Mini Normal 1848 — Game Over!

MortFeld · Post Post #2800 (ISO) » Fri Nov 25, 2016 12:58 pm

Besides, the gimmick isn't even detracting from gameplay. I'm still trying to find scum the old fashioned way.

Which reminds me, I need to look at LUV again.

rb · Post Post #2801 (ISO) » Fri Nov 25, 2016 1:35 pm

It doesn't unless we actually jail scum. Which means we have to find scum first anyway. So just focus on finding scum.

rb · Post Post #2802 (ISO) » Fri Nov 25, 2016 1:35 pm

It's not really you I'm referring to anyway

MortFeld · Post Post #2803 (ISO) » Fri Nov 25, 2016 1:40 pm

In post 2801, rb wrote:It doesn't unless we actually jail scum. Which means we have to find scum first anyway. So just focus on finding scum.

No...

I'm discussing a scenario where we jail town and scum decide to no kill. The problem is that this game can end up in a weird limbo, where it is optimal for us

not

to lynch the jailed person next day even if there is no nightkill. This is WIFOM but it's WIFOM we have to consider - to lynch town after a no kill would be bad. The alternative is for us to continuously no lynch and force scum to either nightkill, letting us confirm town, or keeping the game in this perpetual state until it's resolved by the mod.

My question, which is

still

unanswered, is if there is a point at which a game ends after a sufficient number of days with no nightkill or lynch.

MortFeld · Post Post #2804 (ISO) » Fri Nov 25, 2016 1:42 pm

I don't know why you're avoiding discussing this. If it's suboptimal for us to lynch tomorrow, we shouldn't lynch tomorrow, regardless of what general mafia theory usually dictates.

Naomi-Tan · Post Post #2805 (ISO) » Fri Nov 25, 2016 1:54 pm

In post 2762, Lil Uzi Vert wrote:
@Naomi:
I didn't understand much of your earlier point and only really got the latter part about prods and activity. Thanks for clarifying.

The problem with your theory is that you're assuming that Shadow and RK are town. Drone and Toto if I recall correctly never pushed Shadow but as for the slot overall I would have to double check. Drone made a case for RK but didn't really push it much and awkwardly hopped off to TF if I'm recalling correctly. You're right that neither pushed Nero though but I don't think it's that simple.

As for my theory, yeah scum could choose to no kill but that doesn't really help them in the long run as that's just giving town more time and chances to weed the last scum out.

In post 2800, MortFeld wrote:Besides, the gimmick isn't even detracting from gameplay. I'm still trying to find scum the old fashioned way.

Which reminds me, I need to look at LUV again.

What gimick you talking about here?

MortFeld · Post Post #2806 (ISO) » Fri Nov 25, 2016 2:03 pm

LUV stuff. Not going to spoiler bc this is shorter.

In 454, 579, 952 and 1824 he explicitly agrees with something Toto says.
In 1246 he attacks RK for RK's Toto vote. I actually forgot about this vote, I think RK is decidedly the

wrong

lynch today.
In 1299 and 1705 he asks RK and HS respectively to explain their Toto scumreads.
In 1305 he assures Toto that she is not tunneling unfairly on HS.

So I think an LUV + Toto connection is reasonable. LUV has had a good amount of towncred this game, and scum!LUV might have tried to use this to keep town's opinions of Toto favorable.

LUV did present the idea of a Drone compromise lynch early. This would be a fairly hard bus, since there was a chance for one of RK, Chaos, Naomi, and maybe even rb or HS to get lynched at that point. 2402 gives me pause though,

In post 2402, Lil Uzi Vert wrote:You were right but I was also right about Drone.

reads gloaty and almost LAMIST? Hard to explain why I didn't like this post. But I don't think a bus is out of the question.

2375 and 2391 also bother me. I get that we all thought scum had to be Chaos + Toto, but exuberantly going "Woo vote Chaos he's gotta be scum! Town wins!" pings off. Less about the certainty that Chaos was scum, more about the tone.

So basically, my stance on LUV is that, jailkeeper shenanigans aside, we lynch him tomorrow. This analysis has made me think he's a better choice than Naomi or RK tomorrow.

MortFeld · Post Post #2807 (ISO) » Fri Nov 25, 2016 2:08 pm

In post 2805, Naomi-Tan wrote:
In post 2762, Lil Uzi Vert wrote:
@Naomi:
I didn't understand much of your earlier point and only really got the latter part about prods and activity. Thanks for clarifying.

The problem with your theory is that you're assuming that Shadow and RK are town. Drone and Toto if I recall correctly never pushed Shadow but as for the slot overall I would have to double check. Drone made a case for RK but didn't really push it much and awkwardly hopped off to TF if I'm recalling correctly. You're right that neither pushed Nero though but I don't think it's that simple.

As for my theory, yeah scum could choose to no kill but that doesn't really help them in the long run as that's just giving town more time and chances to weed the last scum out.

In post 2800, MortFeld wrote:Besides, the gimmick isn't even detracting from gameplay. I'm still trying to find scum the old fashioned way.

Which reminds me, I need to look at LUV again.
What gimick you talking about here?

The gimmick is jailkeeper town/scum confirms. The thing I'm hung up on is actually something you brought up - scum can no kill to make us think that the person we jailed is scum.

The solution Shadow suggested is that if there is no nightkill, we no lynch the following day and jail the same person. If they are town, scum will either nightkill and confirm a townie or continue to no kill. If they are scum, scum will continue to no kill. I am trying to figure out what happens if we have, say, 10 nights of no lynches and no nightkills. I actually believe this is optimal from both sides, given the situation. Another confirmed townie is very bad for scum. If they can, they should do everything in their power to avoid confirming someone.

Mod, if you can answer this. Is there a set number of days in a row with no kills that results in a win for either side? If so, which side wins, and after how many days? If you can't answer this, can you say explicitly that you can't?

ChaosOmega · Post Post #2808 (ISO) » Fri Nov 25, 2016 2:10 pm

If we jail town and scum no-kill, we lynch the jailed town. It cuts down on the mystery pool while still letting me investigate and letting Arc jail someone.

If scum never kill, they never get rid of me, Arc, or rb. The longer they wait, the bigger percentage of the game we 3 become. If there's no kill, we lynch who Arc jailed.

MortFeld · Post Post #2809 (ISO) » Fri Nov 25, 2016 2:13 pm

Oh yeah, scum no killing lets Chaos investigate more people. So the game state doesn't remain the same, and progressively benefits town more.

Thanks.

Lil Uzi Vert · Post Post #2810 (ISO) » Fri Nov 25, 2016 2:21 pm

Mort, I think you were pysching yourself out there. I believe I said earlier that if scum choose to no kill, it won't help them down the line. I should have explained why I guess since I thought it was fairly obvious based on the amount of power roles we have left.

Toto just had me fooled man. I wished my SR on him from earlier had grew and not just simply evaporated because Naomi made a interesting point about his play but it was sort of activity related and I don't like scum reading people for that. I think he also even attempted to buddy me at one point when he wanted people to ask me if his game had improved but for some reason I disregarded that due to not seeing the scum intent at the time. Basically, looking back, I see the signs but he just played very well and a lot better than Drone in my opinion.

As for assuming we had won, well it had been a long game and I'm in a ton games at the moment so I was just glad that we were at the finish line.

I'm not opppsed to a Nero lynch, I just can't shake the feeling that RK is scum based on how she described Nero's play.

MortFeld · Post Post #2811 (ISO) » Fri Nov 25, 2016 2:24 pm

In post 2810, Lil Uzi Vert wrote: I'm not opppsed to a Nero lynch, I just can't shake the feeling that RK is scum based on how she described Nero's play.

Are you referring to when RK townread Nero based on very little data?

Lil Uzi Vert · Post Post #2812 (ISO) » Fri Nov 25, 2016 2:27 pm

In post 2811, MortFeld wrote:
In post 2810, Lil Uzi Vert wrote: I'm not opppsed to a Nero lynch, I just can't shake the feeling that RK is scum based on how she described Nero's play.
Are you referring to when RK townread Nero based on very little data?

Yeah. Specifically when she said he's not trying to look town so he's town.

MortFeld · Post Post #2813 (ISO) » Fri Nov 25, 2016 2:28 pm

So you're saying you think RK is more likely than Nero to be scum because of that post?

Lil Uzi Vert · Post Post #2814 (ISO) » Fri Nov 25, 2016 2:35 pm

In post 2813, MortFeld wrote:So you're saying you think RK is more likely than Nero to be scum because of that post?

No, I'm saying she has just as much of a chance to flip scum as Nero. They're about equal for me with me slightly leaning toward RK because of that statement.

Nero Cain · Post Post #2815 (ISO) » Fri Nov 25, 2016 2:38 pm

I'll get to the specifics of your case either later ronight or in the morning but if you think I am scum why did you say?

In post 2750, MortFeld wrote:I'm not confident at all in town!Naomi come LYLO,
but I am confident in town!Nero
.

Nero Cain · Post Post #2816 (ISO) » Fri Nov 25, 2016 2:40 pm

and why unvote?

MortFeld · Post Post #2817 (ISO) » Fri Nov 25, 2016 2:42 pm

@LUV Ok, then you wouldn't be opposed to lynching Nero and confirming RK?

In post 2815, Nero Cain wrote:I'll get to the specifics of your case either later ronight or in the morning but if you think I am scum why did you say?

In post 2750, MortFeld wrote:I'm not confident at all in town!Naomi come LYLO,
but I am confident in town!Nero
.

I was saying that if Naomi is town, I don't trust her to find the scum in LYLO, but if you are town, I do trust you. It was a statement on who to night confirm - Naomi is a better target than you are. I don't believe this anymore. The statement was based on perceived player skill.

Unvote because rb said he wants to slow down the game, and I agree.

Nero Cain · Post Post #2818 (ISO) » Fri Nov 25, 2016 2:43 pm

still not sold on Naomi being town after she basically admitted to pushing a bullshit argument.

MortFeld · Post Post #2819 (ISO) » Fri Nov 25, 2016 2:45 pm

In post 2817, MortFeld wrote:It was a statement on who to night confirm - Naomi is a better target than you are. I don't believe this anymore.

I should clarify this. You are less of a variable in my mind than Naomi is. I think she is town, but I could go either way. I am more sure that you are scum. This makes you a better lynch than a night confirm. But, I think your slot needs sorting before anything else.

In post 2818, Nero Cain wrote:still not sold on Naomi being town after she basically admitted to pushing a bullshit argument.

I'm also not sold. Do you think she is scum?

Lil Uzi Vert · Post Post #2820 (ISO) » Fri Nov 25, 2016 2:46 pm

@Mort:

No, I would not.

Yeah I'm not sold on Naomi either but I understood where she was coming from with the PoE side of her case, not the activity part.

Nero Cain · Post Post #2821 (ISO) » Fri Nov 25, 2016 2:46 pm

si hence why why vote...oh thats right my vote didn't count. I hate that vote tags rule.

Nero Cain · Post Post #2822 (ISO) » Fri Nov 25, 2016 2:47 pm

VOTE: vote:Naomi

MortFeld · Post Post #2823 (ISO) » Fri Nov 25, 2016 2:49 pm

Ah I missed your bolded vote.

If the case on Naomi is "pushed a bullshit argument" when the bulk of the case was not the refuted argument, I'd still rather lynch Nero.

Naomi-Tan · Post Post #2824 (ISO) » Fri Nov 25, 2016 2:49 pm

In post 2818, Nero Cain wrote:still not sold on Naomi being town after she basically admitted to pushing a bullshit argument.

You cannot deny your activity was lagging. weather or not it required a poke you still didn't post for the entirety of D2. like when all the dead players posted after your last post. you've done something wrong regardless if it is poke-accepted or not.