Open 588 Pick Your Poison -- Game Over

[Drezi]

I don't like House's vote in 93. Ton's of people have been speculating and I don't see why Lal should be singled out.

That's such a troll vote

[House]

UNVOTE:

VOTE: Sir Cyanie

The last bit is obviously meant to be:

I don't like House's vote in 93. Ton's of people have been speculating and I don't see why Lal should be singled out.

Scumread me for it all you want. I have good reason for that vote and I'm sticking to it.

[VictorDeAngelo]

@Cynanide

- With regards to 98, listing things I've done this game isn't really scumhunting, if that's what you were trying to pretend you were doing. And you're playing dumb if you're really trying to make out that the vote is solely because you made a t/s list. As far as 99 goes, you can try rewriting my posts or misrep me as much as you want, I doubt people are going to be fooled by it.

I don't like House's vote in 93. Ton's of people have been speculating and I don't see why Lal should be singled out.

That's such a troll vote

Are you saying my vote is trollish or House's vote is?

UNVOTE:

VOTE: Sir Cyanie

The last bit is obviously meant to be:

I don't like House's vote in 93. Ton's of people have been speculating and I don't see why Lal should be singled out.

Scumread me for it all you want. I have good reason for that vote and I'm sticking to it.

But why vote Lal over the other players the setup? Where did you get Lal knows there's an IC from exactly?

[Drezi]

Are you saying my vote is trollish or House's vote is?

House's.

She seems to know there is an IC and is trying to push Cyanide based on her knowledge.

If this is supposed to be his reason for voting, that is.

Lalendra voted Cyanide saying:

OR this is scum who knows that there is an IC and is trying to rationalize why he might know that so that when the IC is discovered, and it seems like he knew too much, he can just go "well I said right in this post here that I was just assuming based on the completed games!"

Which is wrong, but apparently House did not vote her for making a case against somene with incorrect reasoning (That would be weird btw after defending deathfisaro, saying that scum can't possibly make such a mistake). He voted her saying that she seems to know there is an IC and uses that knowledge, while it's pretty evident that her case was that

IF

Cyanide is scum and there is an IC, he'd obviously know that, and he's trying to rationalize why he knows that. (CYANIDE already explained why this doesn't really make sense in 91).

[Riabi]

Lal's vote in 90 is bad, IMO. Her entire post is just one WIFOM argument after another.

Victor's vote in 96 feels OMGUS to me. I would have liked to see victor actually respond to Cynide's accusation rather than just vote him back.

[VictorDeAngelo]

Lal's vote in 90 is bad, IMO. Her entire post is just one WIFOM argument after another.

Victor's vote in 96 feels OMGUS to me. I would have liked to see victor actually respond to Cynide's accusation rather than just vote him back.

Your dislike for votes on Sir Cynanide is noted.

Also what accusations should I be responding to exactly; his accusation that I formed a weak read on a player (well I did that), that I asked questions (did that as well)... the only thing to respond is the fact that none of the play SC called me out for is actually scummy behaviour. And frankly the only response he deserves is a vote in my book.

[Count Dooku]

@Victor
93 is not House's post... You meant 92?

[pisskop]

It is not RVS anymore:
UNVOTE:

The unvote is not what bothers me about this, its trying to justify it. The end of RVS is in no way a concrete event nor does it dictate that you instantly unvote.
And since your unvote your minimal content has sunk to correcting other players on their grammatical mistakes.

Ok I'll say my thoughts after school.

VOTE: unvote

How's that post going?

IRT second part: This could be a townslip.

I don't really look too far into that. The wifom is that scum are wanking out the odds and 'slipping'. Being bad at math isn't a townslip.

I agree with House; this is a hairy post. It sends my hair on end.

First, let's drop all the setup specualtion talk. Thank you.
I don't like House's vote in VOTE: 93. Ton's of people have been speculating and I don't see why Lal should be singled out.

+1 to ending the speculation minefield.
afa House's vote, I'm okay with it. Tons of people have been speculating; about the setup. His reason is generic though.

[pisskop]

Sir Cyanide

Btw someone refresh my memory it's been a while since I played a game here, seeing as we are

13 players

we need 7 people to vote for 1 person to reach a lynch right?

Yeh I'm retarded, I was thinking 'there's 10 town and 3 of them are scum so 7:3'

but that obviously doesn't make any sense. Either way that just makes my point even more relevant.

Indeed.
I'm relatively mixed in how I feel about you. Some things I like, some things look like poor focus, some things look like scuz.

People on this site are really antsy to call something breadcrumbing/tells, I don't really believe in that. Seeing as the likelihood of there being an IC is so high, I suggest we devote some of our energy to discussing what the optimal play for the IC should be. I've already looked through the forums and wiki and there are no real articles and/or discussions about it. All in favor yay/nay?

Nay. Your job as a townie isn't to try to predict the actions of the PRs nor is it your job to hunt them out.

Worse, you may not get shot for it because you're more likely to be vanilla town if you mispredicted the set-up. You stated 'innocent child, tracker, 20/80

I'm really confused why the IC is the subject of such prolonged discussion. Does it change your game strategy much?

Ok, lets see what we know so far. Sadly I can't post in blue so we're going with a European traffic light scheme (

green

is town read,

orange

is neutral/undecided,

<Readlist>

Isn't it early to do this? I appreciate the townread, really, but this is a lot of effort for a first read. I look forward to your periodic reads.

Vote: Sir Cyanide

[Count Dooku]

And since your unvote your minimal content has sunk to correcting other players on their grammatical mistakes.

That is not true btw.

[Count Dooku]

Isn't it early to do this?

I appreciate the townread

, really, but this is a lot of effort for a first read. I look forward to your periodic reads.

Vote: Sir Cyanide

You scumread him, but you appreciate that he is townreading you? What? Why do you care about something, that a scum said about you. You think he is scum, so according to you, he can fake everything.

[Count Dooku]

In other news, I don't like 83. A town scum list is redundant and this seems to just be an excuse to justify a scumread on me.

Why is that redundant? I don't get it.

[SIR CYANIDE]

People on this site are really antsy to call something breadcrumbing/tells, I don't really believe in that. Seeing as the likelihood of there being an IC is so high, I suggest we devote some of our energy to discussing what the optimal play for the IC should be. I've already looked through the forums and wiki and there are no real articles and/or discussions about it. All in favor yay/nay?

Nay. Your job as a townie isn't to try to predict the actions of the PRs nor is it your job to hunt them out.

I wasn't hunting for PRs, in fact I specifically stated I wasn't. Rather, I was trying to predict the set-up. The reason you don't role fish or speculate about set-ups like this in non-open games is because there's really absolutely no way of knowing what roles were introduced, so appearing to be certain of something in those scenarios is much more of a hint towards that person being a PR (because he/she can't know, so if he/she appears to know, he/she is probably one of the PRs and is breadcrumbing/hinting). Here, in an open game, it is much, much different. First of all, we know exactly what roles are a possibility and we also know that the mafia knows the set-up. Speculating about what the set-up may be is probably one of the better things we can do right now. I'm pretty sure not everyone considered the set-up to have an IC before we started talking about it. Well, now we do heavily suspect the set-up to have an IC, right? Does anyone actually disagree with this? If there is anyone who thinks it's unlikely for this game to have an IC, please speak up and give your reasoning. If everyone agrees, what's the harm in bringing it out so that the town people who have maybe not thought about it get some additional information?

I'm really confused why the IC is the subject of such prolonged discussion. Does it change your game strategy much?

There's no direct impact but I think we should devote some posts to discuss what optimal IC strategy is. The IC may not directly know what his/her optimal play is, so I feel we should discuss the protocol for the IC's claim. Why are people against this?

Isn't it early to do this? I appreciate the townread, really, but this is a lot of effort for a first read. I look forward to your periodic reads.

It is kind of early yea, but does posting an early list really make me scummy? Lol.

[House]

There's no direct impact but I think we should devote some posts to discuss what optimal IC strategy is. The IC may not directly know what his/her optimal play is, so I feel we should discuss the protocol for the IC's claim. Why are people against this?

This is ridiculous. It's not like the IC has any actual abilities outside of becoming confirmed town.

The strategy for IC is pants-shittingly obvious. Play a town game and don't claim unless run up, because an IC is instant NK bait & nothing more than a named townie once outed.

You harping on about something so simplistic makes me think you're just trying to look invested without actually being productive at all.

[SIR CYANIDE]

The strategy for IC is pants-shittingly obvious.

Not really. When you're IC, you're at L-1 and someone has the intent to hammer and asks you to claim, what do you do? There are multiple things you can do. Without the discussion I'm trying to incite, this is how it will likely go down:

Hammerer: claim
IC: I'm IC
Hammerer: pm to mods so we know you are IC
Wagonners: yeah go pm the mod
IC: alright
Mod: IC is IC
Hammerer: well I'll be damned
Wagonners: unvote: IC, vote: other person
~~
IT IS NOW NIGHT 1

IC has been found dead
~~



-------------------------


Now it doesn't have to be like this. It can also be like this:

Hammerer: claim
IC: I'm IC
Hammerer: pm to mods so we know you are IC
Wagonners: yeah go pm the mods
IC: no, I'll do it first thing next day
Hammerer: no, you have to pm the mod or you're getting a hammer
IC: I'll do it the first thing next day, we're not in LyLo, if I don't do it the next day you can still lynch me, blahblahblah
Hammerer&Wagonners: *more discussion ensues*
Wagonners: unvote: IC
~~
IT IS NOW NIGHT 1

IC, who was not actually IC but vanilla town, has been found dead
~~

Gratz, we got +value. The issue here is if the

real

IC would have counterclaimed. Then the 'IC' in this example could have been scum, gone down and gotten a PR with him. It may seem silly to counterclaim, but if the fake IC pulls something like I just described in example 2, people may play incorrectly and counterclaim him just to get the lynch in. I've seen lots of stupid shit in my mafia career. This is one of those games where we actually have a fair amount of information (compared to other mafia games) and I think we should use that information to the best of our ability, this includes some probability work and speculation about mafia tendencies and what we should do if situation [x] or [y] arises.

[SIR CYANIDE]

Additionally, if the fake IC claimed to be IC and then got shot the following night that tells us a lot, namely that there pretty much is an IC (hence the mafia targeting the IC).

[House]

The strategy for IC is pants-shittingly obvious.

Not really. When you're IC, you're at L-1 and someone has the intent to hammer and asks you to claim, what do you do? There are multiple things you can do. Without the discussion I'm trying to incite, this is how it will likely go down:

Hammerer: claim
IC: I'm IC
Hammerer: pm to mods so we know you are IC
Wagonners: yeah go pm the mod
IC: alright
Mod: IC is IC
Hammerer: well I'll be damned
Wagonners: unvote: IC, vote: other person
~~
IT IS NOW NIGHT 1

IC has been found dead
~~



-------------------------


Now it doesn't have to be like this. It can also be like this:

Hammerer: claim
IC: I'm IC
Hammerer: pm to mods so we know you are IC
Wagonners: yeah go pm the mods
IC: no, I'll do it first thing next day
Hammerer: no, you have to pm the mod or you're getting a hammer
IC: I'll do it the first thing next day, we're not in LyLo, if I don't do it the next day you can still lynch me, blahblahblah
Hammerer&Wagonners: *more discussion ensues*
Wagonners: unvote: IC
~~
IT IS NOW NIGHT 1

IC, who was not actually IC but vanilla town, has been found dead
~~

Gratz, we got +value. The issue here is if the

real

IC would have counterclaimed. Then the 'IC' in this example could have been scum, gone down and gotten a PR with him. It may seem silly to counterclaim, but if the fake IC pulls something like I just described in example 2, people may play incorrectly and counterclaim him just to get the lynch in. I've seen lots of stupid shit in my mafia career. This is one of those games where we actually have a fair amount of information (compared to other mafia games) and I think we should use that information to the best of our ability, this includes some probability work and speculation about mafia tendencies and what we should do if situation [x] or [y] arises.

On the one hand, that's actually not terrible.

On the other, you could have simply posted it in the first place without fishing. I'd have felt better about your slot if you had.

[Drezi]

Hammerer: claim
IC: I'm IC
Hammerer: pm to mods so we know you are IC
Wagonners: yeah go pm the mods
IC: no, I'll do it first thing next day
Hammerer: no, you have to pm the mod or you're getting a hammer
IC: I'll do it the first thing next day, we're not in LyLo, if I don't do it the next day you can still lynch me, blahblahblah
Hammerer&Wagonners: *more discussion ensues*
Wagonners: unvote: IC

Wagonners: vote Player2 (L-1)
Player2: actually I'm IC
...
Player3: no, actually I'm IC

Back to square one.

OR

NL
random townie (not ic claim) found dead.
Lynch IC claim, when he can't confirm.
Repeat.

And imagine this situation when we don't even have an IC. Scum knows if that's the case.

Where's the +value?

[House]

Hammerer: claim
IC: I'm IC
Hammerer: pm to mods so we know you are IC
Wagonners: yeah go pm the mods
IC: no, I'll do it first thing next day
Hammerer: no, you have to pm the mod or you're getting a hammer
IC: I'll do it the first thing next day, we're not in LyLo, if I don't do it the next day you can still lynch me, blahblahblah
Hammerer&Wagonners: *more discussion ensues*
Wagonners: unvote: IC

Wagonners: vote Player2 (L-1)
Player2: actually I'm IC
...
Player3: no, actually I'm IC

Back to square one.

OR

NL
random townie (not ic claim) found dead.
Lynch IC claim, when he can't confirm.
Repeat.

And imagine this situation when we don't even have an IC. Scum knows if that's the case.

Where's the +value?

You clearly don't know how IC works.

[SIR CYANIDE]

Hammerer: claim
IC: I'm IC
Hammerer: pm to mods so we know you are IC
Wagonners: yeah go pm the mods
IC: no, I'll do it first thing next day
Hammerer: no, you have to pm the mod or you're getting a hammer
IC: I'll do it the first thing next day, we're not in LyLo, if I don't do it the next day you can still lynch me, blahblahblah
Hammerer&Wagonners: *more discussion ensues*
Wagonners: unvote: IC

Wagonners: vote Player2 (L-1)
Player2: actually I'm IC
...
Player3: no, actually I'm IC

Back to square one.

OR

NL
random townie (not ic claim) found dead.
Lynch IC claim, when he can't confirm.
Repeat.

And imagine this situation when we don't even have an IC. Scum knows if that's the case.

Where's the +value?

In example one, the IC makes an incorrect play by immediately counterclaiming. That is what I'm trying to avoid by talking about how IC should play. In fact, in my own message I give the exact same example and why we need this discussion so anyone trying to make some fancy plays doesn't get fucked over by the IC claiming in a bad spot.

In your last example you were going to lynch the IC claim anyway. Look at it like this:

CASE 1

-----
Player 2 is Vanilla Town
Player 2 claims IC after being forced to claim by a potential hammer
We lynch player 3, which was the 2nd most suspect player.
Next day player 2 is alive and can't claim, so we lynch player 2.

vs.

CASE 2

-----
Player 2 is Vanilla Town
Player 2 claims Vanilla Town after being forced to claim by a potential hammer
Player 2 gets lynched (don't pretend you suddenly won't lynch someone when they claim VT)
Player 3 will probably get lynched next day



Now I do not deny that case 2 is slightly better for town than case 1, but I'm just playing the odds here. I think if you'd simulate the base situation over like 1000 games that town would come out ahead from such a play. It's kind of like poker: yeah, you can be favored to get ahead and still lose, that doesn't mean the play itself is bad just because someone can think of a way it can play out that's counterproductive for town's win condition.

[Lalendra]

Well, now we do heavily suspect the set-up to have an IC, right? Does anyone actually disagree with this? If there is anyone who thinks it's unlikely for this game to have an IC, please speak up and give your reasoning.

The odds are good that there is one, however it's just as likely that if IC is as common as you say, that scum might have deliberately NOT picked IC as one of the PRs just to throw us off.

[Drezi]

You clearly don't know how IC works.

You clearly don't understand what I'm saying.

[Drezi]

In example one, the IC makes an incorrect play by immediately counterclaiming.

My examples are both the continuations of your example2, which is in the quote. Read it as such, noone is counterclaiming immediately.

[Lalendra]

There's no direct impact but I think we should devote some posts to discuss what optimal IC strategy is. The IC may not directly know what his/her optimal play is, so I feel we should discuss the protocol for the IC's claim. Why are people against this?

This is ridiculous. It's not like the IC has any actual abilities outside of becoming confirmed town.

The strategy for IC is pants-shittingly obvious. Play a town game and don't claim unless run up, because an IC is instant NK bait & nothing more than a named townie once outed.

You harping on about something so simplistic makes me think you're just trying to look invested without actually being productive at all.

I was wondering the same thing, I don't really see what purpose the IC would serve other than becoming NK bait. Then again, I've never played a game with an IC before so I don't know if there are better tactics that he/she could use.

[SIR CYANIDE]

On the other, you could have simply posted it in the first place without fishing. I'd have felt better about your slot if you had.

I was never fishing, I simply stated that it was likely there was an IC due to objective statisical data, then I backed that up with my subjective opinion of 'if I were mafia I'd also go for IC'.

The odds are good that there is one, however it's just as likely that if IC is as common as you say, that scum might have deliberately NOT picked IC as one of the PRs just to throw us off.

True (and wifom'ish but nearly everything is wifom'ish so whatever), but it is unlikely that the mafia predicted that there would be such an elaborate amount of discussion about the set-up and may have concluded that the value they gain from having an inferior PR (or at least deemed inferior by popular opinion) outweighs the value they lose from being predictable.