason for the Investigatoor the Desperado to claim Day 1 unless they were about to be daykilled and needed help off the gallows. So anyone popping off about being either, in a hard way or a soft way, is less apt to confuse mafia than someone who is remaining entirely silent about their roles. I don't think Town!Sweet would see this differently. I know from experience that Town!Sweet is very good at fake claiming in a way that actually confuses Mafia.
I think you'll agree that this point is extremely weak and was probably only added to increase the number count of your "points." I have had a lot of reads in this game. I'd say I have been more sure of my Town reads than my Scum reads, but I have been out front on my Town reads (e.g., Flavius, KPOP, Vecna, brainbomb). I also haven't been very sure of my scum reads, but that's Day 1 for you.President Eden wrote: ↑Sat Jul 06, 2024 2:50 am2. Balki is in the “sweet spot” for active mafia. I say that acknowledging that I am too, but that’s fine, it’ll work itself out. He’s present in the thread, engaging with ideas, decidedly not lurking… but he doesn’t stand out as one of the stronger voices in the room. A good contrast here is Chaqa, who is only slightly more active by post count but has been a much more forceful participant in the thread. This level of activity allows Balki to skirt claims that he’s lurking or not invested, but it’s also excused him from committal reads. His post on sweet that I’m criticizing is the strongest stance he’s taken all game, and it’s still got issues as noted earlier.
So, I do see now that foodcoats retracted his Sheriff claim. I had not seen it when I made my post saying "Why not wait two days, see if Foody is NKed or CCed, and then make a decision on foodcoats?" I think that is pretty obvious if you read my post itself.President Eden wrote: ↑Sat Jul 06, 2024 2:50 am3. I mentioned that he’s avoided committal reads. Balki’s D1 was pretty ambivalent. (Fun fact, this was my word, then I removed it to avoid prejudging him, then I found that he described himself as ambivalent lol.) I don’t think his reasoning on not killing foodcoats holds up to scrutiny at all:
Note the timestamps and remember that EOD was at xx:15 rather than xx:00. (16:15 or 16:00 for me but probably different for y’all.) Balki doesn’t want to kill foodcoats because foodcoats hardclaimed Sheriff. foodcoats then tells Balki it’s a joke. Balki then tries to marshal people onto rdrivera to buy time for foodcoats’s claim to resolve itself…? And in the meantime, rdrivera is a true null for Balki:Balki Bartokomous wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2024 8:59 pmWhy not wait two days, see if Foody is NKed or CCed, and then make a decision on foodcoats?
Balki Bartokomous wrote: ↑Wed Jul 03, 2024 7:32 pmYou guys still want to kill food after that assless chaps quip? I don’t.
I am feeling ambivalent.
##vote rdrivera. I have him at Null. But I feel like I will have him at Null seven days from now as well. Let’s do a solid for future Balki, and maybe he is scum.
I also did not feel anyone had made a good case on foodcoats, and generally felt like him being scum was about as likely as anyone being randomly assigned scum -- maybe slightly less than random just based on him being pushed by other people and about to be the Day 1 daykill.
That is not "interesting" because the foodcoats fake claim was totally different in character than the Sweetandcool Day 1 claims for the reasons I explained above. The foodcoats fake claim came at a time when a PR would actually claim to save his own life.President Eden wrote: ↑Sat Jul 06, 2024 2:50 amAlso, isn’t it interesting that foodcoats’s cheeky, confessedly BS fakeclaim warranted saving his life when he’s on the block, but sweet’s cheeky claims, which have apparently yielded more fruit so far, merit his death? I don’t think it was necessarily a wrong conclusion to be wary about killing foodcoats D1 (I felt the same), but Balki’s reasoning here just isn’t consistent.
I don't think this is a good point either. I mean, Sweet is a viable miskill at this point in the same way that anyone is this early in the day, but I feel I am going against the grain in making my case on Sweet. He was not a wagon in the last 8 or so hours of the day, and he does not seem to be on a lot of people's radar today. If you think Scum would be looking for likely miskills in this spot, that is a point against your case.President Eden wrote: ↑Sat Jul 06, 2024 2:50 amAnd the scum reasoning is a lot clearer. sweet is a viable miskill. (Note Jamie’s vote on sweet; I think Jamie is sincere and just frustrated with sweet. But there’s a clear appetite for killing sweet.) foodcoats was already signed sealed delivered after the Desperado fiasco, IMO; there wasn’t enough time to coalesce anywhere else. Balki positions himself against the D1 miskill, and if foodcoats doesn’t end up dead, foodcoats’s alignment remains a useful distraction for the mafia team.
* * * * *
@President Eden, I think you are likely to be Town here, because in my experience the person who makes a case like this on me at around this point in a game is almost always (nay....is always) Town. The next time it's Scum trying to lead a charge on me Day 2 will be the first. But you're analysis is wrong. The biggest problem in it is that it assumes that Sweet's Day 1 fake claiming is just garden variety Day 1 fake claiming. That's incorrect, and most of your points flow offtrack from that initial wrong premise.
I appreciate the effort. I hope you'll try again.
so let me retype;
(1)
I think you are BOTH wrong to psychoanalyze sweet, and I think you BOTH already agree on that result. Sweet is doing what he did because he >believes< its the optimal play thats where it ends thats why he is claiming. The >only< thing that he needs to change is to start talking about OTHER stuff ebsides just that.
Which he is >now< doing
@Eden I am noticing >a lot< of your argument is based on Balki analysis of sweet thats NOT good. However I dont think there is a >right< way to fake claim so I disagree whole heartedly with Balki's view on this
(2)
I AGREE that is what Balki is doing but remember when you said "oh he was just joking here" well that was one of my main reasons for thinking Balki was sus...he >wasnt< a major figure in the game. I think he could start making >stronger< cases and being more FORCEFUL I would say the same for >you< Eden, this Balki thing is the first time you've really showed your head in this game
Give Balki a CHANCE to attack him I dont understand why you think >he< is better than killing a lurker
(3)
Know who else pushed the rdr wagon? Brainbomb and 5 other people who didnt want a >runaway< food wagon. This wasnt a >serious< wagon it was JUST an attempt to prevent a >single< person running away nearly the >entire< day GOOD idea, but was never going to >overtake< food
(4)
I dont understand how wanting to >save< food(he didnt actually) was WORSE than wanting >sweet< dead a lot of the things you say Balki is doing, >a lot< of other people are doing too. I dont see the SPECIAL thing that tips Balki into scum category unlike someone like >rdr<
(5)
food NEVER put an actual defense of himself he treated his wagon like >one big joke< and his claim was desperate and went largely unnoticed anyways he >needed< to go
The >only< thing I see against Balki right now is that he ISNT solving like he usually would be, and >that< applies to you too Eden if he hasnt changed something in the next 10 pages then you have >my vote<
