Mini 619 - Ramen Mafia (Over!)
-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
EBWOP:
I should also say that I am probably the newest player in the game. I have one game ongoing in Road to Rome, and my mafia experience before that amounts to a few games played in the third grade. I'm familiar with most of the terminology, and I won't use newbie status as a defense for poor play or ignorance, but I figured you should all know that I have little meta knowledge or trend experience on the site.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
I think we can all agree that No Lynch is a Very Bad Thing unless used to solve a particular situation. I doubt severely that such a situation will arise on D1.
Would it be advantageous to us as a town to create a plurality policy? That is, we agree that at some predetermined time before the deadline (-6 or -8 hours), if there is no consensus we will lynch the person with the greatest number of votes? I can't see any particular advantage in this for scum that matches the disadvantage town gets from no-lynch, and our Day 1 information is going to be limited anyway. I think that scum misdirecting a lynch near deadline or abusing the policy would be a pretty transparent tactic.
aioqwe: Why did you vote for Oman?-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
Oman: Are you opposed to setting policies in general or to this one specifically? I ask because I couldn't think of a way for scum to abuse this more than the current deadline rules. I agree that a genuine concensus lynch is better, and I think it's more likely given the activity so far. I just thought it might be nice to guarantee at least a little information gain should the worst occur.
Also, was that a name claim?
Liam: The idea was only intended for Day1 anyway.
My opinion on aioqwe so far is that he is most likely anxious about the deadline rules, but was worried that wanting to speed up conversation would be seen as scummy. This could go either way, and his response to my question may earn him an FOS or vote.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
Guy who might be A Kiwi: So the answer to my question is that you were acting scummy in order to analyze the behavior of those on your wagon? In this case it was a fair strategy, but I don't think I would try that outside early Day 1, as town are more likely to think "scummy means scum" than "scummy means town pretending to be scum," and then you have to defend yourself, which might taint any findings you present. I'm looking to get some mindset info on you still, so could you explain specifically why you chose Oman for your vote?
Interesting observation about food.
Oman's joke refers to the fact that I might accuse him of cowardice for refusing to accept my proposal, and "chicken" is English slang for coward. Chicken is also a flavor of Ramen, and this is allegedly a Ramen-themed game, thus the humor. Or, Oman could be referring to himself as a young homosexual male.
I teased Oman about the name claim in order to let him know that I got the joke and found it amusing. I don't think the rolename "Creamy Chicken" would tell us anything, since Chicken could either refer to some kind of healing as a reference to chicken soup, hiding as a reference to being chicken, vanilla as a reference to the popularity of the flavor (or, everything tastes like chicken), or mafia if our Mod doesn't like it.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
Whoops, missed one. Thank you for answering my question, Oman. I examined the strategy for potential means of abuse, but I couldn't find any, and I tried to be flexible, but I respect that you feel that the benefit is not worth the risk. It really was more a discussion point than anything else.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
[quote="Oman, post 32]Dice tags are wrong and evil, and you should be killed. [/quote]
[quote="DarlaBlueEyes, post 33]I agree Dice tags = Bad. [/quote]
What?Because she was the first to mention that Dice votes were bad. No particular reason other than that.
Food and Kiwi are high on my list, but so are windkirby and strife220.
Oman, would you care to elaborate on your thoughts about strife?-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
Food, I was giving you the chance to recognize your mistake and answer the question based on the correct information, since the answer you gave us was either invalid or incomplete. If you'd rather that I vote you over something so small...
Also, please restate "so what if I pointed out that she said a certain person? What will that lead to?" as I'm not sure what you mean by this.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
Beyond_Birthday: I haven't attacked anyone yet. What Iamdoing is asking a lot of questions while expressing my opinions on things the town seems interested in. Some of the questions I ask may seem insignificant; I assure you that they are not. The answers to these early, low pressure questions provide a baseline by which we can evaluate the behavior of individuals and groups later in the game. It also gives us a more informed look at the mindset and attitude of each player. Deviations from established patterns in tone and style can be very helpful in determining the motivation behind an action. Since the scum aim to imitate townie behavior, but differ in their motivations, determining motivation is the key to catching scum.
Also, what I said in my early opinion of Kiwi was that he appearedanxious about being perceived as scummy. He posted later that he expected to receive attacks based on that post. I said nothing regarding the information or context the tactic generated, other that calling it "fair strategy" at this point, although I don't think it was optimal play.
Is your reasoning on Kiwi based on his assumption that I am town, or something else that I missed?
Food: Hopefully this will help you understand what I'm getting at. From your last few posts, I get the feeling that you think I'm attacking you over stupid reasons. I would like to stress that I'm not really gunning for you right now.
Oman: Actually I wanted to know more about how you disagreed with strife. And I would argue (in a more appropriate place) that LAL is a sound strategy that is often misapplied, as it would have been if anyone had brought it up regarding Food's mistake.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
Darla, I also like to "see things and stuff" but there are not a lot of ways to do that legally in the US
I'm suspicious of Kiwi for his vote on food, which seemed more like bandwagoning than anything else.
I'm a little suspicious for strife, as his vote on Kiwi was based on a safe topic rather than Kiwi's recent actions. Plenty of people had time to comment on the "appearing scum to catch scum" thing, and strife could have seen that no one was likely to suspect an attack based on it. This is very weak though, there are several other explanations that work.
Windkirby has a poorly justified wagon vote on food, which sets off all kinds of bells. I need a better explanation fo the vote and some other observations from kirby, or he'll get my vote.
We need to hear more from ClockworkRuse before he starts risking modkill. I'd like to hear Liam's opinions on recent developments, and I'm looking forward t Darla's observations. I also have a question for Oman outstanding, but he probably just hasn't seen it yet.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
Oman: I read from Kiwi's post 43 that he was intending to bait attacks on his scumminess, but I may have been mistaken.
As for LAL, as I said, it is often misapplied. I also believe it is worded in a nonflexible manner because Lynch Some Liars has no vowels and is less catchy It also creates a meta which avoids some very bad situations for pro-town power roles, which I approve of.
I just looked at your profile and realized that you are younger than me. I do not consider myself to be old, so I disagree with your qualitative judgement in post 49. As I understand it, if you were gay, you would fit into the definition I was referring to perfectly.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
Strife: The first half of the flavor disposed of the remaining players in PEGBAM, made a few gay jokes about another member of this site, made a couple of remarks at Oman's expense, and established that Jdodge might be our villain. The second half established that we are all Ramen-people and created a setting in which this is normal. It had a nice explosion, a few horrible deaths, and much less rape than I expected. Nothing useful to our game, and I believe the mod when he said he'd keep alignment related information out of the flavor, as anything else would be plain stupid.
On a more serious note, I like your last post much more than the previous ones.
Liam: I agree about food's apparent attitude, but I'm not sure it points to anything.
Oman: I still have a question you haven't answered
I'm going to go ahead andUnvote, Vote: charter
You have six in-game posts, and three of those have been votes. Two of the remaining three have been explanations for your serious votes. Now, your second point against Darla may be valid (I'll wait till her post to decide) but it seems to me that you are fishing for reactions with these votes, which could be scum trying out wagons to find the easy lynch.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
Food: Just because some of us think the wagon on you was silly doesn't mean you can lurk. I need opinions from you about other players.
Also need opinions from Oman and Muerrto on things other than flightless birds.
No longer suspicious of strife. Kirby and kiwi are up there, but I'm still happy with my charter vote.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
Just checking in, will post later after I sober up a bit. Hopefully I can stop the horrible vibrating that I'm apparently doing.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
Oman: Assuming all that hinting was pointing at what I thought it was, I'll keep that in mind. The problem is that Kiwi keeps saying things that make it seem like he's more interested in people ignoring him than he is in finding scum, which doesn't quite mesh with his earlier play.
We obviously can't trust you completely, though. You could just be manipulating Muerrto and buddying up. Not a whole lot of evidence for this though.
Kiwi, I don't know what Muerrto mean by "plea," but this is a loaded question based on the negative connotations of the word "badger." It creates a false dilemma between moving on to another suspect and "badgering" you, which ignores the possibility that Muerrto continues to pursue you, but without harassment. Also, in any noncomplete answer to this question, Muerrto would confess to having "badgered" you.aioqwe wrote:Seriously, do you have any other suspicions or are you just going to badger me all day?
I'd like to see some scumhunting by Kiwi, Liam, Clockwork, and Food. Kiwi has been focused on his own defense for too long, I need verification of Liam's opinions (they seem to agree with mine), I don't know how Clockwork feels about anybody, which leaves him unaccountable for whatever happens today, and Food doesn't have anything concrete i -thread, which makes me wonder about what his priorities are.
Darla, in your las big post you didn't address Liam or I on your list, presumably because you were rushed for time. Would you like to share your opinions now?
Miles, happy 15th birthday. You are about 1 year younger than my brother.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
Oman: for the record, when you mentioned LoudmouthLee, I did some searching. I thought you might be referring to this game where you came under fire for behavior similar to Kiwi's. For those who don't feel like reading the first few pages, neither Oman nor his accusers were scum. The real scum just stood back and watched while the townies ripped into each other, which is what I thought Oman was warning against.
Muerrto: Ah, you meant that he was appealing to emotion. I didn't know if the word "plea" had some other connotative meaning. I certainly agree that it is an appeal to emotion based on it's diction. This reinforces the image of anxiety at being targeted that Kiwi has been presenting.
If you want to see an example of Oman as scum, I would suggest the prequel to this game. Oman was a bulletproof serial killer who survived to the endgame and almost won.
Charter's last post helps his case a little in my eyes, but I think his attacks on Oman and strife are rather weak and stretched. I'll give Oman a chance to respond before saying anything more, to avoid doing his work for him. In strife's case, I'd like to add that charter's vote on Food was random, and Oman's vote appeared to be based on personal policy. After the point had been made, Kiwi and Kirby tried to make a bandwagon out of the policy vote, which is not good. Charter still seems like he's attacking everyone he thinks he might be able to get a few votes on, which seems scummy to me. I'm not buying the "charter-as-newb" theory, since he's been on the site for almost a year and he's got five completed games.
Windkirby: "Vibes" arenotvalid as reasoning. They provide no evidence or argumentative material other than simple assertion. You cannot defend yourself against someone's "vibes," because there is no point to defend against. Furthermore, your "vibes" could be based on any number of irrelevant issues like a posting style or personality that you don't like. Feel free to examine behaviors and attitudes, as I agree that both are key to determining motives and alignment, but you need to quantify the causes of your suspicions to other players so that we can be persuaded, reach consensus, and find a good lynch. Anything else is asking us to simply trust in your "vibes," and asking us to do that in a game whereany other player might be on the opposing teamis exceptionally arrogant. I want to see real reasoning behind your votesoon, or I'll have to assume you didn't have any to begin with. If that happens, you'll have my vote because adding unreasoned votes to leeching, unreasoned bandwagoning, weak excuses, lack of substantial scumhunting and lurking makes me think that you're trying to blend in without having to produce any real information. I don't think I have to tell you which alignmentthosebehaviors and attitudes point toward.
My current suspects are charter, windkirby, and kiwi, in that order.
I'd like some more from Liam.
Since Windkirby's vote, my username seems to be gathering extraneous consonants like iron filings to a magnet.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
I'd support a lynch of any of those three, so I'll move my vote to whichever wagon has momentum.
Note for later: Oman has chosen not to defend himself against charter. When I post later I will be speaking to the points that charter raised based on my own observations because my opinions on them are key to the reason I'm voting him, not because I wish to defend Oman.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
I have more to post later, but these issues are important to have out now.
Food: doc might protect him, I think.
I agree with strife, and I'd like to point out that barring sanity issues, the information we gain from WK is verifiable, therefore so is his claim (mostly).
I'm not even sure a counterclaim would be required at this point, if we have someone else would.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
First off, Food, let cops make their own choices, that way scum don't get a night phase to plan a bussing strategy. Also, I'd really like to see some suspicions from you, since WK wagoning was the only "scumhunting" you've done.
Windkirby: I support Oman's ultimatum 1000%. I want your first post of each day to include who you investigated,why, and the result. If you do not, I may be forced to melt your brain with my mind. I also would like to point out that it may become game breaking to kill you at some point in order to confirm some number of innocents.
Charter is still my number one suspect. His first two attacks were garbage, and he spent a long time doing nothing. His recent posts started off by attacking strife's suspicions of him on points of diction. He also seems to respond to strife's "there were some poorly reasoned votes on that wagon" with "Every vote on that wagon was poorly reasoned. How is that scummy?" which isn't really a defense. He then bites at Oman's gambit-bait, though not with any real conviction. Next, charter attacks BB on an "inconsistancy" in BB's post, but on further examination I think it fairly clear that the expressed opinions are not inconsistant. I find charter's assertion that strife intentionally botched his unofficial votecounts to be a big stretch, since I don't see anything for strife to gain by doing so, regardless of alignment. Once it was clear that Windkirby was going to have at least a few votes, charter was quick to hop on the bandwagon with a couple of additional points of evidence for the arguments Oman had already presented in his defense. Charter has not yet responded to my initial posted suspicions of him, other than to adjust his posting style away from what I noted as suspicious.
In short, I feel that charter has been fishing for an easy bandwagon all day, and his defenses against points against him have been incomplete, missing, or flawed.
Darla: "beef" "food" "breadcrumb" and an avatar that says "Yum" all in the same post
Also thats pretty clearly a nameclaim. Oman is def. "Beef Ramen- bulletproof serial killer"
My suspect list now starts with charter, Kiwi, Food, Liam, in that order.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
I, at least, was joking. Beef is also used in that context where I live.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
Maybe I'm not understanding something here. I saw strife's (fairly reasonable) assertion, and your rather extreme reaction to it. Strife then started to suspect you, at which point you started attacking his posts on diction. Instead of defending your reaction, you attack his initial assertion, since if he will admit any serious flaws in it, then your reaction to it would have been justified, and not scummy. Thus attacking his assertion and his suspicions are the same thing.charter wrote:I'm not attacking strife's suspicion of me, I attacked his assertion that at least one of the four voting food was scum.
Your other attacks have been much more confident in presentation, even though they were quickly dropped. I attribute this to the awkwardness Muerrto created with his response to Oman's attack. Who do you think has been trusting in Oman's gambits? I seem to be seeing a lot more suspicion of them than you do, and I knowcharter wrote:According to you, how is that any different than any of my other votes? Also, a lot of people are putting absolute trust in Oman and his numerous gambits.I'venever stated that I'm trusting in his pro-town intentions or the results of his gambits.
This is not what I was referring to, and I agree that we need to hear from BB on the WK issue. I was referring to the third of your post dedicated to pointing out inconsistancy in BB's attitude toward Oman.charter wrote:I questioned why he voted for someone and unvoted and gave no reason. Saying it was a mental mistake is fine, but I didn't know that when I questioned him. Attack is a little extreme of word to be using, I questioned him, I didn't even accuse him.
But what does he gain from misleading the town about the quantity of votes on you? Especially when the misattributed vote was not his own?charter wrote:Well, I didn't see it as as big of a stretch as you did I suppose.
The end of this postcharter wrote:Sthar8, could you direct me to "Charter has not yet responded to my initial posted suspicions of him, other than to adjust his posting style away from what I noted as suspicious. " the post you're referring to there, I can't find it.
Liam, I expect a substantial post from you tonight.
Oman, what are your thoughts on charter?
Can we get a quick count on who supports which lynch?-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
Beyond_Birthday: Whoops, I meant to say "needed" instead of "need"
charter:
Would have been a great response. My point was that you jumped on strife pretty quickly when he expressed some weak suspicions of you, and attacked his diction when he voted for you, but entirely ignored a vote coupled with an accusation that you might be trolling for an easy bandwagon.Yeah I was trying to get reactions from the people I voted to see if they would jump and overreact when I voted them. They didn't so I backed off them.
Your question regarding the inconsistancy of BB's post seems really odd to me. I'll let BB have the opportunity to explain it to you before I elaborate, just in case it's a misunderstanding.
Everybody: We need to get moving if we're going to have time for claims on our next wagon. If Kiwi has more votes than charter by the end of the day tomorrow, I'll move my vote. If I can't have scummy, I'll settle for unhelpful.
Liam: Where is that post?
Regarding night actions: Power roles don't need your advice, since they can't confirm it to be trustworthy. Surprise is better. Drop the subject.
Kirby: The reason I want your reasoning with investigations is so that it's harder to fake poorly reasoned ones if you are scum, and so that we can recreate your thought processes after your death.
MOD: Happy Scumday-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
We need votes, folks. We need to leave enough time for at least one more wagon to claim.
I'm ok with charter or Kiwi, but my vote alone won't do it.
What happened to Liam's post?-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
What the hell is wrong with you, Kiwi? You've been contributing less than the minimum, just checking in with contentless garbage posts, then claimingfor absolutely NO REASON?I mean, you didn't even bother to mount a defense before you spout a claim that a moderate sized bacterial colony could have speculated as being in the setup. And after your ridiculous claim you, in your impudence,presumeto tell the town to "GTFO" your wagon, and that "this many votes near a deadline is hella bad." I think you need to realize something: YOUR play has put you in this position. I shouldn't have to say this, but the optimal strategy as a pro-town power role does not include being forced to claim Day1 for suspicious behavior.
I'll believe for now that Kiwi has a killing role, as I expected at least two kills per night in this setup, and a controlled kill is verifiable. I haven't decided yet if he's an SK or a vig.
Kiwi, I want a nameclaim in your next post. If there is a kill mechanism in your role, I want you to paraphrase it for us. You will kill only when directed to by the town, and only when explicitly instructed to.
I'd like to hear Darla's thoughts on Kiwi and her recent suspicions.
In other news, charter continues to appear scummy with his desperate attempts to get anyone lynched but himself.
My current suspects are: charter, Liam, food, in that order.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
Ok, so I just checked the thread for new posts, and was astonished to see strife's post in the place where I thought my last post was, expressing just about the same thoughts. Turns out, when I rolled out of bed to go find some coughdrops and tissues, I forgot to hit the submit button. So, here is the original missing post. Some of these questions have already been answered, and I will post again as soon as I have read the intervening posts.sthar8, around 8 hours ago wrote:Clockwork, can you explain that please? I don't see how the mafia kill could make kiwi appear to be lying.
Kiwi: You don't get to decide whether the town can direct your kill or not. If we give you a kill to make, and you decide to kill someone else, you die. Period.
If we decide that Kiwi should pick his own kills, I want full and complete reasoning from him at the start of each day. This should prevent him from using Oman's strategy from the prequel. Basically, Oman made his infamous claim fairly late in the game, and explained his kills up to that point with "sorry I'm bad at vig."
I haven't decided whether Kiwi's kill would be best used as a no kill, or on Liam. A no kill would force Kiwi to go against the best strat for a win as SK, and as SK he might not even be allowed to no kill. On the other hand, we have no idea how many kills there are in this setup. If Kiwi's kill flavor isn't obviously connected to his claimed mechanism, he could kill without us knowing, or a third killing role might be able to set him up. If Kiwi targets Liam, we get an example of his killing flavor, which is Very Important. My only problem with this is that I think we should try to force Kiwi to do something that makes it harder for an SK to win, and I think that might be harder to do on later days.
I chose Liam for the potential NK because he hasn't been contributing enough for anybody to get a read on him, but he has been posting just enough to avoid modkill. This makes me nervous.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
This made me laugh.charter wrote:Also, the fact that no one has given a reason to not kill liam tonight (again for an arbitrary reason, lurking is a null tell in my book) tells me that liam is town. His scumbuddies would have at least suggested someone else, but no one has said anything other than kill liam.
I am very okay with the mafia allowing town to direct their kill. In that case we lose the scummiest player instead of the towniest, and all it buys for scum is a small opportunity to try to convince us on weak, silly reasoning that a claimed vig is actually mafia, rather than the easier to believe theory that he is an SK.
I am also OK with fewer kills at night. Docs are powerful pro-town roles.
Oman and Clockwork are not helping with their eagerness to martyr themselves. I think that the best option would be to have Kiwi kill a scummy player, but I don't have anyone on my list that I'm confident enough to suggest. Next best thing is to possibly confirm Kiwi's role flavor by sacrificing someone who isn't really playing the game at all. Liam's signature says that he will be V/LA for 23 more days. I'm not willing to give him a free pass for that amount of time, and it doesn't look like we'll be able to get a read on him until then. Worst case is to trade an active, townie player for the possibility of Kiwi information. Unless Oman can give us a very good reason that he should be targeted tonight, there is no way I'll support his silly bandwagon tomorrow. It really is very noble of Oman and Clockwork to offer, but lets stick with pro-town solutions for now.
I think it might be best at this point to let Kiwi decide whether to use his power, and where to direct it. As long as he can adequately explain himself tomorrow, I'm willing to trust him for now.
We are running out of time for our lynch. charter still seems the scummiest to me.
Happy scumday charter!-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
If being targeted will not kill you, then this setup is very interesting. I don't to see how this helps us, though, since a failed kill will not give us Kiwi's kill flavor.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
Charter, that was funny for a few reasons.
First, when you posted it, there was onlyoneperson calling for Liam's kill, and one person who had said "eh, I'm OK with that." A couple of others had suggested letting Kiwi decide, and I think someone had suggested a no kill. In short,severalpeople had said things other than "kill Liam."
Second, I found it humorously ironic that you are defending Liam with the evidence "No one is defending him, so he must be town." Little bit of a paradox there
Third, and most important, I'm pretty sure that the whole defense is WIFOM. In fact, I'mreallysure.
I didn't note these in my previous post for two reasons. First, I thought that they were blatantly obvious. Second, I knew that if they weren't somebody would ask me about them.
I'venoted everyone who seems to think we gain no advantage from things like keeping the mafia away from our scumhunters, having effectively more Doc protects, and using majority to direct a kill rather than trusting a player who has been pretty scummy so far.
AlsoFOS: ClockworkRusefor incomplete logic and underestimating the reasoning capabilities of the town.
I'm willing to trust Oman in his plan to let Kiwi cream on him tonight, but I'll want an explanation (which may include a claim) soon.
Kiwi: Because of the dissonance in the town, I'm willing to let you decide what your action will be. I would like you to announce it in thread before night, but I'll understand if you can't. I definitately want who and why in your first post of tomorrow, even if your kill fails. I currently support a choice between Liam, Oman, and no-kill for you, but if you reason well enough, I could probably accept any kill but Clockwork.
It has been suggested that we might have an SK in addition to a vig and a scumgroup. Normally, I would say that three kills per night seems high for a twelve person game, but available information suggests that this might be the case, and is balanced if it is.
Vote: Charter for President
(Hey, 100 game posts yesterday!)-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
EBWOP:
Liam, you're still not helping, and I'm not going to give you a free pass for two more days.
Charter, Darla, Muerrto: Why are you still voting for Kiwi?
Food: using the kill without consensus and not using the lynch is possibly the worst play we could make at this point. We really need to get lynching.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
Oman: figured something along those lines. (Well, not really, but I figured you were beef and knew something about chicken) I should have been more clear, though. I wanted your explanation, andpossiblyyour claim, tomorrow. We're getting pretty damned close to a D1 massclaim here.
strife: I've got more than twelve different flavors of Ramen in my cupboard right now, I think.
As for the Clockwork thing, I figured that a request to be killed without a good reason shouldnotbe indulged, as according to the information we have right now, such a request does not furtheranywin condition if it is fulfilled. The only purposes behind making such a request would be to WIFOM some townie points, or to accomplish some goal we don't know about. I don't want to risk fulfilling the requirements for something we know nothing about, and we don't really have time for proper questioning now, so Clockwork shouldn't be NK'd yet.
I'd be pretty pissed if Kiwi targetted WK or charter, though.
KiwiI would try asking the mod about the Oman thing before you kill him. Send him a PM along the lines of "do I have to try to kill him to prove I've found him?" If you get a yes, no answer, or it gets too close to the night deadline, you can go ahead and shoot at Oman. Otherwise, kill at your discretion. Just remember, we need reasoning tomorrow.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
By my count, Liam has five votes: strife, charter, Kiwi, Food, and Oman. That's L-2. Liam has been pretty lurky so far, and the timing of his posts has me a bit nervous. Oman's claim is also more convincing, what with the breadcrumbs and all. If he's telling the truth, we know to go after Oman tomorrow. Since I'd actually be comfortable hammering right now, I'll put him at L-1.Unvote, Vote: CallmeLiam-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
Or maybe Kiwi is V/LA like I was. I found out that I was going to be gone after night started, so I pm'd the mod to let him know.
Anyway, I'm back, now. I'll post my thoughts a little later.
I'm pretty mad at Oman though.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
OK, well, at least he was scum.
I'm willing toVote: Muerrtoon the investigation.
I'm still suspicious of Clockwork, but for his end of day garbage from yesterday. The points that have been raised against him today have not been indicative of anything, in my opinion.
I'd also prefer to keep speculation about what scum strategies are optimal out of the thread for today, and I think we should avoid massclaim for now.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
FOS: Beyond _Birthday
1. I still haven't seen evidence to suggest that CWR "saved" us from anything but a solid pro-town strategy. His points against that strategy were flawed, incomplete, and based on the assumption that the rest of us would be limited to the same kind of logic.
2. Just because someone said something then died and flipped town, does not make that something true. Especially when that personfake claimed a name that was not his own. Oman had no more information than the rest of us.
3. You propose a false dilemma when you suggest that our choice is between no-lynch and Muerrto.
4. Though your defense of CWR is informative, it might be better if you let him speak on his own behalf in the future, or at least let him have the first say.
Charter: Why wouldn't we lynch Muerrto today? If we fail to, we miss the opportunity to gain information about which of the four possible roles that WK has. We also potentially lose the use of a very pro-town role. I understand your reservations about potential cop sanity, but the only way to solve that problem is to act on WK's info.
Also, your case against CWR seems to be that he needs to die because he is giving the scum advice. If I'm not mistaken, that assumes that he is town, but you still want to lynch him? I don't disagree that CWR is exceptionally scummy, I just think you're going about his case the wrong way.
I have to agree with Muerrto that we shouldn't waste the day just to put him (back) in his grave. I think that we should all agree that Muerrto dies today, then discuss candidates for tomorrow. I favor CWR at this point because I beleive he has been making deliberately confusing statements in order to derail pro-town actions.
I am strongly opposed to a massclaim at this point.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
I amstronglyopposed to a massclaim.
Any setup info we gain will be limited to pro-town roles, so we won't be able to outguess the mod's balancing strategy effectively. There is a high probability that we have more roles whose effectiveness is limited after a massclaim. In addition, I find itveryunlikely that any framers or millers on the town sideknowthat they are framers or millers, so a massclaim doesn't really help us with that situation either. In fact, if we have a pro-town RB or similar who targeted Muerrto, I'd rather that player sit on their thumbs and continue play with the knowledge that theymightbe a framer, rather than potentially outing themselves to the scum.
And how does lynching someonewithoutan investigation result even make sense? It's already been noted that until we have more info on our cop sanity, or can confirm Muerrto's role, our cop is less powerful than he might otherwise be. I doubt that we will be in LYLO tomorrow, so I'd rather have a decreased doubt in our cop, or at the very least be sure that Muerrto isn't scum getting away after being investigated guilty.
Now, Day 3 I might be willing to massclaim, but I don't think we're ready yet.
As for tomorrow's lynch, we don't need to decide today, but it can't hurt to get some input from whoever is going to die tonight. If we spend today discussing tomorrow's lynch, we will be that much closer to sure when it's time to hammer tomorrow.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
strife: I'm really not liking your play today. It reminds me a lot of CWR's end of day shenanigans yesterday, and thatis a dance we should not be imitating.
I still have not seen any concrete reason for a massclaim, or for Muerrto to survive today. The vague fear that he might be a miller does not outweigh the potential gain from his lynch, and a guilty result is the most concrete evidence we could possible have against him.
Your speculation regarding the mod's balancing strikes me as fruitless. There are a dozen different strategies he could have used to balance a significantly powered town, and only a few of those require unreliable investigative roles. Trying to outguess the mod in this manner is foolish and wastes valuable time.
Your soft claim is also unwise, in my opinion. You have potentially added your name to the list of scum kills, and for what reason? To prove that there is more town power in the game? Why did pro-town players need to know that? I was hoping to have at leastonenight of scum uncertaintysomewherealong the line, but you've pretty much shattered that strategy, if you're town. You've accelerated the timetable for a massclaim by forcing us to accept some of the negative consequences without gaining the benefits
Charter: That's not the first time I've been mistaken for strife this game.
BB: why does your claim help anything?sthar8 wrote:3. You propose a false dilemma when you suggest that our choice is between no-lynch and Muerrto.
And for two, your implied argument was that since Oman said it, and he turned town, it must be true. That is a false authority. If you had argued that the argument was sound on it's own merits, I would have responded differently.Beyond_Birthday wrote:So, instead of no lynching, I can see a Muerrto lynch as being more sensible, assuming we trust the cop and his possible sanity issues.
Sane cop is fair if the scum has two GF's, since you guys can't wrap your heads around the fact that there are multiple ways to balance this. Just sayingl.
I guess I can deal with the "lynch the second best option today and save Muerrto for tomorrow" plan, even if I don't like it.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
EBWOP: If we have anymore power roles, can you please not randomly out yourself until we're ready for a massclaim? Please?-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
What the hell, Food?
Did you even read my post?
Irrelevant. If we manage to lynch scum, or our cop is sane, or one of the claimed players is really scum, or we have some other protective role, scum have to make more than two more kills. This is the same problem that CWR's vig/SK strategy had. I think we've already had a conversation about how giving scum advice is a Really Bad Thing, if you're town.strife220 wrote:We outed our cop and doc on D1 - the two main kill targets for scum. At the earliest, cop will have these roles gone by D4, by which time I'm sure we'll either be mass-claiming, or have outed the majority of roles anyway due to lynching.
Irrelevant, since the balancing mechanism could be in some other detail besides unreliable info. Irrelevant, because ambiguous wording in an investigation result, even on a sane cop, is nothing short of responsible and reasonable behavior from the mod. And irrelevant, since if you weren't so focused on the cop being wrong, you'd see that a guilty is the most solid evidence we are likely to get.strife220 wrote:The number of power-roles seems to heavily favor town, increasing the likelihood of some mechanism to make our cop less effective. Our claimed cop has expressed a bit of concern about his own sanity. About a quarter of the players in the game have jumped on the guilty result with complete tunnel-vision, and given poor reasoning
If we lynch Muerrto today, and he flips guilty then we've caught scum, and A) our cop is sane, paranoid, or scum. If he flips town, B) our cop is insane, paranoid, or scum and Muerrto might be a miller. On Day 3, if we get a guilty and A is true, we must lynch the guilty to gain more info. If B is true, we ignore his info for that day. If we get an innocent on Day 3 (much more likely), and A is true, then our cop is sane or scum. If B were true, then Muerrto might have been a miller, or our cop is insane or scum.
If we don't lynch Muerrto today, and we get a guilty tomorrow, then both A and B are true and we need to lynch one of the two in order to verify. If we get an innocent tomorrow, C) our cop is sane, insane, or scum and Muerrto might be a miller, and we need to lynch one of the two in order to verify.
I might be missing something, but putting off Muerrto's lynch seems like we're just delaying the inevitable, and since two mislynches could put us in LYLO on Day 4, I'd rather go with the plan that gets us the most info in the fastest time.
I don't disagree that there is a high probability that we have a Miller, especially if Muerrto is the only townie, but that could be a safe claim just as easily as a real one, and there is only one way to find out.
By my count we have three confirmed roles (Kiwi, Oman, Liam), three full claims(charter, WK, Muerrto), and three soft claims (strife, Food, BB). That leaves only three who are alive, unthreatened, and intelligent (me, Darla, and CWR). We've managed to destroy any advantage we might have gained by concealing our roles, and for no apparant gain. We might as well be rid of the minor WIFOM of "we shouldn't vote X, he's softclaimed power." So, strife, you win. It's time for a massclaim.
A few rules though:
1. We decide on a claim order through town consensus
2. Full claims, including flavor (in both senses)
3. Be careful not to quote the mod, we don't need accidental modkillings (unless you're quoting a scum pm, I'm OK with that)
I am most suspicious of CWR and BB at the moment, but I'd like to see more from Darla.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
That's all I've got to say about that.strife220 wrote:For face value, Sthar8's logic is pretty solid.
So we have one or two more scum, likely with some kind of power. If we only have one more scum, he's probably a roleblocker who gives up his kill in order to block.
I think that the "bottom ramen" thing is just a contrast with "top Ramen." In other words, I think it's a name for the scumgroup, not an indicator of number or power of scum.
I'm very suspicious of BB at the moment, because of his failure to counter and some of his behavior yesterday.
With regards to claiming, we already have enough soft claims that scum have plenty of direction on their kill, so we might as well get the information benefit.
I disagree with popcorn claiming, I think we should set a list and agree on it before claiming.
I would like to add any night choices or targets, plus justification, to the information required with each claim.
I propose:
CWR
BB
Darla
sthar8
Food
strife
Any objections or changes?-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
NO FOOD!
You will make your claim when you are told to.
I'm not sure what you mean by "going outside," but if you're going to be V/LA, you should let us know when to expect you back, then we will decide whether you should claim first.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
BB, I've readallof your posts both carefully and closely, and no ampersand is going to change my habits in that regard. I wouldn't be so suspicious of you otherwise. And just because I see something doesn't mean I'm going to broadcast it in thread, unless I feel that it would be pro-town to do so.
If we have two scum living, that means we had four originally. That might be balanced with the large amount of town power, and I'm not discounting it, but one scum with the choice between power and killdoesfit rather well with the evidence. In that case, I'm sure town will have some kind of disadvantage that we may or may not be able to see shortly.
If Clockwork has no objections, I think we're ready to start claims when he posts.
Remember, claim should include role name, role type, pertinent flavor, night choices, targets, and justification for targets.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
Clockwork:
This was my way of saying "I told you so, and you should have gone with the logic" to strife. This should have been obvious since his next line from that post basically says "but I think we should ignore the logic here and go with gut."sthar8 wrote:Strife220 wrote:
For face value, Sthar8's logic is pretty solid.
That's all I've got to say about that.
Second, strife was the one speculating about fake claims, and trying to outguess the mod. In fact, I've raised that as a point against him already, so I think you can see what my stance is on the subject. I have not defended against any accusations from you, mostly because you haven't made any against me. In fact, the reason you might see buddying between strife and I is that you'verepeatedly misattributed my statements to him throughout this game. I wonder if you hope to gain some kind of advantage from this, or if you need to be reading a little more closely, as the last time I consistently agreed with strife was on Day 1, and even that was not across the board (for example, our opinions on Oman were markedly different).
Third, Iproposeda list, then asked for discussion on it. If anyone had proposed any changes, we could have agreed on them, but it seems everyone liked my first draft. Your suggestion that scum would be able to manipulate the list to some form of advantage is insulting to the town, since scum are a small minority at this point. I'd rather assume that at leastsomeof the pro-town players have brainssomewhereinside their skulls. If the scum are as good and the town are as stupid as you're trying to make them out to be, then we've already lost this game.
I am not cleared, and have never claimed to be cleared. In fact, as of this post we have only two cleared players: Oman and Liam. Being confirmed is not a prerequisite for acceptance of any argument or claim. The standard we use is logical validity and soundness or cogency, because even a confirmed pro-town player can propose arguments with horrible, fatal flaws, as I believe to be the case with strife's thoughts yesterday.
My intent behind the list was to take into account soft-claims and scumminess to create an order that was dangerous for false claims. This isimpossiblewith dice, and I've stated repeatedly that we should try to get as much benefit from the massclaim as possible.
For example, strife soft-claimed first. This suggests to me that he has a roleclaim ready, since he could have been forced to claim right away because of his risky (and poorly reasoned) move. If he's scum, having him claim last maximizes the chances that his claim of choice will be taken already, forcing him to counter, or lose the benefit of any breadcrumbing he's done and make up a new claim on the spot. If he counters, we can test the powers or lynch the scummiest one, and if he makes up a new claim it will not be as thought out as his original, which leaves more room for scummy errors.
Finally, what you're saying with your claim is that you could have countered Muerrto on flavor and chose not to? That's two people who just chose to let Muerrto off the hook with a claim they knew was false (points to BB for stating strong suspicions and lynch preference, even after he had unvoted, though).
Your play over the course of the last two days has served only the goal of attempting to confuse and scare the town. In addition you dropped your Muerrto vote as soon as it looked like others might be unwilling to lynch him, without giving any reasoning other than "if you guys don't want to lynch him, I won't vote for him." I'm happy with you at the top of my scumlist.Vote: ClockworkRuseNote that I do not advocate lynching until after the claims have been completed an analyzed fully.
Darla: I would guess that four scum is a bit powerful, but it could account for why the town has so many strong roles. There are alternative explanations that work, though, so I'm going to assume that there are one or two scum left. I think five would have been too many, since it would have created the potential for a Day 2 town loss (mislynch, sk kill, mafia kill, JOAT miskills to result in 4 mafia out of 8 players, mafia outnumber town and win).
WK: I'm okay with the edit to the list, and food seems excited to claim, so we might at well let him do so sooner. My placement of myself on the list was arbitrary and indended as a compromise to anyone who was suspicious of me. I don't actually care whenIclaim, it's everyone else I'm concerned with.
BB: You are up next.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
The logic I applied to your case does not hold when applied to BB, as it is specific to being thefirstto soft claim. Being second, he could demand that you claim first if pressed, and could thus buy himself some time to think up a proper claim. If you were not pressed, he gains the breadcrumbing advantage to any future claims. I felt that the significant advantage of having scummy players claim without the additional setup info of other claims was outweighed in your case and food's by the very specific nature of your claims. In BB's case, I felt it benefited the town most to give him the chance to claim something improbable or impossible in this setup, thus nailing him as scum. Also, you have been acting much less like scum than BB is, meaning either that you are town, or that a claim slip is less likely because you are (mostly) playing well.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
BB: Thank you. It's kind of funny that you jailed me, for reasons that I will explain when I claim. I'm a he, by the way
CWR: I don't know what advantage that could have, either. Besides claiming that we are buddying up by misattributing a consistent statement by me to him, and using that to show that we are in agreement.
Weshouldassume that the scum are trying to trip us up, but it seems like you are saying that we shouldn't eventryto reach majority consensus on any point because one or two playersmightbe trying to convince us to do something that is anti-town. I think that if we all look for scummy actions, we can figure out which courses are anti-town. If we find someone trying to push something like that, we lynch them and solve all our problems.
Again, I didn'tpickthe list, Iproposedit. Important distinction. If you don't like how little the town discussed the list, you should have said "We should discuss this list further," not "Guys he's not confirmed don't listen to anything he says!" One of those is pro-town.
Regarding your unvote, you weighed my argumentsforMuerrto's lynch against your argumentsforMuerrto's lynch, and decided to unvote?
And as for my vote, we have a lot of day left and quite a few more claims to see.
Darla: Your turn.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
Excellent. Food, was your puzzle based on your intent to claim cryptographically, or does it have some other significance to your role?
Time for my claim:
I am Shrimp Ramen
I am a Bulletproof Townie. The flavor justification is that I can breathe underwater, so every night I go to my secret undersea hiding place, where I cannot be shot at or raped.
Thus, I am the person who needed BB's protectionleast, since I was already safe. I dropped several power role tells on Day 1 in order to attract nightkills, but all the roles I breadcrumbed were forced to claim immediately after I had done so. This also explains why I was so strongly against the claim, as my role is now useless. I was hoping that after scum ran down the list of claimed power, they would target strongly pro-town players, which I have attempted to be to the best of my ability.
This also may explain why there were no kills last night: at least 1/3 of the town couldn't be nk'd
I'm slightly less suspicious of CWR with a second vanilla having the same flavor, but it doesn't warrant the removal of my vote, yet. I'm more suspicious of BB than I was, partly because we know scum has a RB.
CWR: I'm not sure the test will prove anything.
Darla: Why didn't you counter-claim Muerrto?
strife and Food: are you explicitly confirmed?-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
CWR: It could prove her innocence, but I'm not sure that an incorrect result will prove her guilt. Sorry, I should have been clearer.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
Unvote
CWR is effectively cleared unless Darla is also scum, but there are possible scenarios in which Darla is scum and CWR is not.
I'm not sure how BB's guilt or innocence has anything to do with mine, since if both of us are telling the truth, 1/3 of the protown players were unkillable last night. If this is so and we accept the mafia's odd reluctance to kill charter, there was a solid chance that they would try to kill WK and outguess the doc, or me. The likelihood that I was the kill target goes up if you add CWR and/or BB to the pool of townies, since they have been rather suspicious in the last few days, and scum might not want to kill someone that they can feasibly try to lynch. This makes the lack of kill easy to explain even if BB is truthful.
However, BB's role would be very powerful for the mafia to have. It would give them all the usefulness of a RB, with the added benefit that he can act as a mafia doc if, for example, town decides the JOAT or SK kill. BB could also be lying about his targets. If he is scum I think it's very likely that he blocked our cop last night.
I also think that Oman was initially protown, but that he was either a backup to the SK, or a judas-like role that would have turned the lone SK into another mafia group.
Darla, you need to answer CWR's question, if you're able.
BB is the top of my list at the moment, but I need to hear Darla's answer before I vote.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
B_B:
1. I don't think anyone doubts that your flavor is chicken. And I believe that you have some kind of RB power. The only thing we're questioning is your alignment.
2. I'm a dude
3. As of my claim, you were number two on my list. I was noting thatifyou were telling the truth, targetting me was funny. Also, it's kind of funny that I was intentionally dropping PR tells, and you decided I was the least likely to have a power role of all the pro-town players. The "quick change" really only moved you up by one spot, and that was because CWR's chances of being scum are entirely dependant on Darla being scum.
4. Lemme check my shorts...yup, definately boy-parts
5. It kind of bothers me that you are limiting your scum-hunting to "players who find me suspicious." Keeping to that reasoning is bound to increase your suspect pool.
6. My chest is almost as hairy as my face, and I'm not from Eastern Europe.
7. I'm a little uneasy letting a claimed blocking role live when we know that our cop was blocked last night. Claiming town jailer as a scum RB or jailer would be very similar to Oman's gambit in the prequel game.
8. I'm pretty sure I was the one who said I was reading your posts very carefully. Then again, my avatar and strife's are apparantly virtually identical...
I agree that BB/Darla is the most likely scumpair. I think CWR/Darla is very unlikely, and the only other pair I could see at the moment is BB/charter. That pairing is very unlikely, however, because it potentially limits the scum team's actions a whole lot. In addition, if we discover that BB is scum, we have a solvable situation if it comes down to a choice between Darla and charter. I'm not sold on the fact that both masons are confirmed, but I doubt that they are both scum and a scummason is a little unlikely.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
Good point strife. I'd like a votecount before I place mine, though, to avoid any abrupt day-ends like yesterday's.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
Way back in the early 90s, when I learned to operate the Internet, the military (at least the base I was on) was in the habit of assigning account names. Mine was the first two letters of my first name, then the first three letters of my last name, then the number 8, since I was the eighth user to be signed up on an account with those particulars. Since my birthday is the 8th, and my school ID number at the time (which was pretty useless, given that there were only about 15 students) was 8, I decided I liked the convenience of the screen name. I've been using it ever since, excepting an unfortunate period when a girlfriend changed it to compliment hers.
Also, the little symbol next to "gender" under each person's avatar is generally a safe guide when attempting to determine the sex of an internet entity.
I'm waiting on the mod before I vote, but I think Darla is a good plan. If she flips town, however, I think that BB should target somebody other than WK, on the slight chance that either the GF can't submit kills, or the RB decides to target someone else. I also think BB should target someone other than me, since I don't need his protection and if he's town that leaves only two targets for scum.
On the other hand, if BB continues to protect me, scum may try to increase suspicion on me by no-killing or targetting WK on the off chance that charter doesn't protect him. If WK dies, there is less suspicion on me and we lose a cop. If he lives, which is more likely, we have a second night without kills and there is a slightly greater amount of suspicion on me. This does not bother me at all, as fewer kills means more chances for the town.'
All of this is very unlikely, and I find it probable that Darla will flip scum, but we should be prepared in any case.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
WK, just remember that if we do decide to jail you, you still need to pick a target and submit, otherwise we gain significantly less information.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
In fact, Food, BB wouldneedto use his ability on the cop because that's the only way we can confirm he used it. Otherwise, if he's scum, he can just kill someone other than his protect target and claim to have blocked/protected, and we'd never know.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
Actually, I was just waiting for the mod to come back and post a VC before hammering. It was an arbitrary decision on my part intended to give a definite deadline so that everyone could air whatever business they needed to before the lynch. In particular I assumed Darla would attempt a defense, but that seems to not be happening. I intend to hammer as soon as the mod gets back, but you can feel free to do so sooner if you wish. I'm basically just bearing out my implied promise at this point.
BB: I don't care who you protect if Darla is innocent, so long as it is not WK or charter. I would request the block on me in order to force scum to WIFOM with a no-kill or prove that I do not send in mafia kills, but there are too many variables for that evidence to mean anything. Besides, having three unkillable townies instead of two, especially if the third one is possibly a surprise with the potential to block the kill on either the sender or receiver's side, is too advantageous to give up.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
If Darla flips scum of any flavor, BB needs to jail you. If he's lying, you'll get your investigation, and there is a possibility that we'll have no kill. If he's telling the truth, you'll be blocked, we'll know that he has at least a RB ability, and there is a possibility of no kill. It proves nothing about BB's alignment, but if he's assigned to block you and he's scum, it would be suicide for him to let you die. If Darla flips RB and you get your investigation, we kill and eat BB.
If Darla flips town, BB targets someone else on the chance that he either RBs the RB or gets a successful protect, since we gain no info from him blocking you. This will allow charter to target you, keeping you safe and possibly netting another investigation. Who BB and you each target should be kept personal until tomorrow, to prevent scum from changing who sends the kill, killing around protects, or killing confirmable townies.
I was expecting some questions about my claim list, and a defense from darla, but I guess that both of those are essentially irrelevant at this point. It does tickle me that you were apparantly waiting for my permission to hammer, BB-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
I thought BB had already done so, but just in caseVote: DarlaBlueEyes-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
Actually, I was thinking that BB's flavor makes more sense as a doctor. Of course, I think charter's flavor makes more sense as a JOAT, and Liam's flavor should have been an SK, so I'm not putting much faith in that line of reasoning.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
Ok, so lets look at that quote in context.
First, I said:
Then, after BB asks who to protect if Darla is town:On the other hand, if BB continues to protect me, scum may try to increase suspicion on me by no-killing or targetting WK on the off chance that charter doesn't protect him. If WK dies, there is less suspicion on me and we lose a cop. If he lives, which is more likely, we have a second night without kills and there is a slightly greater amount of suspicion on me. This does not bother me at all, as fewer kills means more chances for the town.'
Emphasis added.BB: I don't care who you protect if Darla is innocent, so long as it is not WK or charter. I would request the block on me in order to force scum to WIFOM with a no-kill or prove that I do not send in mafia kills, but there aretoo many variables for that evidence to mean anything. Besides, having three unkillable townies instead of two, especially if the third one is possibly a surprise with the potential to block the kill on either the sender or receiver's side, is too advantageous to give up.
If I needed a WIFOM defense to escape blame for nightkills, I would have already needed to use it today. I think that the fact that I still live shows that most of the players have already independantly determined that the odds of a scum that is not me accidentally trying to kill someone who is protected are greater than or equal to the odds of me being RB'd scum. Since I do not have a killing ability,Iknow that any suspicion arising from nightkills is indeed the result of WIFOM, although the use of that term applied to suspicions of me says literally nothing about any defense I might present. Also, with the pro-town strength of my role, I can expect scum to cast suspicion on me any way they can, especially if I'm seeming pro-town, since they can't just NK me. I was hoping to combat this by using a block on me to reduce suspicion, but I realized that there is a greater protown advantage to another course of action.
In the first of these two posts, I was thinking about how the small amount of concern that my RB-ing may have prevented a kill could be assauged. I realized that if I were blocked by BB and WK still didn't get his investigation, but there were still a kill, The odds of me being scum in your eyes would go down significantly. Unfortunately, if the scum guessed that I were RB'd, they could simply target WK. If WK was protected, we learn nothing about my alignment. If WK dies, due to charter trying to outguess scum or some other odd circumstance, then my appearance matters much less, as the cop is dead. I announced that I would be OK with any of these outcomes, even if they cast more suspicion on me, and felt that I should be a part of the pool from which BB chose his night action in the event of Darla's innocence.
By the second quoted post, however, I had realized that being blocked while a kill went off wouldn't clear me. This doesn't mean that there is no reason to jail me, but I believe that BB jailing someone other than me maximizes the use of our potentially protective roles, and gives us the greatest chance of blocking a kill. Ultimately, I leave the choice up to BB if Darla is a townie, but I thought that he shouldn't be left with a flawed argument as the last he'd heard from me on the subject.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
strife, your post doesn't make any sense to me. Please explain.
B_B is most likely the last scum, and I'm ready for him to die as soon as he's checked in. There is a small possibility that charter is a scum roleblocker pretending to be the doc, or that we have a scum mason, but neither scenario is worth pursuing while we have a claimed jailer whose target died last night. I'll probably vote BB either as soon as he posts, or tomorrow night, whichever comes first.
CWR: If charter had protected WK as well, we would have gained no information from last night, as we wouldn't know if BB was lying about his protective ability. We lost a cop, sure, but since we know our last scum is a roleblocker of some kind, a cop wasn't going to do us much good anyway. Either BB is our last scum, or the remaining scum can both kill and RB.-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington
Specifically
I'm not sure what this is in reference to.But why Sthar8? Didn't he claim bulletproof townie? As in, the role that needed protection the least?-
-
sthar8 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2462
- Joined: April 29, 2008
- Location: Eastern Washington