This game is interesting because of all the joke pairings:
McZombie+McGriddle
nessarae56+farside22
Lacey+Fate(both start with capital letters *shrug*)
I still have never seen a town completely go all the way to lynch on a lurker, or some other policy. I think policy violations coupled with other arguments (Lynch all Liars, and he's been acting scummy, or LaL combined with poor content when they do post) is the best way to go.farside22 wrote: Do you believe in policy lynching and why?
Depends on a lot of factors. Inexperienced scum usually don't know how to handle pressure, so they "disappear" when the heat arrives. Like, McG, I've seen town power lurk even harder than scum. Still, I define lurking as not posting/pushing new content (posting fluff or recap) so it is still a decent tell.Do you think scum lurk more then town?
Maybe too active. I should be busier with RL in March, so don't expect me to keep it up. Though for the rest of February I'll be on multiple times a day to post in all my games.How active would you say you are in a game?
Yes. This came up very practically in the Pick your Power game I am currently in. An obvious town player happened to be the one-shot governor, a very powerful role. No other townies had claimed Bullet Proof at this point, so he could have very easily claimed BP as to avoid a NK, and remained a pretty likely townie in the game.Lacey wrote:I'll toss out a question for the group:
Do you believe lying about something *other* than your role can ever be pro-town? Why?
It was reaction fishing, I wanted to see her reasoning. This was the part of the post I didn't include:chauchaudotcom wrote:Explain to me the benefits of the line of questioning? As far as I can see, this would only help scum.Fate wrote:So I'll ask you this, if someone claimed doctor at L-1 would you lynch them?
Unvote; Vote: Fate
For the sake of my response symmetrically encrypted sentence=breadcrumb.It would depend on the situation, and my general scum feeling for them. If I had collected a lot of evidence that pointed toward them being scum, I'd lynch. If I was heavily unsure, I'd likely vote to lynch someone I had a stronger scum case built for.
I'd also ask them to post a symmetrically encrypted sentence telling us who they were protecting that night. Which they could then deliver the symmetric key for the next day after night actions had been revealed.
Not in the slightest. I said that we should lynch who ever is counter-claimed, because the PR counter-claiming in this setup trades us 1-1. Of course it isn't a trade at all if a VT fakeclaims. I agreed with Lacey that town shouldn't fakeclaim but for different reasons.farside22 wrote:Are you saying a VT should fake claim and possible out a PR here?Why do you think that scum is incapable of breadcrumbing? I really don't like this post. I think town would've included a counterclaim situation in their response, like mine did. Your earlier posts "Town shouldn't fakeclaim doctor" come across as if you are scum not wanting Town to mess with your head by fakeclaiming.
Like I said, in this setup, a scum fakeclaim is tantamount to suicide.Lacey wrote:I don't think that. I just think getting that extra information helps town either way. Really I don't think role claims, except for cops with a proven lynch record on scum, are all that powerful of evidence in any case. Scum can make these claims as much as anyone can, and in all cases, more information is always good for town.Fate wrote:For the sake of my response symmetrically encrypted sentence=breadcrumb.
Why do you think that scum is incapable of breadcrumbing?
Interesting evidence? Who scum claimed to have protect is just WIFOM. It might be the most town player (to try and convince people they are the town doctor making rational decisions) or their partner as WIFOM.If the doc claim is proven to be scum, who they claim to have protected can be interesting evidence, especially when building likely scum pairs. If they are town, it can help produce consistency in their story.
What? This is all sorts of wrong. They aren't WIFOM. They are:Claims and counterclaims without proof are all just WIFOM. They don't bear at all on my votes unless I am truly on the fence.I really don't like this post. I think town would've included a counterclaim situation in their response, like mine did.
What does "I'd take a random vote" mean? You're saying I'm thinking as a scummy player, but that isn't enough to vote me?[/list]That's an awful lot of presumption and WIFOM. I'd take a random vote, but your concocting a lot of strange ideas, and thinking as a scummy player. Not enough for me to vote you, but I'd like to hear why you immediately made such a huge and random jump of logic.
I vote based on my scum list. I keep detailed notes from scum hunting on what was said by who and when. I yield far more credence to this than any single other piece of information. I had McGriddle pretty well pegged from day one in my most previous game because of it.And your reaction to my question sounds like a boilerplate town reply: "depends on the situation and how scummy I thought they were," without taking this particular game into the equation.
Unvote, Vote: Lacey
*Vote subject to change.
Saying your vote is subject to change is either saying "JUST FOR PRESSURE" which we can all agree makes the pressure pointless, or scum who want to be able to backpedal.Oh snap, you're at L-1?
Unvote
because I just wanted pressure, not a lynch
Why would scum quickhammer?Well town, Scum may have just tipped their hands. If someone hammers me (since I believe I am now at L-1), you know them to be scum.
If not, you can be pretty sure at least one, and probably two of nessarae56, McGriddle, and Fate are scum.
That doesn't make sense. It is suicide even without a cop...Lacey wrote:Only if there is a cop, which there may not be.Fate wrote:Like I said, in this setup, a scum fakeclaim is tantamount to suicide.
Yeah that's something. If someone else flips doc then whoever claimed doc (REGARDLESS of who they said they protected) was lying. I'm not seeing your line of thinking here.Any evidence is interesting evidence. Scum have to lie and make up details. Sometimes they do it well, sometimes they do it wrong. It's best for town to have all the evidence up front. For instance if the doc claims to protect someone who is lynched and flips doc, well that's something now isn't it?Interesting evidence? Who scum claimed to have protect is just WIFOM. It might be the most town player (to try and convince people they are the town doctor making rational decisions) or their partner as WIFOM.
I wasn't sorting that out. I thought we had agreed for the purposes of this game thatYou're forgetting a situation:What? This is all sorts of wrong. They aren't WIFOM. They are:
1. Scum fakeclaim, town counterclaims, Lynch the original.
2. Town claims, Scum counterclaims, Lynch the original, they flip something else, Kill scum the next day.
Both situations we trade 1-1. Claims and counterclaims should DEFINITELY be taken into consideration.
3. Town fake claims, scum counter claims
4. Town fake claims, doc counter claims
How do you sort these out? What about:
5. Scum fake claims, scum counter claims?
Or a series of counter claims?
It is anything but 1-1. It's complex low information exchange and not very informative.
I really don't see how my logic is bizarre. You putting forth situations that are highly unlikely, and ignoring the setup, is what is bizarre. Too complex for D1? I'm posing situations that are only relevant to D1 and THIS particular open setup. You are talking mafia theory about all sorts of situations.I'm saying you're using odd jumps of logic that are far too complex for D1. I think it's suspicious (not scummy necessarily though). A random vote on me, or a vote on me based on logic that wasn't convoluted wouldn't look as weird.What does "I'd take a random vote" mean? You're saying I'm thinking as a scummy player, but that isn't enough to vote me?
I want an explanation for your bizarre logic, I'd like to hear you talk it out.
Votes shouldn't be used as scumtells? What the hell? Vote analysis is often underused, but a very powerful tool. I've seen people peg scum off voting paterns alone.McGriddle wrote: Fate I literally just said all I wanted was pressure. That is WIFOM to say scum would want to back petal. Town back petal too, it's one of the problems behind vote being used as a scum tell.
Yeah I was confused at first about this. When I read it on the wiki, it seemed like:farside22 wrote: Should I meantion in this argument of claims. That when a cop or doc dies this means the deputy/nurse will be active. I talked with DLA before the game and I said this set up only makes sense that you have a cop then the other person's role will automatically be deputy or the role is useless.
What are you... oh responding to Chau's random question. You choose an interesting game for your second one, heh. Setup wise I mean.nessarae56 wrote:if u voted for me right now i would ask u why?
This is only my second game so sorry if i got it confused.
So far i have missed to much i was off for like 3 hours and there is already 4 pages. So yeah y'll move really fast here.
Of course town agrees that fake claiming is bad, but the reasons for believing such are what I think is important. I may have been reading too much into it (maybe she just likes using math to support her ideas), and their was a conflict of playstyles, but my point was:farside22 wrote:I have a few questions and comment to make here.
Fate:Why would you see lacey's post as scum feeling this way. I don't see anyone so far who believe that fake claiming is good for the town.I really don't like this post. I think town would've included a counterclaim situation in their response, like mine did. Your earlier posts "Town shouldn't fakeclaim doctor" come across as if you are scum not wanting Town to mess with your head by fakeclaiming
Why do you refuse to rule out all other evidence? Claims are FAR from worthless.Lacey wrote:There are simply too many conflicting strategies. Claims are, IMO, largely useless unless proof can somehow be attached. A cop who can be protected by a doctor is about the only useful claim, as he can try and prove himself during the night (provided no role-blockers are present). But that's not even an option in this setup. Any claim will probably be NK'ed or RB'ed in this setup, which makes claims even more useless, even ignoring the fact that scum can cop claim and give valid investigation results as they are in the informed minority.
I'm only interested in the following evidence:
1) Inconsistencies in voting patterns or evidence.
2) Unwillingness to answer queries.
3) Attempts to ignore inconvenient evidence
4) Scum hunting patterns and eagerness
5) Statistical analysis of the situation and its resulting effect on strategy
I'll agree with second part of your post. To each their own with scumhunting.Lacey wrote: You're leaving yourself open to scum plays by adapting this strategy, such as a scum counterclaim on a real claim which leaves you with more dead townspeople, and a possible trusted scum. With VT's fakeclaiming as McGriddle said he might in some games, it gets even worse.
I have no idea how to read this player. Consistently playing the "uhh I'm confused town." Newb tell for both scum/town...nessarae56 wrote:sorry if i have no idea what the hell going. and no one right now because it only day 3 or 4 too soon to tell. and u guy go way to fast to keep up with anything i have more of a life then this game. but of right now lacey is still on my radar.....
You called it? Yeah you're right, you called it that if you acted scummy I would vote you. Huh. But IMcGriddle wrote: therefor I would rather not get voted for a stupid OMGUS reason even if I have a good reason to vote that person. And I CALLED it dead on that you would vote me if I voted Lacey. So the genuine scum tell is when I fear being lynched, and because another player from a different game didn't want to get lynched? That's bullshit. Nobody wants to get lynched, scum or town.
You take it as an honor to act scummy and warrant a vote?nessarae56 wrote:hmmm so go ahead and vote for me farside22. I take it in great honnor. And yes i know how things go in these games. But maybe just maybe i'm waiting for the right moment to say somthing. I don't like to jump into things like all of u. so i will sit here and wait till the moment is right to say something and i'm i get killed for that then be it. i will play my way and u will play your way. that is all i have to say for right now. i will be back tm at some point to see what u all think.
You clearly said when you hammered both that: 1. You thought McGriddle was indeed scummy, and 2. You deliberately acted scummy knowing it would "help us lynch you faster."so u can lynch me faster i am now helping u out
and yes she/he does look scummy by what she/he has post and i sorry i forgot if your a guy or a girl right now...... i hope that helps u all out.......