Open 101 - Two of Four - Game over before 712

[Raging Rabbit]

Vote Count 3

veerus 2 (axle135, Ripley)

TCS 2 (CarnCarn, veerus)
Ripley 1 (ThAd)
Axle135 1 (ZazieR)

Not voting: TCS

[ThAdmiral]

Wait, tcs was

against

the mass claim, so why are you voting him?

[ZazieR]

Post 85:

I admit, it's good to have the powerroles still alive the second day, however the scum will probably fake claim tomorrow if we don't do a massclaim today. Then we have to start thinking who are/is the real powerrole(s). So, if we don't massclaim, we'll find other problems the next day.

Also, you do know that not everything you say in this:

Obviously if we have a cop and they survive we will have more information. But the same could also be true for a doc and an rb. If the doc prevents a kill we have another confirmed town, and if an rb stops a kill then we have scum. I want to give every chance of one of these things to happen.

has to be true, right? I won't go into details.

Then there's also this part that bothers me:

I think this game will be won off the back of lucky/good investigations/protects/blocks

You may tell the next day which of the claimed actions are true, if we don't do a massclaim today.

Also if you think there should be a mass claim today because there is a chance we will lynch a power role, I am fairly certain they would claim if they were in trouble of being hammered (i'd hope so anyway), so this fear is unjustified.

Bad. In this case, the almost lynched player has to reveal if he has a powerrole or not. In the worst case, even his role. How do we know if he's telling the truth about it? It could easily be scum who is faking it, but he also could be telling the truth. So what should the powerrole(s) do in this situation? If we do our claim, the powerrole(s) will know if someone is lying or not. But with only the claim of one player, it could end up bad.

Post 87:

Tell me, which of the following claims would you pick during the night to kill if you were scum: Person A who claimed a 'powerrole' or Person B who claimed a 'powerrole'. And yes, we would give our powerroles out, however do you actually think that scum won't try to do that during the following day? Now, they'll have to decide before contacting eachother. If we would do it tomorrow, the scum can try to work it to their advantage.
Also, how come you reacted later than some others?

Post 96:

You know that you only thought about the negative points of claiming day 1 on short term? You didn't even think about the effects of it on day 2. And how nice of you to give those ideas out. Think about the long term effect of day 1 claiming and the effects day 2 claiming could have and you'll probably see that day 1 claiming is better.

Don't like TA's post 101. If he has read CC's posts, he could have seen why CC is keeping his vote on TCS.

Unvote Vote ThAdmiral

[CarnCarn]

You know that you only thought about the negative points of claiming day 1 on short term? You didn't even think about the effects of it on day 2. And how nice of you to give those ideas out. Think about the long term effect of day 1 claiming and the effects day 2 claiming could have and you'll probably see that day 1 claiming is better.

It's true that I didn't discuss effects on Day 2 at all, but the effects on D1 seemed sufficiently bad to me to not want to consider Day 2. So, for the sake of completeness, here is what could happen Day 2:

The WCS:

Assumptions: Massclaim D1, 1 scum PR claim, 1 scum vanilla claim, a D1 mislynch from the vanilla pool, scum NK a PR, no guilty investigation results.

So, we've lost a PR and we have a 1/2 shot in the PR pool and 1/3 in the vanilla pool. Plus, we're pretty much in LyLo, I would think. How does this give us better chances by claiming D1 vs. D2? It seems like claiming D1 actually makes the odds of the D2 WCS more likely, since we're almost guaranteed to lose a PR overnight.

Equally bad:

Assumptions: Massclaim D1, 1 scum PR claim, 1 scum vanilla claim, a D1 mislynch from the vanilla pool, scum choose to no-kill, no guilty investigation results.

Here, we have 1/3 shot of hitting scum in each pool, and we're still in LyLo. So, even though we have both PRs, we're still in a tough position. Plus, notice how the scum choosing to no-kill invalidates any results that a possible roleblocker or doctor could give. Of course, we don't know if the scum actually no-killed or if the RB or doc actually stopped a scum NK, but if we leap to conclusions, we could end up mislynching D2.

Other situations are possible, such as a possible cop getting a guilty, lynching scum D1, etc., which can completely change what happens D2.

In any case, I don't see why claiming D2 is definately worse than claiming D1. If anything, claiming D1 seems to increase the possibility of WCS for D2, as well as possibly disabling the PRs, given that the scum would know which PRs are really in play and can adjust their actions accordingly.

[CarnCarn]

Wait, tcs was

against

the mass claim, so why are you voting him?

That's true, but reread Ripley's comments. He makes a very valid point.

[axle135]

It seems as if every option will lead us into LyLo. Because of my inexperience, I'm not entirely sure, but it seems as if a massclaim would make the game statistics instead of actual mafia and somewhat more tense and less fun.

Both no massclaim and massclaim seem, from the arguments made, equally bad options. It seems as if the power roles are both a great disadvantage and one of our only chances of winning. Should we really give them up?

[ThAdmiral]

@ cc: yeah I was just sorta skimming and saw that you were both against the claim and I was a bit confused.

@ everyone: As I said before though we shouldn't really be talking about the possible outcomes of all the possibilities of the claim. I know they are helpful points to bring up in the argument of whether to claim or not but it should be clear by now that both parties are fairly set in their ways and are not going to change their minds. It is also probably too late but I can't help but feel we are giving information to the scum which they

could have

but

may not have

come up with on their own.

I think we should all just vote now whether we are for claiming or not, and then either do it or do not do it.

anybody else agree?

[CarnCarn]

a massclaim would make the game statistics instead of actual mafia and

somewhat

much more tense and less fun.

Fixed. Although, to be fair, it is an option to think through because of the small player list. Massclaim is usually made at or near LyLo because the town has to try everything it can to win, and massclaiming is like the kitchen sink when nothing else will work. But, only massclaim if it will improve the chances of catching scum, which I can't see how it does now.

I think we should all just vote now whether we are for claiming or not, and then either do it or do not do it.

anybody else agree?

OK...

Vote No on proposition massclaim

[veerus]

@ cc: yeah I was just sorta skimming and saw that you were both against the claim and I was a bit confused.

@ everyone: As I said before though we shouldn't really be talking about the possible outcomes of all the possibilities of the claim. I know they are helpful points to bring up in the argument of whether to claim or not but it should be clear by now that both parties are fairly set in their ways and are not going to change their minds. It is also probably too late but I can't help but feel we are giving information to the scum which they

could have

but

may not have

come up with on their own.

I think we should all just vote now whether we are for claiming or not, and then either do it or do not do it.

anybody else agree?

Something in this post I really don't like.. But I can't put a finger on it just yet.

And for the record, I'm against a mass claim. Currently the scum has 2/5 chance to hit a PR (2/4 if we lynch a townie) = 50% worst case scenario. If we claim, scum have 100% of hitting a PR. What more is there to consider?

[The Central Scrutinizer]

axle135, if you have useful thoughts to post about the mass claim issue please go ahead and do so. The only real argument against posting such thoughts is the one that sometimes it is difficult to think aloud without alerting scum to a course of action that might not otherwise have occurred to them, but it's easy to overestimate that risk. Scum can talk at night; our only opportunity to talk is during the day, and fear of doing that leads to bland contentless posting or the kind of reluctant non-posting that has characterized this game so far, and which makes it so easy for the scum to hide.

I think it's safe to say that this is an awful plan, and I will vote for anyone who either claims or continues to push massclaim.

The problem with threats like this is that they tend to close down discussion. How can you discuss anything when only one view is allowed and anyone arguing the other side is under threat of being voted simply for expressing their view? Already we can see how axle135 has felt it necessary to state he isn't "pushing the issue" although it seems he has things to say about it.

And if you are an innocent and believe anyone "pushing" the mass claim must be suspect, surely you would learn more by waiting to see exactly what people do have to say about it, rather than frightening them off with threats of a vote?

We want discussion. This game has been lacking in discussion for a good portion of its existence. But we don't want to discuss things that are useless. Massclaim is anti-town. There is no debate... and I'm sorry if you think that's too harsh.

There is no debate about whether or not massclaim is good for us

. As someone just said, right now scum would hit a PR 40% of the time... and massclaiming makes that 100% likely. And what benefit do we have? Best case scenario, we go from a 2/7 chance of catching scum to a 2/5 chance... pretty much nothing.

Best case scenario, we're increasing the chance of a power role dying by 60%, and the chance of us catching a member of the mafia by 12%. Or, 250% and 72% respectively if your brain works that way.

The numbers don't lie. Bad idea.

Now, I don't think that Ripley is scum for disagreeing with me. I don't even think that veerus is scum for hopping on me. But I do think that I should

Vote:Thadmiral

for right now... call it gut.

[ThAdmiral]

Well if I can count correctly that makes four of us which means no mass claim for today.

@ tcs: a gut vote? come on. Am I supposed to argue against that or just ignore it?

[axle135]

At first I had problems with your post too, but I reread it and realised I totally misinterpreted it.

So we've all agreed massclaim is for the worse? Then where do we go from here?

[ThAdmiral]

attempt to make a case on someone

not

based on whether they were for or against a mass claim.

(this may prove to be difficult)

[Ripley]

How, if at all, was the question of having a miller claim resolved? Two strategies were offered: 1. a miller should claim immediately, 2. a miller should claim at the start of Day 2. What do the new players think about this issue?

We want discussion. This game has been lacking in discussion for a good portion of its existence. But we don't want to discuss things that are useless. There is no debate... and I'm sorry if you think that's too harsh.

There is no debate about whether or not massclaim is good for us

.

Clearly there is a debate as long as at least one player disagrees with this. You state that we want discussion, but you have not suggested any other topic for discussion. And your entire post ignores the question of why you would wish to shut down discussion rather than, presumably, learn useful information from the posts people made on the subject. If you believe a course to be so unilaterally disastrous, is it not interesting to watch and see who supports it?

As someone just said, right now scum would hit a PR 40% of the time...

Assuming we lynch a townie without managing to expose a PR along the way scum would hit a PR N1 50% by chance alone, assuming no successful intervention by a doc or RB.

and massclaiming makes that 100% likely.

No, because the massclaim technique advocated was not one where people claim a

specific

role, and so the scum could not take the obvious route of disposing of the doc, if present, while the doc, if present, would have their chance of protecting a power role much improved. With an original 50% chance of there being a doc this is significant. If the case against a massclaim is as overpowering as you state, you should not need to massage the figures.

And with all this agonised talk of losing power roles, we have to remember that amongst the useful roles we have to include the possibility of a miller.

I'm not supporting a mass claim in its current form because the quantity and quality of posting has greatly improved. However if it reverted to the previous standard, and the strategy to mutterings of "let's lynch a lurker" I would reconsider that position. I've actually spent a fair bit of time trying to think of variations on the mass claim that are better than the current proposition, and will continue to do so.

Now, I don't think that Ripley is scum for disagreeing with me. I don't even think that veerus is scum for hopping on me. But I do think that I should Vote:Thadmiral for right now... call it gut.

It's curous that you make no mention at all of ZazieR who has been by far the strongest advocate of the massclaim.

It seems ThAdmiral is troubling more than one gut. veerus also in Post 108 has a problem with ThAdmiral that he seems not quite able to put his finger on. I'm not saying you're wrong, but it would be helpful if you could be a bit more precise, as is usually possible with "gut" votes and comments if the owners of the guts are willing to think about it a bit.

[veerus]

ThAdmiral seems to have the IIOA syndrome (information instead of analysis). In fact, now that I've been able to quantify it, I feel ok with a vote on him.

unvote; vote: ThAdmiral

[ThAdmiral]

can you explain iioa?

[axle135]

The only possible plus of a massclaim is enabling our power roles to work more efficiently. However, ignoring the power roles, we have almost no chance.

It seems as if randomvoting is over.

unvote

I don't feel I understand the case being made against ThAdmiral, nor that bandwagon in a mini is a good idea.

[veerus]

It's just what it is. For the entire game so far all you have done is speculate about the setup by proposing/denying different claim ideas and not doing any analysis as to who may be scum.

[ThAdmiral]

fair enough.
I think this is just how I generally play day one. In fact I've been actually quite a bit more outspoken here than normal.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

fair enough.
I think this is just how I generally play day one. In fact I've been actually quite a bit more outspoken here than normal.

Which implies a deviation from the norm... and hence the vote.

[ZazieR]

Axle, the PR's could help us, but they can also be the downfall. I tried to take care of the downfall. But that won't be possible. Especially after CC's analysis. In this case I definitly agree with TA:

@ everyone: As I said before though we shouldn't really be talking about the possible outcomes of all the possibilities of the claim. I know they are helpful points to bring up in the argument of whether to claim or not but it should be clear by now that both parties are fairly set in their ways and are not going to change their minds. It is also probably too late but I can't help but feel we are giving information to the scum which they could have but may not have come up with on their own.

So TA, as Veerus voted you due to IIOA, you will post your suspicions or not?

[CarnCarn]

Well, ThAd's at L-1 for the following reasons:

Don't like TA's post 101. If he has read CC's posts, he could have seen why CC is keeping his vote on TCS.

Now, I don't think that Ripley is scum for disagreeing with me. I don't even think that veerus is scum for hopping on me. But I do think that I should

Vote:Thadmiral

for right now... call it gut.

ThAdmiral seems to have the IIOA syndrome (information instead of analysis). In fact, now that I've been able to quantify it, I feel ok with a vote on him.

I agree with ZazieR's point, but don't see why it is really vote worthy (even for a first vote). TCS was "call it gut" for the second vote. Strange. Either he is fishing for reaction or it's just downright scummy. veerus also makes a good point that I agree with, but ThAd is correct that it is his playstyle (I am currently in a game with him and I see the similarity). Also, that's a very weak reason for L-1, I think.

So, the ThAd wagon gained speed really quickly, which suggests there is scum at work here. So, I think the ThAd wagoners need some investigation here:

I still like my TCS vote for the reasons that Ripley suggested and his "gut" vote on ThAd. Also, veerus' scumminess has jumped with his L-1 vote on ThAd. I also would like an explanation from ZazieR about why she thinks ThAd's 101 makes him scummy (presumably, since she voted him based on that).
And a question for all three wagoners: Do you still like your ThAd vote?

[ThAdmiral]

got work now, will post when I get back home.

[veerus]

Also, veerus' scumminess has jumped with his L-1 vote on ThAd.

Considering day 1 has been going on for nearly a month, I feel ok with the L-1. He is currently the highest on the scum-like symptoms list. And the fact that the wagon built up kind of fast tells me that there's likely no scum bussing going on. In addition, the fact that pretty much every player posted since I put him at L-1 suggests to me that scum are hesitant to hammer their buddy in such a short game..

[ThAdmiral]

I've found a better lynch than me:

Let's look at a few of veerus' posts...
(most of the bolding is mine)

Hopefully Zazier will bring some discussion to the thread because unless something comes up,

I'm totally for lynching a lurker

.. This game is going nowhere fast.

mod: who have you prodded recently?

(this will give us a list of our lurker targets)

I'll admit that I mentioned the plan to lynch a lurker, but I made it pretty obvious that I didn't think highly of the plan, and that I was all for a better one.
Veerus however jumps on the idea, and even when activity picks up with the introduction of zazier he still says he is for it.

He then goes on to vote kaieveran. A lurker.
He did so because he was the first to post after the prod. This means that he was able to get on but chose not to, according to veerus. Scum like to come up with reasons like this to implicate people, even when there is often a perfectly innocent reason why the person wasn't posting (such as in this case kaiveran had an internet ban).

According to the rules, there's a deadline.. I'm guessing after wasting all this time, we won't have time for everyone to claim at this pace.

Our best bet is to lynch and soon.

I like Kaiveran for reasons I stated earlier.

mod: when is the deadline?

Still gunning for a lurker lynch, but more importantly, for

any

lynch, just as long as it is done quickly!

I can think of many reasons why scum might want to get to night as soon as possible (stop discussion, use night kill etc.), whereas I can't think of many for townies.

P.S.

I'm still for the Kaiveran lynch

.. after the quick prod, he's disappeared. Obviously he won't make the same mistake again.

Still after a lurker lynch, even when activity had reached quite acceptable levels.
Still constructing arguments that implicate people based on things which are often perfectly innocent.

Great point, Ripley. Combine this with CC's great post just now, I think the vote should be obvious.

unvote; vote: TCS

And then suddenly he flips to tcs (evidently he realised that the kaiveran/carncarn lynch wasn't going anywhere), and even states that the vote is obvious. This sounds like he is trying to build a wagon to me.

It turns out the vote wasn't obvious however, because soon after there is this series of posts:

Referring to one of my posts:

Something in this post I really don't like.. But I can't put a finger on it just yet.

But I do think that I should

Vote:Thadmiral

for right now... call it gut.

ThAdmiral seems to have the IIOA syndrome (information instead of analysis). In fact, now that I've been able to quantify it, I feel ok with a vote on him.

unvote; vote: ThAdmiral

Note the wishy-washiness of the first post.
Now note the way he waits till after someone else vote me (to get me to -2) before he does (i.e. to get me to -1).
If that isn't wagon hopping I don't know what is.

And now his most recent post:

Considering day 1 has been going on for nearly a month, I feel ok with the L-1. He is currently the highest on the scum-like symptoms list. And the fact that the wagon built up kind of fast tells me that there's likely no scum bussing going on. In addition, the fact that pretty much every player posted since I put him at L-1 suggests to me that scum are hesitant to hammer their buddy in such a short game..

Obviously he ignores the possibility that scum would be on the wagon, i.e. obviously he would, i.e. he's scum, i.e. end of story.

unvote, vote: veerus