Name this gambit (or is it already named?)

[Trojan Horse]

It's a gambit I'm still licking my wounds from; it happened today, in the IRC room. (Not the first time I've seen it, though.)

Here's the scenario: a scum has the chance to make a game-winning, hammering vote on a pro-town player (usually in a 3-player endgame). But the scum refuses to do so. Thus, he is apparently a confirmed townie. The scum then watches the real townies argue it out for a while, before finally hammering one of them and winning the game.

The outcome- a scum win- is exactly the same as what would happen if the scum hammered at first opportunity. The only purpose of the gambit is to frustrate the opponents (and have fun in the process).

What would you call this gambit? The equivalent move in bridge is known as a "Grosvenor Gambit", but I don't think that name would really work here. We could name the gambit after some mafiascummer known for that move, if there is anyone like that. (Is there?)

[petroleumjelly]

It's not really a gambit if there's no risk being taken. You can give it a name if you like, but classifying it as a "Gambit" seems incorrect.

And actually, this strategy does a number of things:

1.) It highly decreases the chances of somebody unvoting moments before you vote
2.) It will likely make the other two players "confirm vote" each other [thereby solidifying their votes, so that even if one miraculously unvotes, you can simply vote the other just as quickly]
3.) It accounts for the possibility of your vote does not actually lynch the player in question; if you think you are hammering only to learn that your vote has been taken away, that a player is Unlynchable (or otherwise would need 3 votes to be lynched, etc), by holding off you make it so you don't look like you're being caught "red-handed" when you actually decide to vote.

So long as you don't drag things out unnecessarily, I think this is a fine strategical move to make sure you cover your bases, not simply to "frustrate your opponents".

[jeep]

Yeah, it's not a gambit.

-JEEP

[Mastermind of Sin]

What Jeep said.









(<3 PJ, too)

[Mr Stoofer]

<3 PJ, too

QFT

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Vote: Stoofer

(Whenever Stoofer posts, he reminds me of Thok's corollary. Like mith's observation, but different?)

[Mr Stoofer]

Perhaps it should be called "Stoofer's Gambit".

[Mr Stoofer]

@CES: Your post is a classic case of mith's observation (and not Thok's Corollary).

[Fiasco]

Can we lock AniX away somewhere? I think gimmickitis is spreading.

[mith]

Note to self: "Gimmick" Day.

On topic: This sort of thing happened a lot at MeMeMeet for some reason. Though it generally wasto do more with the scum not noticing they could win immediately than a deliberate strategy.

Not a gambit though, either way.

[M4yhem]

I call it pure, unadulterated eviiiiiiill.

[Fiasco]

Or we could name it after its victim. I'd call it "the Horse" just for Star Wars pun opportunities.

Note to Mith: Horrible Pun Day. I really want to design a nightless setup called "The Unbearable Nightless of Being"...

[mith]

That's a good idea. I mentioned in scumchat that one possibility I've been working on for my next theme game is a Count of Monte Cristo inspired game called "Dantès in Fresno".

[Mr. Flay]

Note to self: "Gimmick" Day.

If you do this, you might point out to folks that they can record their gimmicks on the wiki under Category:Trademarks.

I've seen a scum do this before, and it takes balls of steel but can be really effective. Hardly a gambit though... and getting it out there will reduce its effectiveness somewhat, though town has practically lost by that point.

[Mr Stoofer]

Note to self: "Gimmick" Day.

If you do this, you might point out to folks that they can record their gimmicks on the wiki under Category:Trademarks.

I wish I had a gimmick...

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

@CES: Your post is a classic case of mith's observation (and not Thok's Corollary).

It certainly isn't Thok's Corollary, but you act in accordance with it so often that any post by you in one of the Discussion forums reminds me of it. And I don't think my vote was really a case of mith's principle, as it was inspired directly by one of your posts, rather than voting early on before you could get to the thread.

[Mr Stoofer]

@CES: Your post is a classic case of mith's observation (and not Thok's Corollary).

It certainly isn't Thok's Corollary, but you act in accordance with it so often that any post by you in one of the Discussion forums reminds me of it. And I don't think my vote was really a case of mith's principle, as it was inspired directly by one of your posts, rather than voting early on before you could get to the thread.

This may be my favourite post ever.

[AniX]

Can we lock AniX away somewhere? I think gimmickitis is spreading.

You'll have to catch me and grab me physically first. **Jumps inside a black hole**

[Thok Thok]

I wish I had a gimmick...

HEZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZWAVRE