Large Normal 92 - Game Over! Scum Win!

[Amished]

Hmm, can't go against that type of logic. If they're that convinced that they're scum (and they should know) then this will be a pretty easy game.

Vote: Mastin

[Amished]

Cause following is easier than leading. That and Mastin looks like he knows what he's about.

Unvote
Vote: Dust

[Amished]

Hmm, two mistakes (lack of preview for image fail, and not counting my vote). Clearly Mastin is lying about everything. LALiars, *ESPECIALLY* in random stage....

Unvote
vote: Mastin

Shameful, is what that is. Besides, I support Jesters posing as anything, or anybody posing as a Jester, so this should help you win your popularity contest.

[Amished]

I've changed my mind, Mastin just has too much time and boredom on his hands >_>

So true.

[Amished]

My point about Mastin is that in a game of 27 people, 20 of the 57 (not counting the first two posts by the mod) posts are by him. With me having a couple posts in there, and several other people weighing in more than once, we haven't heard from a good portion of our people. We have 14 (half) of our people not having a post, and while I don't like the RVS all that much, I'd prefer to have everybody have a voice in it.

@Mastin: As it *is* the RVS in a 30 person game in my opinion, what content would you like me to post? Granted, this will launch us into the regular portion of the game sooner, but to have half of our people not even weigh in at all yet is still early in my eyes.

@Dust: When I first voted him, he had "claimed" scum, and was 3 posts into the game. My vote in 27 was still a random vote, adding to the zaniness of our first page (basically). Finally, with my vote on Mastin it's more due to non-pro-town playstyle so far, not a flipflop on his erratic behavior. I can see being erratic, and I was in my last RVS and it was rather fun. RVS didn't last too long and cause discussion, so it was pretty good overall.

If I have to read his thoughts on every single line posted by every single other player, I'll replace out. There is entirely too much fluff/stuff that didn't need to be commented on that he is, wasting all of our time. To comment on everything, even in a 14 player game (so far) is still too much discussion. If it continues, it'll lead to town disinterest helping the scum slide by just due to people not wanting to read all of his selected passages.

[Amished]

@Mastin (going through your points directed towards me in order from 75): Being active is not a scum-slip, nor shall you find me saying solely that. Active lurking is scummy, sure. Besides, like you always like to say scummy != scum. BTW I have no idea what your link/equation means. I know you explained it but I don't care enough about it to go back and look at your explanation. Oh, got it. Still stupid to introduce a link for the purpose of FoS'ing instead of .. you know.. using an FoS?

Games go on for *months* and probably over 100 pages a game of this size; and you're concerned about a couple days and a couple pages? A couple days is not too long.

And I viewed page 2 to still be in the RVS. You posting a lot doesn't immediately get us anywhere, the game is a gradual process, and page 2 in a 27 player game is still part of the RVS in my eyes. Difference of opinion I guess.

(I'll defer my suspicions to the end of this post, so I can avoid cluttering this up)

Everyone that voted you is scum then? Townies that either didn't like your excessive quote-clipping and voted you for that are scum too, eh? Seems logical...... /no

You saying that your playstyle is erratic, and me saying the same thing about your playstyle "nailed" me as scum? So people that vote for you *or* people that agree with you are scum. Got it. Oh wait, not really (keep reading).

BTW: You commend both Zoraster and Zer0 on saying that your posts contain extraneous "words" for lack of a better term. (Zor saying they didn't mean anything, and Zer0 for saying that your playstyle made it easy to for scum to slip by due to getting lost in the static of your posts). My last paragraph in 59 had a broad view of both of these points, but you failed to comment on that. I still find your scrutiny and selective quoting to be misleading and not all encompassing at times. Or did you not scrutinize everything like you said you would?

Cause following is easier than leading. That and Mastin looks like he knows what he's about.

Why?

On the first page he had "information" about Ace who readily agreed with him while also singling out another scum. With him directing the town like a general, I was going along with the mood/tone of the posts and going with the flow instead of creating my own shenanigans. I added onto it to see what, if any, reactions would come of it.

For any reads on players: Ace and zor pop up to be rather townie. Zwet is posting more about this game than the other one I'm in with him so I don't know how to take it but I like it.

I disagree with Stevie on some of his logic (and zoraster's post in 74 is my thoughts on that matter). I also wonder about how stevie would take policy lynching (popular targets K7, Zwet, EMP, etc..) as that has come up a couple times in my experiences here. To also vote Dust (ostensibly) for bringing Mastin to L-9 is sensationalizing the vote in my opinion. However, Dust's reaction (the unvote under back-pressure) has me concerned. The mastin/dust back and forth is tunneling by mastin (like Ace said in 88). Over-commentary is fluff, and it's like listening to a politician speak. (BTW: You (Mastin) even call a lot of your commentary "fluff" in ISO 5).

Finally, I don't care really if it was the RVS or not, but being completely unreadable alignment-wise, while beneficial to you (maybe) isn't beneficial to the rest of the town. Unlike people who townies can get a read on to be more pro-town/anti-town townies can then use that read to gauge the information being given out by that person. Back and forth on bandwagoning is one of the most obvious "opinions" of yours to point at from the early game, but obviously isn't the whole reason why I view you to be hard to get a proper read on.

Your "better than thou" tone in response to Nanook, as well as your statement on "focusing our attention on scumhunting" in ISO 20 is crap as well. The majority of us are here to scumhunt. We do not need you to make us focused on our task at hand. If you weren't here, would we be unable to scumhunt? No.

Your patronizing tone is enough for me to keep my vote on you. Not to mention you not having a solid stance on reactions/people commenting about your playstyle or even bandwagons.

These are the times that I wish you weren't you, Mastin. I know you're probably going to revert back to your line by line and I'm not looking forward to having to go through too many more of those.

@Ace: About Mastin's posts: I think ignoring them would be more scummy than commenting on them in the first place. Clearly he's a large part of the game and outright ignoring it is anti-town IMO, regardless of what your view of his alignment is.

@Zor: I think that's OPengy's point... >_>

I should probably get on here more often, this took entirely too much effort for how tired I am. At least I should sleep well. G'night.

[Amished]

lol, nicely worded EMP. Look at the sentence again, but in a different order.

After everyone has said something (joined), he want's mastin's next post to analyze the first post of the last person to first say something.

Worded differently again: he wants mastin to not post until *everybody* else has said something.

@Az: OPengy's saying he's voting for a lurker (somebody that hasn't posted has also never posted anything pro-town. Sure, they haven't posted anything anti-town, but nothing pro-town makes it look better, while also being true). K7 is a notorious lurker apparently, and is probably voting for him based on policy.

These aren't that hard to figure out, at least in my opinion...

Though I like OPengy's post just because it allowed me to see Az's relative experience level and what I can expect from him later on.

@Steph: I'm pretty sure you're the only one without an avatar at this point, but even still it'd be easier for all of us (including me) to link your thoughts with you if you had a picture or something as an avatar.

[Amished]

I didn't think that missing a Sunday would be that bad...

@Ace: You said that people weighing in on Mastin's post was scummy or trying to hard, I suggested the alternative that not weighing in on him at all is scummier. He's both a player and a major contributor so to ignore him is scummy.

For the discourse between Mastin and Caboose: both have points. I don't know if it was a chainsaw defense or not (no experience with that really, and even knowing *about* it doesn't mean I can always see it when it happens), but it was a blanket defense attempting to influence discussion on Mastin. While I view ace pro-town otherwise, I don't know how to take this action. Clearly he had extensive experience in the newbie game with Mastin, so I'm leaning towards passing it off as a slight meta-read.

[Amished]

@ OPengy: I would've rather been purposefully lurking than meeting a bunch of people I'll probably never see again and having to be friendly/nice to them out of nowhere..

@Mastin: So much for trimming down your posts. I also find your comment about daytalk/code between Dust and I highly outrageous. I would not care one way or another if I had a vote on me. Hell, if Dust and I were scum-partners it might even work better to have him bus me. Certainly I'm not worried about votes/fos's or whatever, especially if there's 2 people giving a FoS at any point.

BTW: I love how you say meta will not work on you but then you proceed to link to other completed games and then say *again* that metagaming you won't work. Great work there. /claps

Also: I don't believe I ever said anything about you wanting votes and therefore people should vote for you. Care to attribute that to somebody else?

One last thing: lol at Mastin already commenting on EMP's scummy playstyle.

[Amished]

Ok, so there's 26 paragraphs total by Mastin in 188, so I'll just go through them numberwise

1) It was a vote to drum up support and see who else would vote for him. 1 vote on somebody isn't likely to do anything, while 2 isn't much better it would seem to show scum that there's more support than one person who may or may not be listened to by all just from your massive posts (people skipping over some of what you said.

2-3) RVS shenanigans. Lately I've tried vote-switching *for* weak reasons/no reasoning at all. This is one of those times. Also, there's no way in hell that I think you're a Jester. Since you brought it up first (in 38, my quote was in 42) I was continuing the trend of being whimsical to see how you would react.

4) No *real* contest here, but if you look back it was me, who has seen you post in other games as well, saying that you often post huge walls o'text. Probably due to boredom/too much time on your hands.

5) I like to hear from everybody in the RVS so that I can get a baseline for them from there on out. "Clearly" we have differing opinions about when the RVS is over, and as I still wanted more people to post, I was hoping that they would.

6) I'll use your own words here: Behavior and Points. You can have good points but bad behavior (ABR is a decent example). Your points might have validity, but your behavior, if continued would become too much discussion. I will wholeheartedly back up my position that there can be too much discussion, though it's based on the other people in the game rather than how much discussion is actually said. I've seen several people comment on the length of your posts and them being too long. THAT is what makes it too much discussion. When everyone can't keep up with the pace of one (or a couple) people's posting.

7) I have been erratic, but it was a smaller game and I wasn't as erratic as you. This allowed more people to get into the discussion, and to drum up a bit myself over time. Being erratic isn't why my vote is on you.

8) See end of 6. There is too such a thing as too much discussion.

9) You wanted to get out of the RVS as soon as possible, without regard for the number of people posting. You take into account the length of typical large normal games, and waiting a couple days for people to weigh in is insignificant. Therefore my position is "why not wait a day or two to let people talk?" You'll be able to see how they interact with each other, and it'll free them up to do so as well. If you're dominating most of the discussion, the rest of the townies will have a hard time either seeing where you're coming from or where the person you're questioning is coming from. That could be avoided by letting us commoners talk amongst ourselves and get a better feel for each other by questioning each other on our own.

10) It was a sarcastic comment. I said that (loose quotation) "everyone who votes for you, and people who agree with you are scum.. /no" This is still taking part of my quote, and disregarding the agreeing with you part of it.

11) I still don't see any inconsistencies with my overall view of the game.

12) I was criticizing your posting style that contains too many words for this type of game.

13) Got it: "nearly everything he said". You have gone over some stuff, which still is selective quoting.

14) Generating reactions is part of the game, and is a null-tell to very slight town tell.

15) Disagreeing with people is also a scumtell, eh? I see Cabooses and Dusts actions slightly different than you do, and by posting my opinions on them I'm scummy.

16)

I'm Mastin. I create messes out of what might've been a normal game. From those messes, though, from the chaos, I can try to make order and find the scum.
...
I'm not trying to confuse the town. I'm merely giving them information they do not fully understand, and

then later

(after getting reactions)

explaining it

to scum hunt.

I added the bolded part in the 2nd para. Both of these make you come off as "I'm great, certainly better than most because I'm doing exactly what everyone should do to scumhunt, and if you don't see it, I'll explain it to you." That is extremely patronizing, and as you're not close to a lynch, it doesn't really matter if my vote is on you for that, does it? If it gets close, I'm sure I'll have 30 more pages of your posts to analyze and come up with a solid opinion.

17-18) Do you know everything that I find to be scummy? No. Ok, then I suggest you not speculate as to everything I see that's bad.

19) You've gone back and forth about bandwagons, and people that disagree with you over the same points being scummy and not being scummy. While I'm sure you're solid on other points, both of these I can point to in this game.

20) EMP is still here, ask him. It seemed obvious to me what he meant.

21) The "point" against OPengy was his voting of a lurker in a non-standard way of saying it. I pointed out what I thought it meant, and OPengy basically said it's exactly what I thought it was.

22) Avatars make it easier to relate people to thoughts. In a game of thoughts, I feel that's very on-topic.

23-26) And so on.

[Amished]

I *will* post my response to Mastin, probably not later today (softball stuff) but I should be able to tomorrow morning (btw, somebody wanted me to answer a question brought up by Mastin, I don't know who, or what particular question they wanted answered). I just caught up again, and the way it played out it sounds authentic to me (dev's ability (not sure if he's pro-town/anti-town) and Mastin's lyncher role-claim.) I have never seen a lyncher before so I don't know exactly what would happen to the rest of the town, or what it means for RC alignment-wise.

I'd rather not play for second place though, so while I'm unvoting due to Mastin not being scummy and sounding a lot more humble lately (and not *as* big of posts), but I'd hope that one way or another Mastin's lynch win-condition doesn't go through.

Unvote

I'll have my opinions on other players too with my other post.

[Amished]

I had a couple minutes to check in, and I disagree with OP's thoughts on lynching Mastin heavily. We need to find scum, and with what happened between Mastin and Dev, I'm pretty damn sure that Mastin isn't scum. Therefore we have a better shot as a town to hit scum if we don't lynch Mastin. Lynching him now is like wasting the day, and I don't like that at all.

BBL, I might be able to post in like 5-6 hours.

[Amished]

Ok, dealing with ISO 53 by Mastin (I'm pretty sure this is the one that needs to be addressed).

Obviously we have differing opinions about discussion and when the RVS ended, so I'm not going to waste time discussing that as neither of us are going to convince the other.

For your first point against me, it could also mean that I wasn't sure what alignment you are and then the mafia could bandwagon against you if you're not either part of the whole mafia family (if one) or not part of their family (if more than one).

By agreeing with quotes, I'm also saying it myself. That's the way I work when quoting something that I'm not arguing against.

Then you got lucky that in 742 the almost lurkers (didn't contribute much to the discussion) weren't scum and the scum were more active.

As to your behavior: I've *always* hated your huge walls. Clearly I don't think your points are as solid as you believe, as at least I disagree with almost everything you say against me. Of course I would, but there are points that you have against other people that I don't completely agree with either so that's still up in the air.

My townies and commoners statement was to help me try to get my point across that you feel you're better than everybody. Right now, I don't really care what everybody's role is. If they come later and have to claim, then I care, but until then, not so much. I also said that it'd be beneficial for you to cut back so that everyone can contribute to discussion, instead of you leading everybody around by the nose-ring.

/no is an indication for me, so if you don't buy it, so be it. /yes

For zor and zer, we've had a very similar viewpoint. That's why I felt it was ok to draw that comparison. Ryan? also says that he holds the opinion that there can be too much discussion (same thing I feel). Is he now scum? No, you've skipped over that paragraph of his.

Maybe I don't believe Caboose to be as scummy as you do? Everyone obviously doesn't have the same opinions as you do. As of page 11 votecount, nobody has voted for Caboose, and you're just about the only one attacking him.

With the bolded quote, it came off that it was you that had to explain everything to everybody, which is part of the reason I hate your style and how you come off as a poster. You also didn't bother to talk about the first half of my quote, which helps to add some context, while also making you seem more uppity in my eyes.

Finally, for the question: If you're patronizing, people will have a harder time following you if you're correct about anything. General tendency, people don't like being talked down to. Also, if people are bucking you instead of scumhunting, that's not pro-town as they are just looking at you instead of a bigger picture. Is that a good enough explanation?

(Post 69, (#7 in particular, but the whole thing is good too) is a great point that might help to sum up my case about this too.)

As to my vote, after the RVS I'm always slow to move it. Except for larger games later on just due to the number of bandwagon support needed. Even still, I *don't* move my vote around that much, ever.

For your bandwagons, you've said you've wanted people to bandwagon, then you've said that you don't like a bandwagon. .... Nope, no differing of opinion there.

[Amished]

@Caboose: It still depends on whether or not the mafia believe Mastin's claim of who his lynch target is too.

I don't see why you (Mastin) say you're dead tonight no matter what though. It's not like you're a claimed power role that scum might want to take a chance at finding/hitting. I just don't see the definite NK that you're seeing.

[Amished]

Oh. We'd still need a vig though, and nobody would know if we had one or not (unless there's another lucky/stupid day-rolecop or something that randomly hit a vig). With a day start we can't be sure of any amount of killing roles that we may or may not have. If a 2nd/3rd/nth killing role is out there behind scum, it might also be an SK, and since you're not a threat to them, they wouldn't care if you're alive or not.

Shortened version: There's no way to be certain (especially from your position) that there's a vig, so you can't be certain that you'll die.

[Amished]

Building a "Lyncher List" right now to prove why Red Coyote is my target.

I call BS. You can't "prove" anything. You said yourself that you were trying to breadcrumb Cop as well as throwing in lyncher.

It's impossible for anybody to see what you breadcrumbed falsely or honestly, as you obviously have high enough situational awareness to not be breadcrumbing something opposite of what you might or might not have fake-claimed early on.

Of course, this is assuming that Deve didn't see your whole role pm to state who your lynchee target was/is (which would make things a hell of a lot more clear). Though with Dev's "claim" of Mastin, I don't believe that was included.

[Amished]

Yeah, I still have to go with Stevie here. You breadcrumbed Cop (and therefore fitting into your precious meta as cop) obviously meant nothing this game as you aren't a cop.

You can (and have proven that you can) breadcrumb anything. Hell, you said it yourself that you would have to breadcrumb/play to your meta of cop for three people. Who's to say that one of the other two aren't your real target?

Hmm, Mastin got in while typing this, still holds.

[Amished]

Fair enough.

[Amished]

If Mastin is right about having a role to change alignments (I *thought* only cults could do this, which is still anti-town, but maybe Masons can too?), then to be confirmed of a new alignment, he'd still out a partner if a pro-town recruiter (if Mason's can recruit) was in the setup. This still gives scum more information, specifically about a pro-town group. I see the advantage of potentially helping by giving more set-up information, but it wouldn't be anything that we probably wouldn't come across later if a mason came close to a lynch and had to claim.

If we have something like a lyncher, and a JOAT, I would seriously not doubt a watcher/tracker or something along those lines. If we even have another JOAT, if one of their abilities lines up with a watcher role or something, they could out whoever visited Deve, and a one for one is generally a great deal for the town as a whole.

@Ace in 441:

At this point (post 327), mastin isn't a good lynch because he is no longer a legitamate threat against the town. If we don't have a good lynch by the end of the day, then Mastin takes this role as lynching third party is always better than lynching town. Vote:: OP for driving this lynch at the moment. Now that we have this information, lets try and lynch scum that are a threat against us.

I want clarification on this. You're voting OP for pushing a lynch on somebody that you can eventually see being a threat to the town, and who's lynch you would push if only the day was different?

@Nanook in 450: Why do you need somebody to out themselves to prove that OP is scum? Especially after admitting that you're not really paying attention to the case at all? Do you really need an investigative role to out themselves (and since it's a day start, there's no night investigation to go on in any case) before you vote for them? This looks to me like you're trying to either force a reason to not vote for somebody. Either the target is scum and you're a buddy or they're innocent and you don't want to be accusing somebody that you know is innocent. Both of which imply that you know everybody that's "guilty" and you're scum.

Vote: Nanook

The reason I'm wary of the OPengy case is due to (especially lately) how opportunistic the voters have been.

[Amished]

Mod: I might be in and out til about Sunday, sorry for the absence

[Amished]

I've come back, but I've saved this game to be my last as it contains the most required reading (glares at Mastin) and the most time dedication. I wanted to let you all know that I've returned, will try to read as much as I can right now, though I don't think I'll get to post tonight anymore. Look for me to put my efforts into a post probably tomorrow.

[Amished]

Wow, going from post ~460. This could take a while.

@Nanook (459): So what exactly are your reasons for voting Mastin? Your attitude towards OP seems like selective scumhunting that Tar has brought up recently. "Oh, I'm not paying attention to him, but I'm voting for Mastin. If OP goes farther, then I might look at the case against him, but it seems gray". Of course it's not clear-cut!
1) It's mafia,
2) it's D1 without a night start,
3) why can't you look at the case now?

@Red (470): WRT where did Nanook want somebody to out themselves to prove OP one way or another; Nanook in 450 stated:

Unless

something/

someone claims that OP is scum,

then I'll still support a lynch for Mastin today.

(bolding mine)

(I'd like to say that right now I hate both Mastin and Zor -starting page 21)

@Zero: Huge wtf moment in 521. I may hate having to read through 30 additional pages in what is supposed to be a 24 page game. However, it does not equate to the posts having nothing relevant in them. It seems like you're not pushing Mastin for fear of looking anti-town and ignoring his posts (by calling the information irrelevant) making yourself still look anti-town.

Tar's posting is easily the best in the game (including a comparison to Mastin). It's directed, easy to read, has solid logic, and best of all you don't have to spend 15 minutes per post (minimum) to read it. King's selective scumhunting and attitude was rather piss-poor. With that SS, and OPengy's quote, I would lean towards the two scumgroup, and probably the two of them are together.

One thing that is annoying me (other than Mastin's arrogance) is the 40% that he keeps bringing up. After all the true maths that he's done on speculating about the setup, we have this statistic that I feel is greatly inflated without supporting evidence. There are people here that have seen mason recruiters, but there's no evidence of them working on a neutral role here. For me (or anyone) to really believe the 40% claim, I'd want to see exactly 2/5ths of games with lynchers have a mason recruiter as well. I would also want to see evidence of them working on a lyncher, and removing the lyncher win condition. Until then, I would hope that the 40% doesn't come up again.

Also, to add onto some of Zor's counterpoints to the a-f that you (Mastin) posted about the information gleaned.

First I want to state that I don't believe this to be the case, but it certainly fits with a possible theory for "A".

Mastin is scum (for this case I'll go so far as to assume godfather), Dev or another person in the mafia is a Mafia Doctor. As far as I know, mason's die if they try to recruit mafia. Cops would still get an innocent result on Mastin (not guilty, at least); a mason (pro-town) would die and limit the power of said pro-town group by not being able to recruit any more townies, a vig (pro-town) would target him taking away a pro-town power (because of mafia doc saving Mastin), and his talk about potential day-talking scum would make sense as that could all be orchestrated behind a curtain, while all fulfilling an anti-town purpose.

Hmm, Stevie's "hammer" also makes me suspicious of him. To pull out Phoebus's quote as his reasoning (Phoebus not being exactly the epitome of great behavior in the first place), and not questioning Mastin along those lines makes me believe that Stevie is scum and just wanted to get Mastin out of the way instead of actually questioning somebody mostly-confirmed.

@Phoebus in 584: You state that your definition of scum is mafia, but you're voting for somebody that isn't "scum" in your eyes. Why is that?

and as long as I am around, I will prevent Red from being lynched.

God I hate that line. I just finished a game where one of our two mafia said that about a townie. The game is over now and I'll link you to the exact post if I have to.

As to your discourse on "fun", Mastin. I generally have anything stop being fun when I know I *have* to set aside hours at a time, every day, to read through and argue for or against something that will continue to make me spend even more time backing up my statements. If it didn't take so long and/or be that serious, it would make it more fun as this is still a game. Needless to say while I signed up for this game and will finish it out, I will not willingly be in another game with you. I don't care if spending 3 hours a day with you would make me the best scumhunter ever, it just would not be fun for me.

Regarding the multiple kills that Tar and Ace brought up in 593 and 596: One of the problems with our situation as I read it is that Mastin brings up the idea of a vig targetting him. If there's only 1, then we'll get a true result. If there's more than one, or a vig and an sk that's planning long term trying to breadcrumb a vig, we'll get a skewed first night result barring flavor telling us that Mastin's body was shot and then burned or something.

And 2 and a half hours later I'm done! ... until tonight probably.

[Amished]

@Zero: What the hell do you do D1's then? Bandwagon mindlessly? You should go by what people say. How else would any case get started if you didn't analyze what was said and make your own opinions? Sure, the majority of the time a townie is lynched, but that doesn't mean you should not say much or not give opinions on what was said.

[Amished]

Sigh, summer sucks. I'll be LA again over the next few days, hopefully I'll get a chance to weigh in from time to time, but don't expect anything overly insightful

[Amished]

Ok, I'm heavily monitoring another game that's close to deadline, but I'll start reading through where I left off (~pg 27) now. Expect more of a barebones post as I have 7 pages to go through.

[Amished]

Getting through page 30 or so, and even without Mastin, he's the focal point of so much discussion. There's almost certainly both scum and non-scum on his wagon, but from the looks of the posting so far I'd be more likely to believe the scum is in the lower contributing players of his wagon.

(This is spurred by King's statement about his apathy towards the game)
Still, at this point everyone is talking about Mastin, and *NOBODY* is really able to scumhunt as I understand it. With or without him (as Mastin isn't posting atm) he's a serious focal point and is blinding a lot of players, and allowing so many people to get by by just voting for him. I believe that this is one of the strongest points for wanting to lynch Mastin, as without him there won't be such a huge distraction and allowing everyone to have opinions on a much more diverse group rather than bitching back and forth about Mastin's lynch.

I think it's pretty lazy to not try and at least follow leads and ask questions when we basically have no pressure to find a better lynch. Don't settle for Mastin because he's a good lynch, look for a better one and if we don't find it, fall back on Mastin.

With Mastin around, nobody really feels that much pressure to find "a better one". Then with your response in 763 (page 31), you don't feel that adding 1/3rd onto the game length rather unnecessarily without having scumhunting going on is helpful?

---

Stopped at top of page 32, coming back tonight and hopefully will be able to finish catching up.

[Amished]

@Mastin: I can't find the original post for your claim, but I want to clear something up. I know you can't win D1, but it's technically possible for you to win on D3 and beyond given you and your target are alive throughout that specific course of the game? Or *just* Day 2?

.... A one-sided lover pair? Really? In a large ... well I can't really call it a "normal" game anymore, now can I? Didn't you go to your role PM when Dev claimed your role just to check? Out of everything you've said, this is what I have the biggest problem with; because clearly Dev didn't get your whole role pm and you could just as easily win as long as your target (which I'm believing more and more to be RC) dies before you do, and that's your attempt to direct mafia kills at him rather than at you. People have pointed out why a Vig might consider not shooting you at all in the first place, and with all the talk about how it's likely to lynch you tomorrow they might not even really consider shooting you. While this doesn't directly line up with the *fact* that you can't win til D2, RC isn't really coming under any suspicion and basically will not be lynched today, it could be made up. Though a vig worth his salt would think about this (hopefully), and probably shoot you anyways just in case, and by you bringing all this up, you'd know a vig would then suspect you more and probably shoot you. I think a JOAT would have a vig power as well, so you'd consider there's somebody with that ability in the game period. No, with all the flak you'd receive from this, you're almost certainly telling the truth about this as well. Sucks to be you apparently.

Ace, in 817 does bring up a good point though. It almost certainly makes RC a target tonight. I've viewed all three of your "targets" to be pro-town at this point, and to lose one of them directly because of you (Mastin), and you are the direct cause of him being in the picture really at all with him being openly considered for a NK isn't something I'd want to happen.

[Amished]

In ISOlation. Go to the bottom of the page, look at where it says "Display post from previous: (drop down menu for all posts) by (drop down menu for All users) *THIS IS THE ONE THAT NEEDS CHANGING*. Make that Caboose, in this case, and hit "Go". It allows you to get a read on people without having to scroll through other people's posts. When I have more time, Caboose will be one of the people that I'll be looking at as well.

[Amished]

Ok, so for my readthrough of Caboose:

He was one of the first to attack Mastin, and not sheeping onto it like many of the players lately.

However, I was reading another game of his (was nominated for a scummy as part of a best townie effort in a mini theme) and while there was nobody like Mastin there to really get annoyed at, he did better to look around at other possibilities. These are different circumstances, but I would've expected him to not be so narrow minded.

The confusion/argument on the chainsaw defense accusation of Caboose I think he came off the short end of the argument due to a weaker case on that as well. I've (falsely) tried to pin a chainsaw defense on somebody, but the attacker was town and defended a player of unknown alignment (turned out to be scum). Personal experience and the addendum in the wiki pointed out by Mastin, Ace? and Tar? lead me to think that it was a weak attack to make it look scummy when it was not is scummy in my eyes as well.

Something that recently came up (Stevie's hammertime statement on Mastin that makes me believe he's scum as well) translates back, but only if Stevie does turn out to be scum. ISO 9 looks like in game coaching (needless to say I think that daytalking scum would be rather overpowered and I don't believe that that is a possibility) trying to steer a partner away from mastin so as not to draw as much attention to himself(caboose) while also trying to point Caboose to attack Dust who was under pretty heavy suspicion by Mastin leads me to think that Dust isn't part of their scum group (if 2, or scum at all if 1) and therefore working on getting an opponent one way or another lynched. Unfortunately, this is all dependent on Stevie being scum.

The last thing, that's more annoying than really damning or solid is Caboose's constant repetition that Mastin is lying. While it's very easy to say that Mastin isn't being truthful, not to try to line up what was said so far (and apparently missing Dev's claim according to ISO 22) into a theory that could work long term just means to me that something is missing.

Example just of me this game: I knew Mastin was breadcrumbing cop based on experience, but after Dev claimed Mastin as lyncher and Mastin claimed his target was RC I was obviously skeptical. For Mastin to crumb cop like he was, he'd need a solid target to force him to really be believed and get the number of votes necessary to fulfill his win condition. Tar is basically legendary, and I know Mastin generally gives credit where it's due and his respect for RC and Ace starting from his first post all line up to one of those three being his target. I came up with my own theory that still fits what I know of the players, how they've played, and is pretty well into the realm of possibility (much more so than recruiting/converting mason leaders).

Caboose comes off as a more subtle scum (meaning not really the "obvious" scumtells that I've seen from Nanook for instance) but still higher than a general level of suspicion.

[Amished]

@Phoebus: WRT Nanook (they may not be obvious, but he stands out more in my eyes than Caboose does just by what Nanook has posted so far):

ISO 3: FoS's Cat for commenting on Mastin's playstyle that Cat obviously doesn't have anything to do with how Mastin plays. (Throwing suspicion on somebody else for something they didn't do is a rather large scumtell in my book) (ISO 6, goes back and says that the FoS wasn't really that important, retreating suspicion on one of his very few viewpoints at that point)

ISO 5: Votes Mastin, but the paragraph before the vote Nanook puts out some reasoning against Mastin, but then claims the vote is only due to the lyncher claim. It's a way to voice suspicion without really taking a lot of credit for it and giving wiggle room to himself.

ISO 11: Continues on a Jester possibility for Mastin, though he's said that he has experience with Mastin from another game, and from what I've seen Mastin plays basically the same in all games other than the occasional cop breadcrumb when he is a cop (or trying to be). No reason to really place Mastin as a Jester, and therefore wasting time/space looking active rather than actually coming up with something relevant to the game.

ISO 13: Filled with back and forth logic, not taking a stand on anything (talks about how OP could be Mastin's target, but probably not, but who knows.. etc.)

ISO 14: Here's one of my big ones. Last paragraph Nanook explicitly states

I haven't seen enough that really warrants an OP lynch at this point, or should I say I haven't really focused on the evidence. Unless something/someone claims that OP is scum, then I'll still support a lynch for Mastin today.

Admits to ignoring a case on a player (scummy) and also needs somebody to claim that OP is scum (outing a power role/not scumhunting on his own).

He's *never* even put a point against another player, just content to sit back and keep his vote on Mastin. (Proverbial "you" coming up) even if you're not going to move your vote, you should still pay attention to the rest of the game and see who else is scummy/pro-town for future reference and not just following along without thinking.

[Amished]

So I should sheep to an easy bandwagon, one I might or might not necessarily agree with instead of pointing out what I view to be scummy behavior so that in future days (unless there's a nuke role out there that if they die the game ends) everyone else and I have something to build on in the future?

We still have time before a deadline, so time spent looking at people other than Mastin seems like it'd still be a helpful concept.

[Amished]

I'm stuck in the 490s. Did anyone ever tell Mastin that his math is wrong?

As far as I know, no.

[Amished]

At deadline, if I'm around and we need one more to a lynch, I won't hesitate to vote for whichever is higher. I would prefer Mastin *be* higher at that point if needed, just due to potentially saving RC through Mastin's wifom'd situation of being half of a lover pair. This would also allow our vigs (if any) to shoot at their discretion and probably get more information out of the deal (in terms of knowing the number of killing roles). Saving a player (who I view to be pro-town) and getting information of NK abilities, while also not relying on a converting mason recruiter who might not target Mastin because of his insistence that a vig shoot him or not wanting to out himself D2 is better than an unknown alignment kill.

That would also ensure that the people not doing anything that *are* on the Mastin wagon do something tomorrow and if Mastin is right about the number of scum on his wagon we should be able to find a bunch of them through that.

However, if OPengy/somebody else is closer to a lynch nearing deadline, I'll vote for them instead as we do not want or need a no-lynch.

[Amished]

Yes, but a cop won't come out after just one investigation. Therefore they will not have this (by their words for the most part) proven anti-town force around. If they don't do anything, we can call them on it. I have faith in the general population that the townies on Mastin will be more active than they are now.

I also didn't say I expect them to play *better*, just to play. That's often enough to at least start to get a read on their intentions.

[Amished]

Someone brought this up earlier and I meant to address it. I will state here and now unequivocally that I am not a lover role. I was not told of any lover addendum responsibilities to my win condition or anything like that either.

I realize *you* aren't, but with Mastin being a lover of you if you're NK'd and not lynched, scum could get you and Mastin at the same time with only one kill.

[Amished]

It's pretty damn clear to me that a wagon isn't starting on *anybody* at this point. So to start off:

Unvote
Vote: Mastin

I feel that Mastin's latest claim about his role (one sided lover) is even more detrimental than he was initially thought to be. This also allows a vig if we have one to open up their choice tonight. I highly doubt masons would want to recruit Mastin, given how he'd have to out himself and his partner. If there is a mason, masoning somebody else that will stay alive is still a more pro-town outcome than the WIFOM gained by masoning Mastin and whether or not his win condition has changed at all. This frees up the rest of the game as well to actually scumhunt as the Mastin show looks to be distracting enough for the scum to want to keep it going anyways.

Kise: I've addressed my position on a bandwagon, especially going into the end of the day. As WC said, you're not even voting for *anyone*, so you're in no place to lecture about hanging off a wagon. Besides, only half + 1 can be on a lynch, and the half - 1 that don't vote aren't all scum. You might've seen scum do that in other games, but now that you've pointed it out, you've lost that as a scumhunting technique going into D2. You're really trying to make yourself useless, aren't you?

@Zwet: If you can't find where Tar has argued against PBPA's, I know *I* won't believe you.

[Amished]

@Kise (994): Do you think I panicked and/or changed my vote because of you? I'm getting more experience in large games, and I know it can get hard to have everyone together to get votes in on time. With .... Nanook? unvoting and I agree with empking's alt here moving that wagon backwards when it's pretty clear that most of the rest on his bandwagon aren't moving to anywhere else. Say even 9 people aren't going to vote for somebody else, 14 out of the 18 other people would have to agree on a lynch and vote that in the next few days. At this point, Mastin is the best candidate overall to be lynched, and has the most reasons *for* a lynch in my eyes too. If you disagree with my reasoning for voting him, which I can't do much about as I've outlined all of my feelings about him.

@Zu: I will not avoid responsibility. Avoiding responsibility to me would not be voting. I always take responsibility for where I place my vote. By voting for him, and being on the wagon at easily identifiable points (not counting Jebus' great tool of having a vote count at the top of every page) it places just as much responsibility on me for voting as anybody else for not voting. Probably a bit more due to being able to analyze large wagons later on in the game.

For the number of scum on his wagon (which is obviously debatable and wifom) I've also read a couple of his games that I've not been in and he's found scum pretty often. To me (while it's not this great of a gap) it's like listening to Tar/ABR as compared to K7/Looker on who is scum. I do believe that throughout a good portion of the game so far Mastin has been an easy place to park a vote and just point to him being confirmed not town and keeping him alive will cause wifom does give scum an easy reason to not have to look beyond him and appear townie by scumhunting.

[Amished]

Sorry about the absence, gonna try to get read what I missed.

[Amished]

@Ryan: Wrong game:

@hewitt: For the wifom from Tar: With the lack of .. description.. on the mafia group, it makes me lean towards one larger group. Being in the Mafia, he would know the number of scum and would probably be able to figure out that they're the only one. The reason I'm thinking this way is that I can see Alvinz being a vig kill (lurking and then putting down the hammer without a real explanation which I would view as pretty scummy). Tar must've killed Zwet what with Dev's ambush ability claim on him which explains those two deaths. Last one could be an SK, but I'm not as sure about that. It still would make sense to have a largerish scum group and an SK balance wise. Two anti-town NK abilities, but 1 member for the second NK. The numbers would still probably fall in the typical % range with only 1 sk and a bigger scum group; while with a watcher, tracker, rolecop all claimed/confirmed + others out there it's reasonable to think that the SK could be found and killed making it easier on the town by reducing anti-town NK's but harder to find all the scum.

@Zu: For my lack of response to RC, I was distracted by Mastin (as you can reference a timeline on RC's post and where I had dedicated my time). I forgot about his questions/points until now, and if you want me to answer them, I will.

[Amished]

Backup-Mod Votecount Edit 2-13

Zer0ph34r (7) - Caboose, cateraction, King, RedCoyote, ryan2754, devistation, Orangepenguin
AceMarskman (3) - NanookTheWolf, zoraster, zu_Faul
RedCoyote (2) - Phoebus, Zer0ph34r
hewitt (1) - Empking's Alt
jeromus (1) - stevieT92
zu_Faul (1) - AceMarksman
caboose (1) - hewitt

Not Voting (6) - Azerhi, Maturain24, jeromus, Amished, White Castle, Kise

Back, computer virus + vacation = impossible to be around and to let people know that I was going to be absent. I'm terribly sorry to everyone that had to go on without everyone being active, and I know it's a bad position to be in. I'll be catching up today.

[Amished]

Ok, what with the deadline, I'll mainly be going through the people that have votes on them right now, starting at the top:

Zero

:(8 (Caboose, cateraction, King, RedCoyote, ryan2754, Devestation, Empking's Alt, orangepenguin)): The thing I get most from him is bad playstyle/erratic. In his first 13 posts, he said that he refused to vote for somebody that wasn't scum (and mentioned that Mastin wasn't) then voted for Mastin anyways. Classic "damn" @ the start of the day, though rereading that with the "." mark in there I think the damn was due to 3 town players dying and not the goon dying. What's most telling is how fast the votes piled up on Zero, which I thought was very scummy. As there was no mafia distinction (japanese, italian, whatever-mafia) it more appears to me that at least a couple of those voters are scum just going for a bandwagon and without a 2nd mafia they'd realize that they're going after a townie. Of course, those four were: StevieT92, Cateraction, King and Nanook (those 4 will be the topic of my next post, probably tomorrow sometime I'm thinking.)

However, this caught my eye and I don't think anybody noticed it:

I'm going to be honest. Until mentioning it, I had no idea what I Jester was. I looked it up and you know what? That does sound exactly like me. But I'm not a Jester, I'm a vanilla townie, promise.

in ISO 42 which lead to

Those of you who are voting for me, you're making a mistake. A not little mistake.

Which is an obvious attempt to hint at a PR.

@Zero: What was/is the mistake they're making that's larger than voting for a vanilla townie that you've already claimed? Also, which 2 on your wagon do you feel are scum?

Overall conclusion: Erratic playstyle =/= scum. The quick wagon against him makes me think he's town.

Red

: (3(Phoebus, Zu_Faul, Zer0ph34r)): Zero I already talked about, a certain someone knocked another one out of contention. Will look at the third just in case later.

My impression: Brought up some really good points and asked great questions D1. There was some buddying/praising of Tar, but I thought Tar's post was well put together, as well as several other people at the time; so that's a null-tell. In his responses he's very even-handed and consistent with how he's dealing with everyone, not babying or really pouncing on people. That reads pro-town in my eyes.

My other commitments took longer than I thought they would so I shall be continuing this when I have more time. So far I don't see either of these people as being worthy of my vote at this time.

[Amished]

First catching up what's been posted lately:

@Zero: ..... *headdesk*

1) =/= means not equal to. You're more townie because of the fast bandwagon, and your playstyle doesn't mean you're scum, just that it's erratic and often anti-town.

2) People still gain information from a townie lynch.

@Red: I'm not saying Zero is unreadable. It may be tough to get a read on him, and he may comment on off topic things but you can get a read on him for sure.

@Zu: I see a lot of where you're coming from, and Ace is the next one on my list to look over. I might steal some of what you've posted just due to me agreeing with it.

AceMarksman - 3 (NanooktheWolf, zoraster)

Well, first off there's only 2, unless Jebus forgot a player on the list. There's three now because of Zu, or 4 if there's a forgotten.

Early on defense of Mastin (before claim) but also asking him to not post as much. Gives a wildly hypothetical situation as to the alignment of Mastin (wagon gets to L-2, reverses it to a townie = Mastin scum; part of ISO 2). Knowing Mastin, and seeing his love for defending himself, that clearly wouldn't always be the case. Moving on, Zu's note about Ace calling out Tar for lurking (when there still were plenty of less than active players) seems scummy to me as well. His very next post he calls out King for lurking and FoS's him. Difference in stance between these two players looks like a connection to me as well.

ISO 21: He votes for OPengy for leading a lynch against Mastin, but goes on to attack Mastin for several things, and says why some of Mastin's comments are scummy. Possible dualism with then knowing Mastin isn't townie, while voting for the 2nd largest wagon.

At this point:

Vote: AceMarksman

22, says that a Mastin lynch is better than a mislynch (basically a reversal of what he had been saying, in the previous post).

Next couple of posts are all about voting for Mastin and advocating his lynch, and taking Zor's math instantly. Possible connection, but I think a lot of people were just looking for another stance on the math and took the first available. To act like it's a slam dunk still looks like scum trying to drive any point home possible.

I'd need to check the timeline, but I recall it going the way that Zu said. Mastin realizing that he definitely couldn't avoid his own lynch so then gave up and stopped posting rather than him stopping his posting then being unable to turn it around. The way Mastin is, he wouldn't give up until he had to give up.

Nothing I've seen really makes me lean towards Ace being town, so I'll stick with my vote and head to bed.

[Amished]

I was of the opinion that Ace, Tar or Red could all be Mastin's lynchee, just due to him knowing the first and third, while Tar being somewhat famous around here. Tar being scum precludes him from a typical lynchee position, so it's down to Ace or Red. I'm viewing Red to be pro-town anyways, so he very well still could be the lynchee target as per a typical pairing like that.

[Amished]

By my counting, Ace is at 11. Go back, Hewitt was the 3rd a while ago and then he unvoted or voted somewhere else.

That left Zor and Nanook. (2)

Zu was 3.
I was 4.
Hewitt back on at 5.
Dev FoS'd him
Cateraction at 6
Dev voted then at 7
Ryan at 8
OPengy at 9
King at 10
Red at 11

Still need one more by my reckoning.

@Zero: At the very least, a townie lynch is better than a no-lynch. See who was pressing them for obvious wrong reasons, who was on the lynch, when, under what circumstances, etc. At best, we have a bunch of people either going for a lynch or bussing a partner to get a lynch, and we hit scum. We can't get scum if we don't try, and you've been active latest without voting.

Repeat: Not voting and leading to a no-lynch is a mistake. Much much much moreso than sitting around saying it's a mistake and not getting a lynch.

[Amished]

Ok, so first off there's another scum-group (mafia and hate-club), and judging by the deaths (shot and beaten line up) we probably have persistent killings from both of those. Tar died from killing zwet (who was shot) so the mafia is probably responsible for Dev's death last night. That eliminates them from killing Stevie, so I'm guessing it's a vig or something along those lines that's a persistent killer as well. Zu was pretty active so I don't think that he was killed by a pro-town role as this game was dying out and he was keeping it alive (pro-town before his death and confirmed now). EMP was kinda iffy along those lines, so I could see possibly a pro-town (or acting pro-town if sk or something) going after him.

Secondly, welcome KMD.

Third, WTF were WhiteCastle and Zero thinking? If it wasn't for somebody getting Stevie, we'd have no real shot at getting scum on our own. We still have no idea if people were bussing a partner or being opportunistic in going after Ace. He's obviously still around so we can't eliminate him from possibly being scum, so if we do lynch him we effectively wasted yesterday.

On that note, my opinion on Ace still stands so

Vote: AceMarksman

And now I need to go back and look for stevies connections with other people to see if I can find somebody else that looks scummy.

[Amished]

Yes, we have 2 confirmed scum, Tarhalindur and StevieT92. Both of which are dead.

However, I'm sad that the month for your old avatar is up already...

[Amished]

@KMD: Oh, then no, we don't really have confirmed living scum. Suspicions, yes, but nothing confirmed. Our resident JOAT that had a day investigation used it on Mastin D1 to out him as a lyncher and was killed last night. Since we also had a watcher, tracker and doc die N1, I'd say that both we're probably running low on power roles, and with a doc dead we're also probably running low on protection for anybody outing themselves. As we also have 2 scum groups, it'd also be a ridiculously bad idea to out themselves for one or even two scum (depending on situation).

I assumed that you wanted your RVS vote and recognized my name. Perhaps to elicit a response out of me for fooling me into thinking you were town and then getting a L-1 situation on you reversed in lylo to win it for you. Either way, I didn't take it too seriously.

I am curious as to what you'd be willing to bet on though, but I'm pretty sure I'd take it if you came up with a good one.

@Kise (and then also partially at KMD to help you catch up/not miss some of the more major points): From your (Kise) 1392, it looks like you're forming a Phoebus/Zero connection. As per Azhrei's ISO 27 (his last post before requesting replacement) where he claimed mason buddies with Phoebus under no pressure on either of them I'd say that he's pretty clear. I don't know if they (Zero/Phoe) have any history, but it could just be a player following somebody they think is better than they are. I played with xtoxm in my first game and I listened to him moreso than the other people, so I can see where he would be coming from if that's the case.

[Amished]

@Red: I'm saying that Tar was killed because he was "ambushed" by dev. So Tar killed Zwet (who was shot). That means to me that since Dev was shot, Tar's group also killed Dev.

@KMD: Ok, then why do you think I'm scum if you're voting for me?

[Amished]

@KMD: I was one of the last on Mastin due to an approaching deadline and feeling like nobody else would get lynched. For Ace, I had gone through the people getting votes and was one of very few to actually make a case. Personally, I think you'd be better off looking at people mindlessly bandwagoning (confirmed StevieT scum on Zero during D2 is a great example) rather than thoughtful votes put out there not without reason. With stevie hopping on Zero like that, it makes me even more likely to believe Zero is town, and I'll be looking at Cat, King and Nanook (the other 3 people that voted for Zero in quick succession yesterday and all those that voted for him today (OPengy, Kise, WCastle and Cat (again). Ace is still up there in my scumlist, but with Cat being on both of those and the final count for yesterday, he looks exactly like opportunistic scum.

Unvote
Vote: Cateraction

[Amished]

Sounds good to me. Anybody else that caught your eye?

[Amished]

Well, with Stevie leading the D2 hopping on of Zero (four consecutive posts all containing a vote for Zero, Cateraction, King and NanookTheWolf were the other three) it's a heck of a bus if that's the case. What makes it weird is that Stevie was the first of those four to hop on like that and I'd say that's not typically scummy.

Cat could easily be following his partner's lead (StevieT; it's on page 45 for all of your reference) to vote for Zero to try to drive a bandwagon up and just silence somebody and end the day for a weak reason (and Cat's vote there also had very little to back it up).

I'd still say that a mafia group is more concerned about self-preservation. At that point, they'd know that there's a 2nd group (Tar died revealing mafia) so assuming equal numbers for each group they'd want to keep a leg up on their competition by trying to hold more power over the mafia in the end game. I still stand by my position that the (alleged) bussing was too early and too obvious to have them be going against their own player (and two days in a row for Cat). However, Cat's immediate following of Stevie and still poor reasoning for voting increases my thoughts that I have scum in my vote.

@Kise: I can buy that explanation, but let me ask you this: do you ever change your mind? From the mid part of the day1, there was a lot of Mastin bashing for his playstyle and for his role. Clearly Zero represents poor play overall, so do you not think it's possible for him to be more "sheeplike" so to speak and just go with what he keeps hearing over and over? The whole situation with him and then the interaction with Stevie still makes a lot more sense with Stevie scum and Zero town rather than Stevie scum and Zero scum. Them being opposite scum I'm ignoring for now as Stevie wouldn't know if Zero was part of the other faction or not and would just treat him as such.

tl;dr version: I'm almost positive that Cat and Stevie are partners, and that they ganged up on Zero. With there being 2 scumgroups I can't eliminate the possibility that Zero is part of the mafia, but I'm of a similar opinion of KMD on this one, I see more poor play rather than scummy play. Cat's being on just about every wagon out there and for weak reasons certainly makes him even more like eager scum. If you don't think so, I would like to see another explanation that makes as much sense as this.

Somewhat crossposted with OPengy and therefore mostly directed at him: If Cat is part of the mafia (and taking into account what Kise was thinking about Zero being part of the mafia) then Cat would still be unnecessarily bussing Zero. If cat/stevie are together, it clears zero less, but if they're on opposing scum factions then I would say it clears Zero more. What is your opinion on this? Also, if you think he's scum with Tar, why aren't you voting for him?

@OPengy directly: Going back to your ISO 89 where you point out that StevieT no longer has suspicion on Cateraction. I noticed that too in my reread of Stevie and that still makes it look like Cat is with Stevie, which looks more of a connection between the two of them rather than Cat/Tar. Either way, connections with scum aren't exactly a good thing. Would one group be infiltrated into another? i.e. Cat being part of both of them and could choose who to be with or had a win condition that won with either one if either of them won at the end?

[Amished]

@Kise: Yeah, my argument is that at the time the hate-club would want to keep their numbers higher than the mafia (assuming equal distribution), while also wanting to keep the town in the dark as to their existence. Bussing Zero would be counterintuitive to both of these goals so I don't think that he would bus his partner in that situation. Since he's not bussing his partner in my eyes, Zero would have to be in the mafia with Tar. I don't see any real connection there (I haven't looked that thoroughly yet though). Yes, Tar would easily be able to hide who he was scum-buddies with due to him being a good player. But I don't see a connection between Zero and *anybody* really..

The switch to hewitt is interesting though. Perhaps after seeing three more votes that Stevie wasn't expecting (conjecture) made him realize that his vote on Zero was a more fragile position than originally thought and open to a lot of pressure that he wouldn't want. Cat could've followed up and put a 2nd one just to get it going further, but again; that wagon progressed much faster than I think anyone would've predicted in a very short amount of time. Cat switched over to Ace 3 posts later (in ISO) to do his part in trying to stop a no-lynch so that's hard to evaluate the motives behind that.

I guess sheeplike is the wrong term. Perhaps predictably unpredictable is better. I see him as a stubborn inexperienced player. Say a wagon on .... it really doesn't matter at this point.. you, Kise, started right now. For iffy reasons, just to be clear. If Zero somewhat disagreed with it now, at the end of the day (saying that the argument went on for the rest of this day, off and on) I'd expect him to see some logic (be it good or bad) somewhere that he might agree with and place his vote on you. During that time would he also say something stupid? Almost certainly. Would he catch flak for it as well and serve as a great distraction for scum? Again, almost certainly.

@Cateraction: You were opportunistic with the zero wagon D2, and hopping on Zero today when there was pretty clearly a wagon going to form on him. Your response to Tar's post was over the top "thank you for that" then presumably gone to read zu in ISO because of it. You also used that to push your own agenda of an OPengy lynch and perhaps trying to line up lynches there as well.

Why isn't everyone voting for him so far?

[Amished]

Well, the NL thing against Zero is also against WC and partially Kise (because Red is correct in analyzing who was actually around of those not voting for him) so that's not just a point against Zero. Otherwise I'm still seeing just a bad player from zero with anti-town and not necessarily scum motivations/actions.

I believe going after cat would form the most coherent picture with connections or whatever while still being scummy (which is why I'm voting for him).

Ace is still scummy for the case that I posted against him late yesterday, but I feel there's less connections there. Of course I'd be happy with either of them as I think they're both scum but cat would give us more information overall I feel.

[Amished]

Backmod Edit Votecount 3-5

Zer0ph34r (4) - orangepenguin, cateraction, King, ryan2754
cateraction (3) - Amished, hewitt, Kise
King (1) - White Castle
Amished (1) - kmd4390
RedCoyote (1) - Zer0ph34r

Not Voting (8) - Azheri, jeromus, Caboose, NanookTheWolf, zoraster, RedCoyote, AceMarksman, Phoebus

@WC: We lost a doc, watcher and tracker N1, and then a JOAT lost on N2. That's 4 town PR's, and if you assume that the JOAT had a protective or roleblocking ability of some sort, 1.2 (1 for the doc, .2 for a one time ability through guestimation) protective roles. Have you ever come across a game where there are more town power roles than scum? Take the low end of saying 3 scum per group, that's 6 and then say that there's an even number of scum to town power roles (not more than as I haven't seen anything like that, and would seem to be slightly OP, but with the killings, say 2 vigs or 1 vig 1 sk to account for the other NK and then one other left). If there's 6 T PRs, we've lost 2/3rds of them while only losing 1/3rd of the scum. (33% difference)

If we bump the mafia/HC members up by 1 each (2 groups of 4), then we've still lost half of them which is more than I would be able to say about the mafia/HC who have only lost 1/4th in that case. (25% difference)

Regardless of the numbers, we've lost twice as many power roles than scum. Unless we really start catching scum and not no-lynching again, that's most likely only going to get worse. Giving the power roles we have left my opinion on the matter allows them to look at that option and either see it's good advice and take it, think they know better and then don't take it, or just ignoring it still leaves the ball in their court.

Going on, with losing so much more pr's than scum (and my ~1.2 protection PRs) they would only get off one confirmed scum if they caught one. More than one doc could be out there, but it still puts them in a bad position as well. Besides, I would hope that anybody who does have an investigation can push their own case without giving it away (or just press a particular lurker if they got a guilty on them). They do not need to out themselves to give their opinion on things, and you wanting them to out themselves when we're down more PR's than scum would benefit scum moreso than the town as we'd be out the PR if we're lacking doc protection and not a jailkeeper or something.

Sure, both groups are worried about preservation. Their best chance to win is through keeping their numbers up. It allows them to keep their NK ability, and drives the game ever closer to Lylo. Is there something wrong with that logic? Look at it from a scum perspective. With two groups, they're probably slightly smaller. They would then most likely be able to guess that there's another group out there. In that case, they would want to make sure that they can outnumber the other group so that they can finish off the game as a win for them. If they drop in numbers, it's easier for the other faction to cross-kill them and take them out of the picture completely, making them lose. Basic self-preservation and the desire to win says that scum want to keep their numbers high. Absolutely nothing scummy about this and you trying to make it appear scummy gives me another suspect that I need to reread and see if I can make a case against you.

@Zero: What hewitt is mostly talking about (if you still don't understand) is an offshoot of congratulating the doc. In this case, you're stating you're happy that a scum died, so you're congratulating the JOAT (for Tar) and somebody else with a killing ability (for Stevie). They already know they did well by taking out scum, to congratulate them was and is still typically seen as a way to falsely look like you're wanting the town to win through smart play.

[Amished]

Long post from 1492

Ok, so. Today is D3, day start. 2 nights. I find it highly optimistic to say that a power role has two confirmed scum. I still don't see where I'm helping scum with my comments. With how many PR's we've lost, we need what's left (if any) to come through big time. Having 1-2 confirmed townies might help, but we still need to find two groups with multiple people in it.

As to my speculation about the setup, I'm trying to figure it out from what we have lost and what information we've gained. Clearly there's 2 groups, mafia definitely have at least one more as their kill method was consistent through both nights. Logically the easiest way to balance two groups is to make them equal so I'm assuming that they both started with the same amount of players. Also, we've lost 2 investigative roles (which were weaker in a watcher and a tracker), a protective role, and a JOAT with at least an investigation and a kill. With the weaker roles out there already, with odd-ER roles being in the game (lyncher, while also having a JOAT and masons), it's very easy to assume that we might have a couple other weaker investigative roles out there as well, to combat the rather high number of kills that have taken place over two nights.

Which is another reason I feel the need to post my thoughts. We've lost 8 people over two nights. If we keep our average, we'll lose 3 more townies and a scum tonight. That'll drop us to 14 overall. Given the case of 3 scum per group, that'll leave 3s-11t which gets us mighty close to lylo taking into account that there's almost certainly a persistent kill ability out there as well of unknown alignment (guessing pro-town). In the case of 4 scum per group, we'll have 5s-9t (still 3 killing factions) and in the case of 5 scum per group we'll have 7s-7t (lylo). From the start I was guessing around a quarter to a third of the game is scum, just going by typical larger games. 6-10 would fall within that range, and in the case of two scum groups, that's 3 to 5 each. Do I know how many per group? No. Can I make a fairly logical guess? Yes.

Besides, 6 scum total is only a guess. Say there's 8 scum. Outing 2 scum in your highly optimistic situation (where when I was talking about only 6 scum, I was giving us the benefit of the doubt in low scum numbers, while I'll give the odds of not getting two confirmed scum from 1 player as a pretty low chance, much lower than having 6 scum). There would then still be two killing factions, both of which could kill throughout the next two nights. You took the absolute ideal scenario from both sides and are trying to play it off like it's reality. Doesn't always work that way, bub. Also, the other scum faction would be just as likely to kill the outed PR as well, stopping our potential investigations from them, and allowing them to win. Either way, at this point the only possible situation in which I'd even consider believing a PR outing themselves is in the 6 scum + 2 caught scum total. As they wouldn't know that, I still fail to see how outing themselves now and ending their usefulness is helping the town win in the long run.

Commentary on how I would think if I'm mafia is hurting the town? I'm giving reasons why I don't think somebody is scum. If those reasons can be refuted without me having a valid response in return, then we'll all be one step closer to finding scum. However, if scum not bussing their partner would help clear a player and people think that's logical and believe me so we don't lynch somebody that's likely innocent in the overall situation is also helpful to the town by narrowing down our list of suspects.

Finally, I'll turn this around on you: How is you directing the HC and Mafia (if they even listen to you in the first place) going to help? They know how many people their group has, and can discuss if cross-killing is beneficial and will get them closer to winning. Anybody not from one of those groups wouldn't know if that's beneficial to them or not, and you directing them only means to me that you're part of one of them.

Unvote
Vote: WhiteCastle

tl;dr version: He's saying out a PR right now (assuming so that he can kill them) and therefore to keep the rest of his scumgroup free from investigations. Also along those lines, having a PR with confirmed town/scum from an extra day is more beneficial to the town than to out himself right now if they're not in any real danger.

Finally, his directing of the scum groups can only mean that he's part of one of them, as they wouldn't listen to anybody but themselves, while that's just a warning to the other group that they're coming after the other. While that's beneficial to the town (scum killing each other and not townies), it wouldn't be beneficial to them yet most likely as they wouldn't know how town investigations have gone so far and would have to narrow the PR's down further (which he's advocating by having the PR's out themselves) before really feeling comfortable with that. Nothing about your post makes me think you're town.

[Amished]

@Ryan in 1500: True, that's the farthest from Lylo, but also in 91 there were 4 per team and not three. Also look at the odds for a cop getting 2 scum that are alive in two consecutive nights.

In the 3 per team setup, that would leave 4 that the cop would have to find. N1: 4/25 (started with 27, 1 lynch, cop knows own alignment to get to 25, need to find the ones still alive now out of those 25)

N2: 3/19 (1 lynch, 4 more deaths last night, still know own role and 1 scum)

That would give chances of 12/475. Yes, that's a 2.5% chance, but I'll bank on the 97.5% more often than the 2.5%... I was also saying that since those odds are that low I doubt that it happened. If that was the case, then sure, come on out and give us our next two lynches. Otherwise, with a lot of our other PR's gone, I don't think that only 1 is enough, especially if we keep going on with 4 kills a night.

My only experience with a large game was 91, so I'm still thinking that 4 members per group is right (which would basically render the above calculations useless, but that's what WC wanted to go with, while I thought that was overly optimistic on several points). In that case, we'll still have 3 members left per group. 18 left, that's 6m/12t. In the unfortunate case of getting all townies with the lynch and continue the 4 kills per night and all on townies, that would make 6m/7t. Yes, the scum is split into two groups, but even then the town doesn't have a lot of wiggle room, and if they just go after townies even from there, we wouldn't have a chance in hell. 5 mafia per group is even worse.

Though I do see where I misunderstood his (WC's) point about when to out yourselves. I still stand by taking the 2.5% odds (then multiply that by the 1/3 decent chance of having only 3 scum per group instead of 4 or 5 that would also be about as likely, and the 2.5% would be even less in the situation that he gave with getting both of a remaining group (2nd number would have been 1/19 instead of 3/19, giving a 4/475 chance.) To bank on that is too much hope and trying to follow the cop rather than actual scumhunting for those posts.

Therefore, I'll go back to where my vote was before as I've not seen anything that makes me change my mind on him.

Unvote
Vote: Cateraction

[Amished]

Welcome Javert.

[Amished]

I thought the meaning is rather clear. Much like in 91, we hoped that zwet would get NK'd to confirm their role and to eliminate a distraction even though he was part of a mason pairing. Much like how Mastin was lynched, Zero's poor play is a distraction to many people and I feel having the people jumping on Zero put out a case on somebody else would help us to not have them coast through anymore. Pretty understandable viewpoint, actually. Much like I would much rather vig a lurker than waste time lynching them. Leaves much less wiggle room and allows the town as a whole to be better off.

[Amished]

Or I can just call out stupid ass questions that have an obvious ass answer. There will always be people that I would vig regardless of alignment. Lurkers and people like EMP/King/Zero are at the top of my list. Ask anybody a stupid question and I'll answer it anyways, I'm not going to stop giving my opinions on a question that I think is utterly ridiculous in the first place.

I'm leaning moderately town on Zero, but would I also like to see him vigged at some point? Yes. From what I read, and what I inferred, I have a similar viewpoint as Javert on this topic. Giving my thoughts on the matter, and inherently disagreeing with you that NK'ing somebody probably protown but a huge distraction to a good number of people is pro-town overall. Like I said, the town would be better off without them in the long run. Kinda the same principle as D1 in this game. Mastin = not scum (was even confirmed) but was he a major distraction and hurting the town by causing WIFOM and posting walls o' text and causing people to lose interest? Yes. That's why it was a good reason to get rid of him. Do lurkers/people who post random irrelevant one-liners hurt town morale? Yes, so we should still get rid of them. Screw their alignment, they lost my loyalty the minute they decided to not participate that actively in our game.

[Amished]

I need to catch up, summer's been hectic (anti-prod, actually somewhat kinda here post).

[Amished]

Just looking ^, the problem with the shot/beaten is that the shooting is the work of the mafia (zwet was shot, tar died because tar shot zwet) and the only hate club member was beaten to death (the other recurring theme) so since they didn't kill themselves they probably have the killed or dissolved from N2.

[Amished]

@Zaz: true.

[Amished]

I guess having a cult, and then two anti-town killing factions just seems like it'd be too much against the town which is why I think HC does have a killing ability.

[Amished]

There's no doubting that shot belongs to mafia due to N1 kills. Dev (confirmed town JOAT) said that Tar died due to his ambush ability. That ability only activated if the person that Dev targetted (Zwet) was "attacked" in some way (beaten, shot, SK'd, etc.). So from that: Tar (mafia) killed zwet N1. Zwet was *shot* N1. Therefore, Tar (mafia) *shoot* people.

I missed most of the end of D3, but I've read all of D4 so far.

All of a sudden there are a lot of scummy comments/stances out there. Hewitt is my number 1 suspect, including his very first post. His stubbornness over Zero and how he went about it makes me think he has knowledge of the setup too. At this point, we only can know that Shrine was a correct lynch (with regards to his comment to Kise) while cat obviously was wrong. To explicitly state that Kise is wrong on 2 out of 3 means that Hewitt basically knows that Zero is town.

That, and I think anybody who says that they should fall under suspicion is instantly scum. (Overall) Townies feel like they have good intentions (unless pulling a gambit, but they still have the right intentions) but don't really feel like they're supposed to be questioned at all as they know they're town. Saying you should fall under suspicion instead of if you come under suspicion and understanding why is a very key and subtle difference. You fall under the first, which I firmly believe comes from scum.

Vote: Hewitt

If we're also speculating as to what happens if a cult recruits mafia, what happens if they recruit masons? I don't believe BM's stance that they think you're all that lynchable. Overall I think Zaz has been pretty pro-town, and BM is better than Phoebus (when you actually get "caught up" like when you figure out about mafia shooting people..) and still being semi-confirmed (questionable, as we've gotten two different stances from the two outed masons).

I need to reread RC now, as if hate club is a cult, he might've been recruited. Fonz/Lowell might be tied into this as well.

[Amished]

Well let's see... D3 all I've been saying is how I'm comfortable with a cat', Ace/Shrine or Zer0 lynch. 2 down, 1 left on my list. Capish?

Well considering you're wrong on 2/3 perhaps we shouldn't be listening to your judgment.

This is the original quote/section.

Kise wanted Cateraction dead (NK'd, Vanilla Townie)
Kise wanted Ace/Shrine dead (Lynched, SK)
Kise wants Zero dead (still alive).

He was right about wanting Ace/Shrine dead due to them being anti-town (I keep "scum" terms for groups). He was "wrong" about cat due to cat being pro-town. (I use "wrong" as I thought Cateraction was scummy as well, and if the flavor thing didn't pop up I would've guessed that Cat would've been at the top of the questioning list in my eyes). So since Kise is now "right" once and "wrong" once, for him to be wrong on 2/3 he'd have to be wrong on Zero. In that instance, Zero would have to be pro-town. While I believe him to be pro-town, he could be just feeding my ego or whatever to make me believe he is, while I don't know. The way you stated it looks like you *know* Zero should stay alive due to him being pro-town, and wanting him dead would be "wrong".

[Amished]

All along I've thought that zero was just a poor playstyle townie. I think the scum obviously know more than they let on and probably could try to figure out who's with who and just flat out know some people's alignments. I just don't see townies ever being that sure about anybody.

It's just a difference of viewpoints I guess. I agree with the analysis of Zero, but disagree with how it was expressed and that generally allows me to find somebody that doesn't share a win condition with me. Seeing where people are coming from = good, not being able to see where they're coming from = bad. In this case, hewitt = bad.

[Amished]

I don't consider Shrinehme's role to be scum so no you're still not making any sense, but that was a very good attempt at trying to twist my words around.

A serial killer is anti-town, as their win condition and the town's win condition are in direct conflict with each other. What are you trying to say? That lynching a serial killer is wrong?

[Amished]

Overall we still need to kill SK's too, so it wasn't "wrong" to have Shrine lynched. We might have been able to direct him last night, maybe not, but overall we still needed to kill him. This way it eliminates an anti-town killing role who we may or may not have been able to direct, slowing down our rate to lylo. I refuse to believe that there would only be two scum on a team, so no other lynch would've performed the same function. In that context, it was the most right lynch we could've possibly had barring some weird game functionality.

[Amished]

Yes. Serial Killers are a one person "scum group" basically. If we don't kill him, we'll get picked off one by one until endgamed due to 1v1 at the end. Typically (always, afaik) at that point the mod declares a SK win and not a Town win. If there's an SK at endgame, it's not a town win. Therefore, an SK cannot survive til end game, and must be killed before then.

[Amished]

Back at hewitt: How would the town win if an SK was never killed?

[Amished]

orly = o rly = oh really.

I don't think the win condition is actually going to be much help in this game if there is a cult like the HC might be. They'd have their first PM that they were originally, and depending on if there's scum in the mason group, they'd probably have a town win condition posted maybe? Cultists definitely would have the right wording though.

[Amished]

@RC: If the hate club killed somebody, then they either didn't N1 (since I believe all have been claimed except for the BTD), or they killed one of their own faction (which doesn't make sense). In the former case, their kill has been protected against last night while also having it been protected against N1, and in the latter case it's just illogical to waste your own faction knowingly. Unless they hate so much that even they have to kill one of their own like every other night or something stupid... (no, I don't actually believe this.)

Though it looks like Zaz is onto something about having the masons not being NK'd. As soon as she replaced in, she said that her partners were unconfirmed to her. It was only til BM came in that that statement was refuted, but even still there was that element of uncertainty about the masons that I felt, and I wanted to wait another day to make sure. Mafia/HC (if HC has kill) would probably figure out that a lot of people are suspicious of them and leave them alive to try to get them lynched instead of wasting a NK on somebody they don't have in their group.

Now with Zaz saying that there's no reason not to trust your partners, then I feel the masons are pretty much confirmed to me unless they're all culted now and that's why they can trust each other.. In the scenario where they're not all culted, I don't feel a need to know the 3rd as we could possibly see the last one start to get a bandwagon on them and we can analyze votes on a confirmed townie.

[Amished]

@Javert: Regarding your point #5: During the day, did you realize that you were going to fall under suspicion? We have suspicions that hewitt will turn scum, but that's different from what you described. Thinking about defending scum and thinking about receiving flak for it during the day is knowing scum instead of just defending until a flip. It's a very different situation from what you described having.

Also, it's not exactly the same as the situation that you described. Yes, there will be townies on a lynch (there has to be as until lylo there will never be enough scum for that). But to say that you defended someone of unknown alignment and then had them flip scum is way different than having defended anybody that you don't *know* the alignment of and having to worry about it like Hewitt has.

My major point is that Hewitt shouldn't know that he'll receive flak for voting for anybody, it's that he shouldn't "know" that anybody is town. His actions regarding this make me suspicious above all else at this point in the game.

apologies if this is hard to understand, I'm slightly inebriated at this point of the night (wednesdays rock for that around here....)_

[Amished]

@Hewitt: You mean how you've been actively defending zero all day like you know he's town but then still leave wiggle room in case you have to vote for him later?

FTR: I will be on vacation starting Saturday til Monday night (then spotty access from Tuesday til probably next Thursday)

[Amished]

I just lied? I can quote probably 4-5 posts of yours where you're actively defending another player (Zero). If any scum is stupid enough to defend a buddy that heavily, fine, you're both scum. Otherwise I don't see town defending anybody like that. However, I do see scum defending town without being asked at all, and (stupidly) scum defending a partner like that. Both ways, you're still in a scum role.

It's still scummy as defending somebody is scummy as they should always defend themselves so that everyone can judge that persons own actions so we can get a read on them instead of your read on somebody else.

I can provide several quotes to that effect (you defending Zero), but congrats on making me provide something very very specific while I have an overall trend of behavior.

@RC:

I agree 100% that BTD isn't the Hate Club. But do you think, as Fonz/BM have said, it's the other way around? Hate Club is shooting and Tar's mafia is BTD?

Tar was killed because he targeted Zwet, right? Therefore whoever "shot" Zwet gets the shooting. I thought it was pretty clear that since Tar died by targetting Zwet, and Zwet was shot, Tar + other mafia = the shooting kills.

For why the mason's aren't dead yet: perhaps the scum think they're lynchable while if BTD is a pro-town role they think that the masons *are* confirmed and pro-town? That's simple enough and reasonable, so still follows the whole simplest explanation is most likely true theory... So far I haven't seen any mafia be all that complex about their kills in any of my games so far.

[Amished]

Yes, hewitt, from my read and from what your tone of posts feel like you know that Zero is town.

To be quite honest I never saw a link between ZeroPhear and Shrinehme anyways. Can you give me concrete examples on how ZeroPhear can be linked to a known, existing scumteam?

Asking for concrete examples of *anything* in mafia is bullshit, "to be quite honest" ... If anybody had concrete anything, the town would never lose.

I did not think he seemed like a pro-town player at all. I think it’s imperative to point out that weaker players like cateraction don’t necessarily mean scum.

This also pretty well covers your view of Zero (and King for that matter).

I said in that paragraph that if I were to just name off obvious names that come to my mind first. I then stated that obviously that's not the right way to go and that I'll have to delve deeper. Otherwise I would've just voted one of them.

When Fonz questioned you about your aggressive pro-town appearing players being scum comment. Also a defense of the "weaker players" in the game, which Zero certainly falls under.

OPengy in 1955 (page 79) also points out that you have been pushing hard to not lynch Zero today. You jump on me for saying the same thing, but not OPengy?

Well, you have been pushing pretty hard NOT to lynch him today, so that is KIND of a link.

The intention of your 'some of the vocal players' thing is clear- to protect Zero. But you did say you suspected those three, and no amount of weaselling is going to get you out of it.

Oh look, Fonz says it too.

Yeah, at the moment I don't want to see ZeroPhear lynched today and that's clearly the easiest route that many players would go for today.

Seems like an obvious defense of the "not lynching Zero" viewpoint.

Regarding Post 1932, I'm not liking it one bit.
Trying to throw some doubts at players who look pro-town, the bad defence for Zer0 and saying that we should look more at pro-town looking players without doing it himself.

Zaz says the same thing too!

I was insinuating that his reasons suck for voting ZeroPhear, do you honestly not understand any of my posts?

I read this as "no good reason to lynch Zero". Still looks like defending him.

So far all the weak players we've lynched have flipped town so I think it's a bad idea to go after a player like ZeroPhear or King right now simply because they suck

Bad idea to go after Zero (and king). Defense.

(BTW: I still don't fully believe the whole "2/3rds wrong" thing from Hewitt. The first thing I did when I played here was to find out what roles were what and what I could trust or not. SK definitely was one of the bad roles, and iirc it's even in one of MikeBurnFire's flash things about mafia roles.)

We've lynched no town players, nor have we lynched particularly weak players in my estimation. I think you are out on a limb for Zer0 for no reason, and then you throw King in there, I'm assuming because Kise pressured him some. You've been backing up Zer0 since D2 for sure, possibly since D1. It's a wonder you aren't voting Javert (formerly Caboose) right now, because that would just about be the cherry on top.

I'm still not the only one that picked up on you defending Zero.

But even before cat' flipped, there was a lot of defense of Zer0 on your part, hewitt.

O hay, luk. Moar peepz saying that you defend Zero. I'm not the only one saying this, but now you get all up in arms? Yeah, definitely not buying it.

And I'm not voting because I don't have anyone who I think is scum yet.

BTW: This statement is enough for me to vote for anybody for.

Also, to help clarify my point about you receiving flak: I combined your position that you should be questioned due to being a vocal player in the town

I think it’s safe to say that some of the more aggressive, vocal, pro-town seeming players are scum.

(which you definitely fall under)

And you being vocal about Zero not being a good lynch for today (already quoted at length in this post).

So, you're being vocal about zero not being a good target for today, and you've said that those people being aggressive and vocal should be looked at as potentially being scum. That's where I combined your collective stance together as you *should be* receiving flak for aggressively being vocal about not lynching Zero.

Then what are you waiting for? Go quote me where I've been defending ZeroPhear instead of simply saying that I think it's a bad idea to lynch weaker players like ZeroPhear. Have fun with this.

I want to point this out too, saying it's a bad idea to lynch him isn't defending him? Are you kidding me? If I said it was a bad idea to lynch Jebus, that'd be me defending him from my position thinking/saying that I don't believe he's mafia. You saying the same thing about Zero shows the same stance about Zero as I would have about Jebus.

[Amished]

I don't understand the RC questioning the mason's thing more than the questions. The two outed ones both said that the mod confirmed them to each other, and that there were 3 of them N1. I don't believe in a multi-recruiting cult in any game (insanely imba/swingy if it's a one way/all way lovers pairing because of it) and I wouldn't guess that any mod would put that in a game. RC moves up in my suspicion list because of trying to cast doubt on something that really does appear to be absolutely confirmed.

Let's see, Joe replaces Zero (anybody would be a step up, so good)
and Stark replaces Person A (like 2 posts? Who was this guy?) -> WC -> over9000 (hopefully we can hold onto a person for once....)

Welcome to both replacements!

(wanted to post this last night, but my computer decided to not want internet after reading...)

[Amished]

That's fine. But accept that when I and someone else look at something, and they come up with a conclusion that i'd never in a million years come to, I am inclined to wonder if they are looking from the same perspective as me.

This is what I'm thinking between the exchange between the both of you. Yes, mods sometimes make mistakes, but to come up with one scenario that would prove that you (Javert) are right when it doesn't really follow all that logically overall, doesn't make me feel that comfortable with your alignment. Caboose didn't give me any solid town tells either, so there's not really anything to make me think that you were town, and this is a relatively solid indicator that you're not town. If Javert gets higher in votes before the looming deadline, I will have no problem switching my vote.

[Amished]

Oh, hey, Javert: It's still not the same situation. You're defending yourself, and you realize that your overall position is bad. You're not expecting to get heckled for defending somebody constantly that you don't know the alignment of. Wanna actually stop trying to make a link between two completely different situations?

I've been cop, gotten an innocent on somebody and defended them (not on site). That's *still* not the same situation as I *know* their alignment while expecting to be questioned. The extent of Hewitt's defense of Zero isn't the same, and doubtful that he's the cop, nor would need to defend somebody that vigorously as there have been several people that were unwilling to lynch Zero (me included) and therefore wouldn't need to really have a defense of somebody unlikely to get lynched.

[Amished]

I was elaborating on Javert's constant comparison between Hewitt's actions and what Javert has come across before, while also tying that in with Fonz's statement that he didn't know where Javert was coming from and applying that to Hewitt who I still think is scum. Through Javert's soft defense, I can see a tie between the two, and believe that one of their lynches will create even more information through ties to other players.

[Amished]

@Javert: Hard defense is worse than a soft defense in my eyes, but ok.

I think it’s safe to say that some of the more aggressive, vocal, pro-town seeming players are scum. I know that should be obvious but I think that’s something to dwell on before going oh well let’s go after ZeroPhear.

Aren't you one of the more agressive and vocal players in this game? And you probably think of yourself as pro-town? So by your own criteria, you are scum.

to which Hewitt responded

I would agree that I'm aggressive, vocal, and pro-town so yeah players should definitely be questioning me too obviously. I would view that to be poor effort on my fellow townmates' part to not question me.

He feels he should be under suspicion without even doing anything (just playing). I guess what my position really is is that if you think you'll be under suspicion for playing as yourself, and not in ties to another player, you should be under suspicion. I've read 3-4 games (and been in one) where replacement scum came in and said that their predecessor was scummy. I've *never* seen town say that, so by saying that their "role" in the town is scummy means they're scum. It's been 100% for me so far, and saying they should fall under suspicion is on the exact same track. Newbie 789 (http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11497) with Scien is the one that I was in where I saw it, and I've done it in http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10684 for your own reference where I'm personally involved in that sort of situation.

BTW, I think that you're both scum. However I realize that I may be wrong. I think that Hewitt being scum says more about you than you flipping scum, but it's pretty close.

@Hewitt: You've said multiple times that you do not think that Zero should be the lynch for today

I have no idea what you're talking about with the explanation thing. And I have no idea what you're talking about concerning ZeroPhearj. I don't have reasons for going after ZeroPhear and he's not an ideal lynch today at all.

so that more falls under my soft defense. You've said that [quote="Hewitt]I think it’s imperative to point out that weaker players like cateraction don’t necessarily mean scum.[/quote] and you've commented on Zero's posting a couple times implying to me that you feel he's a weaker player. Not scum generally means town (classifying SK 3rd party as scum as wincon is against us, though Lyncher was weird in this game.) Since you've gone after me and not any of the other people I've quoted saying that you're defending Zero also implies selective scumhunting on some of that which is another reason I think your lynch will provide more information than many other people. (This is kinda where I was going with information on a lynch, Fonz. Go back to where I quoted Zaz, OPengy, others (can't remember atm, I'd have to check to be sure of everybody) saying that they think that Hewitt is defending Zero pretty hardcore. Through this, I think we can form better ties to Hewitt if/when he flips scum, moreso than having to go back to D1 for ties to Phoebus, or D1/D2 for ties to StevieT as they're more recent, giving more opportunities for Hewitt to post and see how he interacts with many more people).

@Zazie: No, before this discussion, the WinCon was never brought up in the game to the best of my recollection. Slightly when we were talking about Mastin's WinCon due to him being 3rd party, but that was him more saying that he'll take an assumed wincon of winning with the town rather than any specific wording or trying to figure it out at that point.

[Amished]

EBWOP: the Newbie 789 link should be this: http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11497

[Amished]

EBWOP #2: You've said that [quote="Hewitt]I think it’s imperative to point out that weaker players like cateraction don’t necessarily mean scum.[/quote] and you've commented on Zero's posting a couple times implying to me that you feel he's a weaker player.

Should be:

You've said that

I think it’s imperative to point out that weaker players like cateraction don’t necessarily mean scum.

and you've commented on Zero's posting a couple times implying to me that you feel he's a weaker player.

[Amished]

@Zaz: Oh, either way, Joe stating the wincon is clearly the first happenstance in the thread simply due to Jebus only realizing that he didn't have the wincon posted in the first post. Until now I don't think it crossed anybody's mind to figure out whether or not the scum had it at all, or if it did cross their mind, they didn't bring it up. Personally, I assumed they had it being in a normal game. In any case, trying to find scum through wincon seems borderline bad-mannered as you're not finding scum through their scumminess, but through something that the mod decided not to do.

[Amished]

Anybody ever try to figure out town through the wincon? In any of my games? Is that what you meant? If so, you know that I've seen it, but I'm not sure how effective that has been yet.

Otherwise I've played in a lot of newbie games (where the roles are posted and the wincon is right there...), and a lot of the mini games I've been in I've been killed early on and I stop paying attention to the game for the most part. AFAIK it didn't happen in Mafia 91 either.

[Amished]

Zaz, would you mind clarifying your question then? I don't know how else to take what you said.

[Amished]

Because King voted for Zero (and said that he doesn't trust two townies) you're not going to vote for hewitt but are (I'm assuming) going to keep voting for RC. How is that related to each other for you?

[Amished]

A lot of people thought Cat as extremely scummy, so are you really attacking him for that?

Also, please summarize why you feel RC is the best choice for a lynch today.

[Amished]

I started with 102, and you said that you've been pushing for a cat lynch too throughout yesterday, so your criticism of King is moot on that point.

As for the fishing, I'm not completely sold on the "congratulating the doctor" scumtell. As far as speculating about the NK's, it can help get a read on how they think through the game and if that's consistent with the way they've approached other people and/or a pro-town perspective. Also, the Mafia/HC (if it's a killing faction, or the other killing faction if it's not the HC) has more information to begin with as they know their own motivations for killing people and only have to figure out the other recurring kill, especially as the SK outed themselves and told us all who his kill was N1 (reducing the amount of kills they have to speculate on even further). I find it scummy that you're also calling out RC for doing this more than Zazie, who came up with some pretty good theories (IMO) about why the people shot were shot and why the people beaten were beaten.

All that being said, his parroting of Zazie does make him look suspicious for me. I need to reread him lately to see if he's come up with some of his own ideas.

[Amished]

You don't think like scum to try to catch scum?

"RC" (Zaz) is also helping out those of us who might not be as agile of mind (you, apparently) to see why the NK's are being targeted the way they are. If you can think about who the shot/btd people are going to kill, you can also use that to help judge who is making said kill, leading towards the scum.

[Amished]

So, looking for honest reactions to go back to when catching a scum to give more information to everyone (and since town needs information more than scum) that's scummy as well. I think a more likely answer is that the scum are ignoring him/making him look scummy and than townies ignoring it as they don't have the information that would help if we catch scum.

Also, scumgroups are comprised of individuals. That's the way to catch scum, get one, and look for ties to others. If an individual is pretty incessant on one kill, they can probably convince the other(s) to go after the bigger threat. I know you weren't around, but iirc D1 Zwet was attacking Tar pretty hard for his pbpa. Look what happened that night, Tar went after Zwet and died because of it. Strong individuals (or smart ones) can recognize threats and want to go after them.

Look at the avoidance of the mason group. Zaz pointed out that the masons look lynchable (and there are plenty of people who don't trust one or more mason) so they would probably look lynchable to the scum. That seems to be the simplest answer to why they haven't been targeted yet as there's confusion over their status. Looking back, KMD did drop some PR tells during D3, so that seems to explain his death while I and many others thought Cat was scum (including you, Kise) which would seem to explain his death from both a pro-town (trying to whittle down scum numbers) or an anti-town (going for cross-kill) perspective. All of this is pretty logical and rather simple.

I never underestimate scumgroups, as they have more information and they can coordinate and look for the biggest threats as a whole. If they're smart about it, I'm sure that even if they all work in their own best interest and share what they think is the best course of action, if more than one person would come to that conclusion it's dangerous for the rest of us. Respecting your opponent is the best way to not get blind-sided, as I've learned rather painfully throughout all of my games.

[Amished]

I do feel he's a weaker player, but not scum. I'm voting you because of your defense of Zero/Joe (haven't been able to get a read on Joe yet, but that's mostly due to him not posting enough). I thought that he was town and I personally wouldn't vote for him almost completely due to that quick wagon that built on him ... D3? D2? Must've been D2 as Stevie was on that wagon as well iirc. He could be part of the mafia, but in my mind eliminating him from one of the groups is more than we can say about basically anybody other than the masons (who are cult or just masons IMO). Javert defending you like you were defending Zero is suspicious, and I feel that your lynch can either confirm or deny a possible Chainsaw defense by Javert on you (who has attacked me for attacking you. Like Tar has posted, it's really only valid if the person being defended is scum.) That's why I'd rather lynch you than Javert as you're in the middle of this defense line, so to speak, and would give direct information about both Zero and Javert that's recent and rather fleshed out instead of weaker ties between other players (not counting the masons).

Also, your reason for voting RC is noted as it's exactly the same as Kise.

[Amished]

@Javert: I know I don't defend somebody that staunchly as town (like hewitt has), nor how you defended Hewitt. Primarily because I have no clue as to the alignment of who I'm defending. I defend as a cop, but that's due to having knowledge of their alignment. I believe that Hewitt will turn scum, and from that your chainsaw defense of Hewitt will lead me to another scum. However, I will admit to being wrong at times and if Hewitt does turn town, then I'm much more comfortable seeing you as more townie than I do currently.

[Amished]

Ah, that makes your position a lot clearer, and a lot more understandable. Since Mastin was technically 3rd part (not pro-town) D1, what makes RC the correct lynch for today?

[Amished]

@Kise: If they could recruit, I'd call them a cult rather than Masons. However, nothing I've read from Zaz nor from Battle Mage has lead me to believe that they're growing in power. Also, it'd make them a rather powerful pro-town group if they couldn't recruit anti-town roles (making them confirmed to each other and an investigative role) while also being horribly imbalanced if they could recruit scum as the scum could just out their partners and win with the town that way. So in a word; no. Recruiting masons are more of a bastardization of the word mason as having a .5 mason (scum mason) instead of calling them neighbors.

Mod: Can we get a current votecount? With people switching it's hard to see who is close

I ask for the votecount as a lynch (not in mylo) is much better than a no-lynch. If Hewitt won't be lynched, I may not agree with an RC lynch, but it'll be better than having the same discussion during another day (as evidenced by Ace not getting lynched D2 but getting lynched D3, effectively wasting an entire day, and allowing an SK to kill again).

Crossposted with RC:

Why did you block Zero/Person A? I can see alvinz with the hammer N1, but not the reasoning behind the other two.

[Amished]

Well, as the person you were voting for D3 was lynched (shrine/Ace) I can see you not having somebody to block. Your discussion about the NK's (you being able to prevent them in a way) makes a lot more sense now overall, while always seeming to have a pro-town vibe to them as well. I am against lynching a claimed pro-town Power Role.

Going back to the start of the game when we had the Mastin WIFOM about who his target was, I do believe that he was trying to go through his cop meta to try to lynch you now. Even then, it was between you, Ace (SK, anti-town), and Tar (Mafia, anti-town) in my eyes, and from what everyone has said, lyncher targets are generally pro-town. In that case, it's also make sense that you're pro-town.

However, it's really late for a claim (under 4 hours to deadline without extension).

[Amished]

Oh, shit. I thought we were only hovering around L-1 for you, RC. Hrmph.

[Amished]

Ah, more like a hider that can tell certain people they know are pro-town who's scum if they die. Weird. I never thought about that.

If we assume that they would die if they target scum (which is reasonable since if they didn't die and recruited scum or failed to recruit a player they'd be rather overpowered by basically being broken or a strong investigative role as there isn't much possibility of sanity issues nor wondering about a godfather if there is one, which defeats the purpose of a godfather...) then there is no scum in the group and their word is completely accurate as they'd have no reason to lie. If that follows, then we can ask them:

@Zaz, BM: Can you recruit players or not?

It'd still be a pro-town cult moreso than a mason group in my eyes, but that's personal modding nuance in naming convention.

I'd have to find it, but I thought even during D1 (when the "lining up lynches" occurred), Az said that he had a valid reason to say that (signaling to me that they were forming a connection even then, rather than one that formed overnight).

Looking for that now, as Az was replaced and shouldn't take long.

[Amished]

EBWOP: I was wrong, it was D2 that he said that they were masons together, though here's the whole post:

V/LA? You said you were going to have a post for us. Sad

And then I got sick. Sorry. I didn't enjoy it either Sad


now, What I was going to post about concErned the phoebus tRying to setup a Day2 bandwagon on mE. I know this is going to sound scuMmy, but, trust him, he does have reASons. And he alsO has good reasoN not to reveal them.

get what I'm trying to Say?

Or do I have to be a little more obvious?

As to the rest of the game, I see that we're debating Zero's jesteriness. I say he's not a Jester, because I don't think Jebus is a bastard mod.

On Caboose - I needa reread. I missed most of him through the Mastinness.

OP doesn't seem quite as scummy today, and I'm intrigued by his interaction with Tar.

In short, I needa reread. Oh God. Kill me now.

The way he phrased "trying to setup a D2 bandwagon on me" signals to me that they were masons together before the Night began. Though he (Az) did bring up the idea of recruiting masons...

Screw WIFOM, srsly.

I literally don't even know anymore. I'm taking a nap if I have time.

[Amished]

--Note: I will be going through this post in the manner of speaking that there is only one scum group, as N1 is what I'm primarily concerned about, and at that point there wouldn't be confirmation to any scumgroups/cults (ok, maybe cults) that there would be another scumgroup out there as there were no scumgroup lynches nor N0 kills.

@Kise: Just a guess, but:

Potentially to screw with the scum group(s) at the time. To build on a case that's already out there would be a lot more attractive for scum to hop onto during D2 (catching them through vote count analysis).

-or-

Making it look like Az was scummy through somebody's eyes that wasn't scum (the scum group would know whether or not Az/Phoe was in their group) would make it less attractive to kill Az if Phoebus felt that Az was making too many PR/informed comments (giving up partial confirmation later on to help the town by having one partner die, leaving another at risk for no confirmation at all if they were NK'd before claiming). This would also apply to protecting Phoebus in a way by making it look like he's committed to pushing a lynch on somebody not in the scum group, which is also a benefit to scum to keep somebody like that around.

Either would make sense, but I can't say for sure. Hell, it could be both, and just an elegant solution to a tricky problem.

[Amished]

EBWOP: Hewitt: Do you believe RC's claim as town roleblocker?

[Amished]

If he was a mafia roleblocker, do you think he was telling the truth about his roleblocks?

[Amished]

EBWOP: (Crossposted)

Clearly that'd be the optimal strategy for recruiting masons. Which is why I called them either a weak investigative role (weak cop, weak doc, etc. if they die); or relatively imbalanced (given that RC is a roleblocker of some sort, though if they come out with their roleblocks and the recruiter isn't one of them) then they have a way of getting around Godfather investigation immunity, basically, which would destroy a relatively common theme in large games.

Looking at the pro-town abilities so far, I wouldn't put it past Jebus to have a pro-town roleblocker. We've had a tracker, watcher, joat, and doc. Putting a roleblocker in there would serve as another recurring protection (anti-kill, anyways, if guessing correctly) role. Especially with the common sentiment around here that Cop + Doc is imbalanced, Doc + other weaker roles seems to fit along those lines.

The way I see it, is that if RC is town (which I'm currently leaning towards), RC blocked Alvinz for probably the same reason that Alvinz got vigged. 2 posts all day then hammer without a reason? Looks scummy to me for sure; though somebody drawing that much attention to themselves for just hammering all day probably wouldn't be chosen to kill if they were part of a scum group (WIFOM applicable there as well, though there obviously was an SK, and they could've done the same).

[Amished]

NAnanana-NAnanana-NAnanana... BATMAN!

All joking aside, yesterday's lynch was absolutely ideal in my opinion. RC being the Hate Club *CULT leader* gives us several key pieces of information. One, I doubt the HC would be on their own *leaders* lynch, so I feel rather comfortable eliminating them from HC discussion.

So, since they could not recruit N4, we have a N1, N2, N3 to look at. One night is accounted for by Stevie, so there should be 2 more of them. I actually thought Fonz was a cult member, so him being a mason instead cuts down on one of my suspects for HC from before.

With the HC being a confirmed Cult, we can't be sure about the number of mafia. They obviously are our number one concern, as they can obviously still kill, since the other killing role was covered by Kise and I think we can count on him to be active and kill every night without getting blocked at all or anything. As such, I suspect both townies and mafia were on RC's lynch.

This gives:
Battle Mage (mason),
Kise (dead),
Javert,
The Fonz (dead mason),
joe478,
hewitt,
ryan2754,
Zazier (mason)

Cutting out the dead/masons (odd that all three masons were on the lynch, signals to me good communication skills, which is tough to pull off if they weren't aligned with each other) we are stuck with:

Javert (replaced Caboose DAY3),
Hewitt (original),
joe478 (replaced Zerophear DAY4),
ryan2754 (original).

Of these, Javert defending Hewitt defending joe (replaced zero) still stands out as the most scummy play of all of these. I've seen scum defend townies moreso than I've seen townies defend other townies or townies defend scum. Because of that, Javert looks to be the best option for me at the moment.

Going off on a parallel line of thought; if the HC members were not on the lynch of their leader, it then is narrowed down to:

Amished (me, not scum)
RedCoyote (dead, leader),

therefore the two left are most likely in:
King (original),
Lowell (replaced Jeromus DAY3),
orangepenguin (original),
stark (replaced PersonA DAY4, replaced White Castle NIGHT3, replaced over9000 DAY 1),
qwints (replaced Zoraster DAY4).

Personally I think that scum tend to replace out. In this case, we're looking at a cult (recruit at night, probably told near the end of the night based on personal *limited* experience modding, just to make sure that they weren't killed as killing factions always get the full night deadline to submit kills, so being culted I would guess be a last PM to be sent); therefore the DAY replacements are my two guesses for the remainder of the HC as stark's position replacement has been pretty constant throughout days and nights over the duration of the game.

I do not know how many scum would be needed to balance that with a cult. I'm guessing more than one (remaining). 2-3 more would make sense. Javert and Hewitt are my two top suspects for that with their defenses of others.

With 4-5 scum left, and only 7 are needed to lynch, we do need to be very careful with our votes. If we miss both HC and Mafia (which I think is unlikely, but I think we're not likely to hit one if we miss the other based on this last votecount particularly as it was on the HC leader.

Combining my position on defense + replacing, Javert seems to be the best option for me period. I need to look for potential ties between Tar and Caboose, as well as Caboose/Javert's voting pattern.

I'll post more as I find it.

[Amished]

Hrmph, I thought I had a new idea about possible HC recruitments, but that fell apart and didn't make sense at all.

[Amished]

@ryan: I thought he was a pro-town roleblocker. I thought it fit with the rest of the odd roles that had already been revealed and I was not sure about the origin of the BTD kill (vig/sk or killing cult). Clearly the shot was still the mafia (note, who all else had "confusion" about this before? Going back to see if I can find acting stupid (scummy) or misreading (neutral)). If there was an SK, I thought that he'd be an ideal role to eliminate one of our anti-town killing roles as with most mafias, they can choose who will send in the kill so unlikely to block them.

Hell, I didn't even "defend" RC until he was already lynched. That's a pisspoor attempt at a false case. Another scum? Becoming more likely, or I might be wrong about Javert/Hewitt and this is one of them that was on the wagon.

@Javert: Good point about RC pushing for mason death, I didn't get a chance to reread him to notice that it was him doing that all along. Maybe he tried to recruit a mason and failed? Would cut down on another scum to find increasing our chances..

[Amished]

EBWOP: Crossposted with BM

Regardless of what they thought about a player, they still would need townies lynched as well. They have a kill to get rid of other threats to them, so any lynch that's not their own would be good for them.

[Amished]

So, Javert: Do you think that RC just failed to recruit a night or two (or every night but having StevieT considering the "playing very poorly for their win condition"), actually recruited but in the absence of a lot of our people, they were not active in thread, or just recruited people that weren't active to begin with?

@ryan: You are in my top 3 suspects currently. Javert I've had an extremely hard time reading throughout the game, and with the news of being an alt, I have to take more time to look through a meta of him. His defense of Hewitt is my #1 suspicious action, and being on the lynch of a cult leader would (like I said before) pretty much eliminate him from my "possible HC" list, giving me a decent target for mafia. Hewitt I feel has been the scummiest and has defended a weaker player (zero), as well as being on the RC lynch (so probably not HC, but looks to be probably mafia). You being on the RC lynch, as well as your "case" of me defending RC through faulty timeline reference still keeps you in my mafia running. I pretty much fail to believe that there were no scum on a lynch at any point in time, so I have a very narrowed down avenue to look for scum and I'm working on VC analysis and meta at the moment. With 4 people potentially, and now Javert giving me a lot more meta to look through it'll take me a long time, especially as I go through every page to check for the biggest bandwagons and check them against my suspects. When I see a vote change between each of you, I have to also check to see what your reasons were as well.

[Amished]

I mostly read through games to look at a general feel of how they play (how they address other players as scum/town). I haven't looked at anybody's meta, and I generally use that as a last resort if I can't find anything in game (as that's the most pertinent) or if I'm torn between several candidates and I want to be on the one most likely to hit scum.

I also have an alt, and while it was initially to try out things a bit differently without subjecting myself to "omg ur meta iz diffrent ooo scum" has actually turned into basically just another account where I play basically the same. As the search function on the boards is broken/disabled where you can't search for posts in game, I figured it'd be a lot easier to find games as PJ rather than Javert using Google search. If I even use meta, I'll let you know what I find, but your linked games will get me more of a head start than anything.

However, your last post (regarding pinging others for an emotional response) has me leaning more towards town for you.

@Ryan: Have anything substantial? Or are you just flailing now that I'm looking at you rather than anybody else?

[Amished]

Good thing you weren't culted then?

[Amished]

Mod-Edit Votecount 5-1

Amished - 1

(ryan2754)

Lowell - 1

(Battle Mage)

Not Voting - 10

(joe478, King, Amished, hewitt, stark, Lowell, Zazier, qwints, Javert, orangepenguin)

With 12 alive, it takes 7 to lynch.

---

What other results do you have? Mod-confirmed sane?

[Amished]

"Oh look, everybody else that I investigated is dead"

Not buying the fake claim.

Vote: Ryan2754

[Amished]

I was off the lynchwagon because I thought that Hewitt was a better choice. Given the quick deadline, I would've switched to avoid NL (ala my play the rest of the day, namely switching to Mastin D1 and trying to get Ace lynched D2 at deadline.)

[Amished]

It does matter when I know I'm innocent. I was hoping to get him to give us information on current players, or to see if he was going to come up paranoid or insane. As such, a false result without him giving reason to "doubt" him means he's lying scum.

@Ryan: Or I'm innocent and you're scum, trying to get you into an endgame scenario. I've done similar as scum to get my partner into LyLo without much suspicion on him. I also claimed early to try to cut down on discussion. You, as "cop" didn't wait to see what other wifom/information I would have as the "scum" you say I am.

That is why I waited to vote him. Either through bad results (actual pro-town cop, sanity questionable), or to allow him to feel as he's in control and give up more information on his partner(s). As his claim gives us all dead people where he has "bad luck" by "hitting two scum throughout the game", he's not giving up any partners, and allows us to hit scum today.

Also, 3/4 aren't "dumb" as I've done/seen both in different situations (4 gives wifom on whether you were trying to pull a gambit to get a partner lynched and become "confirmed"). You wouldn't know if you're gonna get lynched either, so 3 is what you'd be hoping for. It allows you to lynch a townie that you're worried? about and gets you another NK now that the last pro-town killing role is gone, not having to worry about getting NK'd at all, advancing you one day further towards LyLo where a mistake wins you the game.

3 was by Mastin on me in Newbie 748 on Day 2 (failed, did get to LyLo though), while 4 was by my alt that successfully got us to LyLo and my partner won the game (Newbie 799 (I'm Truant))

However, seeing as Hate Club has the ability to kill in this game, it doesn't surprise me that I got a read of scum over 3rd party off of him as HC.

Where do you know that the HC has an ability to kill?

Um....10. Look at my Investigation results. All of my dead investigations confirm my sanity. The only way Amished is not a scum party is if he is some miller bullshit.

Or you're lying...

[Amished]

I am not some miller bullshit.

[Amished]

Checking on mod-clarification for something..

[Amished]

... Uhh, last I checked, Kise was a vig, and Mafia still have their kill. That makes 2 NKs. This looks like a slip knowing that one way or another Kise didn't kill the last couple nights, or you didn't, but are trying to credit a "threat" to the town with a NK to make you (as HC) appear more ominous.

You said you had been

been quite unlucky with regards to my night investigations.

which is where I got that from.

What I was trying to say with that confusing last sentence was that as cop, you didn't wait to see who would side with me given I've been rather vocal and try to get more information by me interacting with other players. However, you decide to claim early, cutting off all other interaction and generally makes days shorter (more beneficial as scum).

Also, you've said that it's not close to endgame/lylo, but the tide needs to be changed for the town. Right.

[Amished]

Ok, so I got the mod clarification that I was looking for. Either Ryan is lying, or Qwints is scum. (Both *could* be the case, but for different reasons, will explain at the end of the post).

I'm a pro-town hider.

N1 I hid behind OPengy (2nd leading vote getter on D1. I didn't feel he was all that scummy, so I hid behind him as I thought that the scum would leave him alone to possibly try to stir up a mislynch on D2).

N2 I didn't hide at all due to the fact that there were 4 NK's N1, and I thought I'd take my chances by myself as I didn't feel I really stood out on anything.

N3 I hid behind Zazier as on N2 the scum didn't go after the Masons, so I thought that they'd stick with that plan on the next night.

N4 I hid behind Qwints. Was wary of hiding behind the masons again because by now I thought that they were pretty much confirmed. Qwints was a lurker and therefore I figured wouldn't be NK'd.

I had initially thought that I would die if I hid behind scum (typical hider PM) but when I checked my PM again and talked with Jebus, I would only die if the person I hid behind was targeted for a kill. In this case, I'm assuming that ryan's target on me went to whoever I hid behind as it wasn't a kill.

If that's the case, I don't know if ryan was lying to manufacture a false claim on me (I would've thought he'd get no-result); or if he got Qwints alignment instead. Until I get more clarification, I shall

Unvote

[Amished]

I have no clue if *anybody* I hid behind is scum or not. I just saw that I was a hider so I assumed the typical stance (die if the person hid behind is NK'd or scum, kinda like a weak cop for the 2nd option (scum)). However, I can hide behind scum as long as they aren't targeted for a NK (which would still kill me).

The way I would make a hider role is that they die if they hide behind scum or the person they hide behind is NK'd, but otherwise be unable to be targeted (which would come up as a no-result for you, ryan). However, I talked with Jebus and he said that I would only die if the person I hid behind was NK'd. I have no idea how being hidden interacts with other roles that aren't killing factions. As I know I'm pro-town, I'm guessing that you might've gotten Qwints alignment instead of mine as I was hiding behind him.

[Amished]

EBWOP: To be perfectly clear, Zaz could be pro-town (like I believe her to be) and I would've had the same result.

[Amished]

Well, for you maybe. For me it's either Qwints is scum or ryan said he got a result when he shouldn't have (making him scum).

[Amished]

Basically. Could be both scum but I doubt it. One or the other for me, but a choice of all three for you I would suppose.

[Amished]

In that case, nobody would die (if I was targeted). I haven't exactly tried to get NK'd, but I've played as pro-town as I could. This is why I didn't see RC's fishing as that bad before when I should've as I benefited from avoiding a NK by hiding behind who they were targetting, while he didn't want to recruit somebody who was going to die.

[Amished]

Framer shouldn't have been able to target me though. Redirecter on you? After the power the town has, I would expect they have something. (Doc, Cop, Watcher, Tracker, Hider....)

[Amished]

@Stark: That's correct.

@Javert: I don't know what went on, as the way I thought it should happen is that if Ryan investigated *me* he should've gotten no result. I don't know if the mod plays it different or if there was something else to affect his (ryan's) result.

[Amished]

What other results do you have?

Mod-confirmed sane

?

Explain why you asked the bolded when you should know the answer as he has claimed to have a guilty on you.

Because I believed him to be lying at that point, I wanted to see how far he was going to go with the lie and see what WIFOM we could get from him possibly trying to clear a scumbuddy.

As many people have said that a scum gambit cop claim at this point is too risky with only one result, I've given up on that. When I saw a "cop" get a guilty on me, they were my partner (the Newbie with Mastin that I linked to earlier today). As I have no partner, that doesn't work the same way.

That is why I explored a redirector or other possibilities instead of ryan lying.

[Amished]

EBWOP: lol at Joe losing a bet (looks at avatar)

Also, welcome back Zazie

[Amished]

Vote: Amished

Go scum!

[Amished]

OMG thank god. I put way too much effort into this game to come away with a loss; especially with an innocent result and a scum mason. Tar dying N1 was a severe blow; I thought he would've done really well going into the later game, and I was hoping that he'd help guide the rest of us as this is my first large game as scum; and lead the town to get more mislynches.

Also, the night that somebody is killed, their kill doesn't go through. I talked with Kise after we were both dead and he targeted me to kill the night I fingered him as the Vig. That's why Joe's kill didn't go through last night (if he sent one in at all).

Drawing a vig and a cop to me sucked though. What did I do wrong to garner PR attention like that? Any advice is welcome, I don't do all that well as scum

[Amished]

Why were you disappointed in me? You didn't say much in our QT to guide me =?

[Amished]

You gave up on me that game. Hell, you gave up on Poro that game too. I wasn't the only one attacking you for your behavior there.

[Amished]

Yeah, I was scared of getting on your bad side too much Jav. If the cult couldn't kill, I think you easily could've gotten rid of the cult and weeded out the mafia (other than BM due to "confirmation"). You played extremely well, don't get too down on yourself.

[Amished]

Who would've known something like that would happen though, Dev? Finding a non pro-town allied person D1 out of.. 6? is pretty damn good, IMO. You did well, there was no way to divine the consequences of your action.