I’m not denying it was a good D1 (especially because I was quite certain looking back on it you were scum, hence the check)
But my N1/D2 approach needed work - after finding almost a majority of the scum for near certain, I 100% should’ve checked someone else, held my read on you closer to the chest, and been much more unpredictable in calling a volley on you out of nowhere.
That’s true.
What do you do if there’s an important role (say, Cop) and they refuse to check the probable mafia?
(This happened one game)
I mean I wouldn’t waste a night checking probable mafia when we can find another mafia?
Maybe just me though.
hang the mafia and have the cop check the null
why would you waste a night checking someone you find suspicious when you can hang them and check a null read?
You were probably going to hang them anyway
Why would you waste a night confirming someone is mafia if you were hanging them
That makes zero sense still what so ever? Just because someone is neutral doesn’t mean they are wrong.
No, listen.
In Tos, these were the roles
Sheriff (checks alignments)
Jester (ToS Fool)
Consigliere (the probable mafia)
There were 6 other players alive.
The Jester pushes the consig, who had claimed Investigator. People weren’t sure who to vote. I was an unrevealed mayor, unrevealed because there wasn’t a bodyguard alive. I asked the Sheriff to check Consigliere, since Town was dumb.
Instead, they check the confirmed Retributionist. Sheriff is lynched, mafia get majority, I save the day, but THE TOWN WASN’T BEING SMART.
If the other villagers are submitting bad night actions then there’s probably nothing you can do about it. You just have to compensate with the rest of your play, and post S A L T postgame :^)
I remember making a generalisation a while back that self-meta seems to be a common thing to do on other sites. People were like “No, not really”
Aand then I see posts like these
…Is this common in the meta to have posts like these every so often?
