Of course I read this post. But if Vecna is actively playing badly, is it really the right response to decide that “Vecna is good, even though they’re actively being bad, so let’s put them off the table?” Isn’t this kind of reputation based protection exactly what can be abused by scum by doing a parrot impression all D1?celaph wrote: ↑Tue May 18, 2021 4:45 pmHad you not read this post when you made your previous post on me?foodcoats wrote: ↑Tue May 18, 2021 3:10 pmThis is actually a lot better than what scum!celaph provided last game... though it was noted post game that celaph improved their scumplay over the course of the game.celaph wrote: ↑Tue May 18, 2021 5:39 am
Most people are on for a combination of the reasons you gave plus a preference for meaningful activity. Vecna was pure good player protection. Macca was pure read. You and rdr are mostly on there for good player protection, though you're both also playing how I would expect both of you to play as town. Worcej is mostly read with a little bump from activity and Demon is a small bit read with a bump from activity. If they're scum they've at least produced content for us to work with later.
It's worth noting that the ordering is just straight from the number of posts list (ignoring me). HB isn't on it despite his numbers because almost all his posts have been off topic.
Celaph, how can you say you are protecting goodplayer!Vecna? How is Vecna a good player so far?
Good player Vecna is a meta thing. As town he has generally done a good job solving the game, obvtowning himself, and drawing the NK. He's null in my books right now, but I think DKing a null Vecna on D1 is a bad move.
As town, my reaction is more, “Gee, this bit of Vecna’s is stupid. I wish they would contribute to the game.” Not, “Good players do parrot impressions sometimes.”
So, protecting a “good player” who is actively unhelpful to town, and could be actively hiding their scumminess, does not make good sense to me.