Nintendo Mafia (Game Over)

[Kdub]

I have two main suspects after reading this game:

danakillsu - Poor vote on Lelouch, as has been noted by others. Post 569 looks like a forced, unconvincing reason to throw suspicion on Tragedy as if he's looking for some excuse to eventually switch his vote. Doesn't mention Tragedy at all or give any further reasons why he suspects her until later when she's about to be lynched.

Espeonage - Way too confident that Lelouch was town. Even after Lelouch's supposed scum-claim, Espeonage is still adamant that he is town. I don't care how good you may be at reading someone as a VI based on posting style or tone, that in no way trumps a D1 scum claim.

I'm also getting bad vibes from mb53 and Lucresia, but those are less solid reads.

esurio is very likely town. I am less certain about Dekes and lewarcher, but I'd put them down as town as well.

VOTE: Espeonage
This looks like the more viable lynch today, and Espeonage's flip is likely to reveal more info on dana+others as well.

[Kdub]

@ Kdub: What was your read on Tragedy whilst catching up?

Well, I read the game knowing in advance that Tragedy was town, so I don't think I can answer this question fairly. I was mainly looking for "what are other people's reasons for voting her?" rather than "what is her alignment?"

[Kdub]

lewarcher:
When I'm replacing into a game, I like to do my readthrough with knowledge of the flips up to that point. It helps me in terms of looking at interactions between players during the readthrough when I know the alignments of some players. I don't like doing "blind" readthroughs, but I know that other people prefer that.

Of the people who voted Tragedy, dana's behavior toward her seemed the most forced and unconvincing. I wasn't thrilled with mb53 or thil's votes on her, but dana looked the worst to me out of that wagon, partly because of his earlier behavior as well.

[Kdub]

PatB:
Their votes seemed quick and not well-supported by earlier interactions with Tragedy. Are you asking me because you disagree?

Dekes:
More people have taken a stance on Espeonage than on dana. dana himself has indicated suspicion of Esp. That is why I think Esp's flip will tell us more because there will be more interactions to look at.

Since the two lynches we've had have both been town, I'm thinking the scum are among the people who are lurking (If you want to be a jerk and call me out on this, go ahead, it should make you look more town) but clearly all of them couldn't be.

If the scum are mostly lurking, do you think that the people who were actively pushing the mislynches are more likely to be town then? Why?

[Kdub]

Unvote

VOTE: Bunnylover
The other vote sort of served its purpose.

What purpose?

@Ash, something I find even more disturbing than the DBE wagon speed was the speed of the TMH counter wagon for such seemingly innocent reasons.

Considering that it happened on page 1, were you really expecting serious reasons to be given for the TMH wagon? Also, you were the 3rd vote (out of 4) on the DBE wagon, yet now you find the speed of the wagon "disturbing"?

[Kdub]

And I don't really find the DBE wagon speed disturbing, I find the TMH counter wagon speed disturbing. No, I wasn't expecting serious reasons. However, with reasonings of wanting a RVS wagon to hop on, but not going for an already begun one, I became wary.

The way you worded your original statement seemed like you were uncomfortable with the speed of BOTH wagons, TMH's wagon moreso. Bunnylover also raises a good point: why are you not looking at the TMH counter-wagon and who might be scum on it? We're on D3, page 32, and the best lead you have is a page 1 wagon with no follow-up?

[Kdub]

After rereading a bit, I'm pretty sure Xtoxm/hohum is town. There's a good chance Espeonage is also town as well.

UNVOTE:

Yeah, I know that's a sudden change of opinion, but I'd rather not say more at the moment. I'm going to think about the best way to proceed.

With that said, hohum's vote on esurio is bad. He's still town though.

VOTE: GhostWriter for now.

[Kdub]

hohum, who else do you think is town?

[Kdub]

@Kdub: I can not fathom how you believe Espeonage is town. Can you explain?

I caught something on a reread of the past several pages that makes be believe so. I'm more sure of it now than I was when I unvoted. I'm not going to elaborate any further than that at the moment.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: dana

If Espeonage is really town, as I now believe, this looks like a good place to put my vote. GW isn't off the hook, but I think dana is more likely to be scum.

@ people on the Espeonage wagon:
Whether you see it or not, I'm confident that Espeonage is not the correct lynch. I suggest moving your votes elsewhere. All will be made clear in time.

[Kdub]

hohum:
I'm going to have to disagree, esurio is a fairly strong town read for me based on her D1 play, and I didn't think the thing between her and Ythan was much of anything.

lewarcher:
I already said I'm not going to elaborate. I don't deny that his play has been scummy, but I'm feeling pretty confident in this. For all intents and purposes, assume that I have setup-related info that indicates Espeonage is probably town.

[Kdub]

Is this based on posts from Xtoxm, hohum, or a combination of the two of them?

The combination of both of them.

@kdub: I fail to see any reason why not revealing your reads is pro-town. Naturally there is a possibility, but it is a possibility that must not be discussed (I am sure you are smart enough to see what I mean). Therefore, by mentioning what you mentioned, you are preventing me from discussing Espeo's case with you for basically the rest of the game. Smart move, if you were scum. I am really confused. I will attentively read your slot's iso tomorrow.

Very well. If it comes down to it, I'll explain, but right now, I don't think it is beneficial to have that discussion.

Why would I look on the counter-wagon first? I'd have to go through them to try to find scum, and even with a scum flip, it wouldn't confirm Bunny as scum as well. If I believe that scum are protecting scum, I don't go after the one's protecting, I go after the one being protected, as there is likely a power-related reason for it. And then you look for the rest using post-flip analysis. That wasn't a good point, it was a terrible one.

If you believed Bunny's slot was scum, and that his buddies were protecting him, you should have been looking at and calling out people on the counter-wagon, even if you were voting the one being protected. You did not do that at any point.

I am receptive toward a thil wagon, but it's not my top choice.. His attitude toward wanting/not wanting to put his vote down, plus his Tragedy vote yesterday don't look good, but I'd prefer a dana or GW lynch today.

[Kdub]

esurio, who is your second suspect? I know Pine's slot has been scummy, but I'm asking you to trust me for now, we're not lynching Pine.

[Kdub]

Kdub, hohum, mb, and Bunny: It's increasingly looking like two major wagons are forming with a little more than a week until the deadline. You four should start considering what you like and dislike about these wagons, because you guys are the swing votes that will be making the decision if nothing changes soon.

I've already said that I don't want to lynch Pine. A week until deadline is still a fair amount of time.

I'm still most in favor of either a dana or GW lynch.

Hey, you reap what you sow. No case = no defense.

Here's a case for you to respond to, dana:

Mb53. Don't make me think that you find me suspicious in every game we play with each other.
This is a bit disappointing, as I will mostly turn out town most of the time anyways.
When will the CASE be ready?

I really don't like this post. It's like Tragedy's trying to remind people that chances are that she's town, as if we didn't know that already. It reads like overconfident scum to me.

FoS: Tragedy

This is a strange reason to suspect Tragedy, especially coming as it does when the Tragedy wagon is gaining steam. What is overconfident about that post? It looks like nothing to me.

KILL THE AWFUL VT (I THINK IT'S VT ANYWAY) CLAIM! IT DOESN'T EVEN MAKE ANY SENSE TO ME! HE HAS A POWER THAT DOESN'T EXIST BUT HE HAS NO POWER? WHAT IS THIS I DON'T EVEN???????????

unvote vote: Tragedy

I have ALWAYS wanted to do that.

Tragedy said "I have nothing to do in this whole game with my power that doesn't exist. Anyways I still don't have a power."
That made no sense to me and looked like Tragedy was trying to make up flavor that the mod gave her which was really just her own work. Add to that the fact that she was claiming ANOTHER obscure character that was a VT, and it just was not believable at all to me. Why would I give someone else time to reconsider when I had decided the claim was fake?

If somebody else has claimed an obscure character as a VT, and they actually flipped as an obscure character that was a VT, why would that make Tragedy's claim unbelievable? By saying "ANOTHER obscure character that was a VT", it's pretty clear that you disbelieve the claim on the grounds that you don't think more than one such a character would be in the game. What is your basis for that reasoning? Wouldn't the opposite tend to be true in a game this size?

I'm not really getting the "your laughter wasn't spontaneous/genuine, therefore you're scummy" thing. Why does it seem like a ton of people want to attack esurio for crappy reasons? Maybe we shouldn't go there for now, honestly. Let's lynch Espeonage and see where it goes. If he flips town, I will be MORE inclined to lynch esurio.

So you spend all game defending esurio from Espeonage, now it looks like you are trying to line up a lynch ON esurio if he flips town. Obvious scum motivation here.

Aside from that, you have done no scumhunting on anybody outside of Espeonage's slot. Most of your posts are you defending yourself, hammering Tragedy, or complaining about this game.

[Kdub]

@ Kdub
I never expected MOST of the characters to be minor, so since mine is, and the dead guy's was, I thought it much less likely for Tragedy's claim to be true.
You might see scum motivation in that post from your PoV, but it really just makes sense. If Espeo wasn't scum as I thought he was, I would be MORE willing to lynch esurio. But I emphasized the MORE for a reason. You're right about the no scumhunting on anyone else, and although I take some responsibility for that, I blame it mostly on the fact that Espeo/Pine is not dead.

So 2 players = most? The rest of your post is pretty much just conceding the points I listed against you, so I see no reason to move my vote if this is your defense.

[Kdub]

I'm just not confident in any vote that I could lay down right now. And I don't see how not-voting would be scummy, in fact, it would let the day go longer, and with more being said means more information for town. But if you want me to lay down a vote, give me a good person to vote, and exactly why I should.

vote: Hohum

[b/]

I have never seen a more spontaneous vote and that does not sit well with me.

These are both posts from today after your supposed investigation. Nothing indicating that you think Espeonage is scum, and no attempt to question or push his player slot. I think we need to hear a full claim.

[Kdub]

UNVOTE:

Need to think about this. The claim is pretty sketchy given the timing and thil's reasoning as to why he didn't vote or pressure Espeonage/Pine today, but I'm having trouble seeing a scum motivation for faking a guilty here. Aside from that, I believed that Pine was town for reasons that I may or may not reveal today. I'd like to hear from someone (I think they know who they are) before making a decision.

[Kdub]

Do not hammer please. I want to hear from other people and I may have something important to say. There is no pro-town reason to quickhammer, so don't do it unless you are scum. In fact, I would suggest that people unvote to be safe.

[Kdub]

OK, now I'm a bit confused. hohum, the fact that you initially voted Pine and wanted to lynch him means you aren't sure he's town, right? If so, I don't think a town read should trump a guilty result. I guess I misinterpreted something you said earlier. I'm fine with lynching Pine first, in that case. I'll vote when we've heard from everyone and we agree to proceed.

Mod: I unvoted on the last page so I am not voting for anybody at the moment.

[Kdub]

No I'm not. I think your response cleared things up for me. The smart play here is to lynch Pine.

[Kdub]

There is plenty of time before the deadline. I'd rather play it safe and wait for people to weigh in at the expense of dragging the day out a little longer as opposed to risking a quickhammer, especially when other people have said they are planning to post additional content soon.

[Kdub]

I think it's pretty well established by the mountain of shit posting today that pine is not to be hammered without consent. If you were to vote him for motivational reasons a quick hammer would likely be looked at with murderous hearts. This sort of moots away any caution you held in reserve, doesn't it?

I think you underestimate the likelihood of accidental hammers (whether they are accidental hammers from town not paying attention or "accidental" hammers from scum). What good reason is there to put him at L-1 when I've already made my opinion on him clear and other people have said they want to post stuff?

Regarding thil vs. Pine, I agree that thil's claim looks sketchy given that he indicated no suspicion of Espeonage/Pine today. However, I see no good reason for scum-thil to come out with a fake guilty result against Pine suddenly like this. The wagon on himself wasn't obviously going to lynch, so why give himself up when his lynch was not inevitable? Also, given Pine's VT claim, I'd rather play it safe and not lynch the claimed cop. Yes, he may be targeted by scum tonight if he actually is the cop, but we've almost certainly got a protective role in a game this size. Having a confirmed cop is extremely valuable, and I'd risk lynching a claimed VT (especially one who has been under suspicion for a while) over him almost regardless of reads at this point in the game.

TOWN:
danakillsu

wat

[Kdub]

If thil is scum, his motivation for faking the claim seems to be "it looks like I'm going to be lynched so I'll take down a townie with me". That's fine, except it certainly wasn't obvious that thil was going to be today's lynch.

If thil is town, his motivation is "lynch scum before the wagon derails". Why isn't that likely?

Preview edit: ...and that (RC's vote) is exactly what I was talking about, hohum.

[Kdub]

@kdub: will you now explain in detail why you thought pine was town?

Since Pine and hohum are both dead, yes I will.

Check out these posts:

This Espeonage wagon has grown far too quickly. I looked into him over the night phase, and i'm pretty sure he's town.

When you turn out to be wrong about Espeonage are you going to lynch me too?

The only thing you're trying to do here is rush a mislynch and what's worse is you're browbeating and throwing lots of useless words into a post to make it seem as if you actually have a valid point.

To me, this looked like Xtoxm/hohum was breadcrumbing a cop investigation on Espeonage/Pine. Post 750 was the most obvious, and hohum replaced in and immediately declared Espeonage to be a mislynch, so that reinforced it in my mind. It turns out I was wrong, which I realized in this exchange:

The procedure here is simple guys.

Cop claim: lynch the claimed investigation result.

If thil turns out to be lying lynch scum.

We can sacrifice Pine in order to lynch scum. The idea when he replaced in was that he couldn't save his player slot anyways.

unvote, vote pine

OK, now I'm a bit confused. hohum, the fact that you initially voted Pine and wanted to lynch him means you aren't sure he's town, right? If so, I don't think a town read should trump a guilty result.

I guess I misinterpreted something you said earlier.

I'm fine with lynching Pine first, in that case. I'll vote when we've heard from everyone and we agree to proceed.

So yeah, that's what was going on with me thinking Pine was town for a bit yesterday.


I don't think thil is scum. The timing and nature of the cop claim just don't make sense for scum bussing their buddy.

chkflip was off my radar yesterday, so I'll reread him today.

VOTE: danakillsu
This is a good place to vote for now. Everything I said about dana yesterday still stands.

[Kdub]

Ythan, do you think that scum fakeclaiming cop would claim to have failed to send in an action N1? If anything, that strikes me as more likely to be an honest answer. That just raises extra doubts when he could have easily claimed an innocent on someone if he was lying.

- at the time thil claimed there was no way in hell that somebody else but thil or Pine would get lynched

The dana wagon was gaining some steam for a bit. Without the cop claim, I'm not so sure we would have necessarily lynched one of those two.

chkflip's iso is not so helpful. His attack on thil came early before the wagon had formed on him, so it's probably null in terms of how likely it is to be bussing vs. trying to get a counter-wagon to Espeonage started. Notably he questions the dana wagon, but never mentions him otherwise.

[Kdub]

I don't think the chance that he would choose the lie over clearing a townie is trivial.

I don't think the chance should be completely ignored, but I do think the chance is small. If you take a look at his posting history at the time during which N1 occurred, he did post on site a few hours after the night began, but not at all during the next three days. It seems consistent with his explanation that he missed the deadline.

[Kdub]

So my side of my interaction with Espeo/Pine doesn't mean anything to anyone? I would think normally that big a bus would be impossible for scum to make.

Wasn't that strong of a bus by any reasonable standard. Nice try hyping it up though.

Ythan, just to be clear, you are saying (without details for the moment) that you are certain that thil is lying about being a cop? Is your info strong enough that we should consider this to be a 1v1 situation like yesterday? Because if that is the case, then that is the only way I could see myself voting for thil today.

[Kdub]

I was thinking something along the same lines as lewarcher, though not necessarily a counterclaim, just some sort of role-related info.

I'm not backtracking. I've never stated I have absolute proof he is scum. As I clearly stated in that post I am relenting for the moment but may in the future share what information I have for more minds to consider. None of this information is new.

If none of it is new, then I'm not seeing it and I don't see the harm in you sharing it.

[Kdub]

I think I've sorted out the misunderstanding with what Ythan said with regards to "information". Nevertheless, barring any additional revelations, I remain unconvinced about thil being scum.

Ythan, what's your opinion of dana?

Blah, Ythan play is reminding me of GreyIce play in my previous mafia game (SE5 I think) where he tunneled on Prana who claimed doctor and would not stop tunneling him. GreyIce flipped scum that game.

Vote: Ythan

That was SEMG, and no, Ythan's play this game is nothing like Grey's play in that game. I also know that you have played in a game with town-Ythan before (hint: I was in that game too), so resorting to this type of argument instead of direct meta on him strikes me as a strange direction to go in.

[Kdub]

interesting stuff happening about bunny... can you or kdub please direct me to the meta's you r referring to?

Bunny was talking about this game (in which I was the mod): http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... =3&t=16887
The game I was referring to (when Bunny played with town-Ythan) is this game: http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... =3&t=15353

So Bunny already knows what Ythan's play is like, that's why I found it strange that he went to meta on another player to make a case on him instead of talking about Ythan's play directly.

[Kdub]

@Kdub: I've played with Ythan only once in that OoT game that you linked. He was town that game. I haven't observed Ythan scum play yet, but now that you mention OoT this is reminding me of when Cupcake (or LLD) claimed Mason, yet I don't think Ythan gave up attacking them.

So why didn't you think about past games with Ythan first when analyzing his play? Why did you try to compare him to another player to justify a vote when you should have had something far more solid to go by?

I have explicitly stated that I have information. I have denied having the kind of information certain narrowminded players assumed I was claiming.

Alright, I'll bite. Please share your information, because barring any new revelations, thil is not today's lynch, and I will actively fight against thil's lynch if he gets close. You have already put yourself out there by claiming to have some sort of info, I don't think there's much you could reveal that would put you in a more dangerous spot if you really do have something on thil.

[Kdub]

Ythan:
The thil wagon clearly has stalled, so good luck with that if you're going to continue to stonewall.

@Kdub: I would have to say that its because your game was more recent then OoT game. Also because OoT was a Reck game, and I play differently in Reck game (I don't know why probably because they are crazy), and therefore I would assume some may do the same.

The OoT game was less recent? Fine. But the second part seems like an extra excuse added on in case people didn't find your first reason convincing enough.

So now that you have dropped Ythan as a suspect, who are you after? I had to look back to see the last time you legitimately suspected someone.

[Kdub]

Ythan, does your role PM specifically mention SMRPG, or was that just your own example to explain the doctor claim?

Why does RC's death point to thil being scum? If you were responsible for protecting RC on N1, and if thil is telling the truth, the scum probably figured he would get protected last night, meaning they could freely kill off anyone else. RC dying doesn't say anything about thil's alignment.

[Kdub]

I'll point out that Peach is never referred to as "Peach" in SMRPG, she's called Toadstool. It's a minor flavor point that I could see being a mod error, but it's worth mentioning.

Can you answer my second question?

[Kdub]

Then I guess only 9/10 of the reasons thil is obvious scum work. Good thing I explicitly stated before claiming that I was going to offer up my information to the consideration of a greater number of players.

If you're calling thil scum and telling people that they are stupid or not seeing what is "obvious" to you, yet everyone else is still unconvinced, maybe, just maybe, the problem is with you and not with everyone else.

Iso 22: Finally reveals that his reason for thinking Espeo/Pine was town was somebody else's supposed breadcrumb. This doesn't make sense to me. Why on earth would someone leave such an obvious breadcrumb as "I looked into him over the night phase"? Surely, no townie would really think he should stop everyone from lynching whoever they wanted over this. Also says his vote on me is good "for now", but hasn't moved it since, despite not pointing out any more "scumtells" in my posts.

If it was a legitimate breadcrumb, which I thought it was, wouldn't it be obvious that hohum would not have wanted to reveal himself explicitly unless absolutely needed? I was trying to prevent it from coming to that point.

As far as scumtells on you, I posted reasons why I think you are scum, and your response was essentially admitting that most of my points were valid. Obviously my vote isn't going to move based on that type of response.

[Kdub]

Un-cc'ed cop claim that caught scum >> reads. That's my "opinion".

[Kdub]

Noting that this response you speak of was before the following statement, why did you say that it was a good place to put your vote "for now"? Especially since you thought it was obvious your vote wasn't going to move.

"For now" means "barring any new information, either from other players or from anything I catch on a reread". I made that post near the start of the day when some players hadn't even posted yet, and I stated in the same post that I was planning to look at chkflip again. It's not like my vote was absolutely not going anywhere else.

I just don't buy the idea that you were trying to keep things from coming to the point of outing hohum. I don't understand how you could think that such an obvious statement was really a breadcrumb.

Then tell me, what would be a scum motivation for making a sudden flip-flop on Espeonage/Pine like that as opposed to simply defending him from the outset? If I wanted to protect Espeonage, I wouldn't have pushed for his lynch in the first place.

To what extent would you stick with this? Or is this an absolute rule that you will apply for the rest of the game, regardless of anything else, as long as thil remains un-CC'd?

Nothing is an absolute. If new evidence surfaces that puts thil's claim into doubt, then obviously I would reconsider.

@kdub: the major points of dana's case against you are actually the first 3 or 4. Please make sure you answer each point, espceially: the "either pine or dana" thing, followed by a vote on dana.

Iso 0: Says that Espeonage's flip should carry information about my alignment.
Iso 6: Says there's a good chance Espeonage is TOWN, and then doesn't proceed to vote me, but rather Ghost Writer, whom he has not called scummy.
Iso 8: Says IF Espeonage is town, I am a better place to put his vote. This obviously means that if Espeonage is scum, I am a worse place to put his vote.

I thought that if Espeonage were scum, it would make dana look slightly better because dana had voted him earlier. After Pine's flip, looking at dana's play again including his earlier play today where he seemed to have no real suspects and was just following other people, I decided he was still scummy in spite of Pine being scum. It obviously wasn't a one-or-the-other situation. And the GW thing is a misrep, I did suspect him in my ISO 4 and 5 for his poor reasoning against Bunnylover. To say that I didn't call him scummy is only true in the literal sense, I clearly suggested that I was questioning his effort and motivation.

[Kdub]

Well if you were scum, following the rest of the town when they finally decided to lynch Pine would be a perfect strategy. Defending, then bussing is a great strategy for scum if they can pull it off.

That's not the issue though. I started out calling Espeonage scummy, which many players agreed with. I then suddenly started defending him, even though others still thought he was scummy. Why would I act in that manner if I were scum?

Your claim probably wasn't necessary just yet, but obviously it's not a claim that changes my opinion one way or the other.

[Kdub]

TMH:
Ythan is probably town. He's stubborn as ever, but he's playing similar to what I've seen in the past, and his Peach breadcrumb seems legit (I was in the game he was referring to with that crumb). Also, you explicitly said dana was a town read, then you put him on your "MEHHH" list. Why?

[Kdub]

Oddly enough, I agree with dana. Ythan is probably town. Lynching him over dana would be a mistake.

I don't know exactly what to make of dana's "lynch me today" play, but it looks more like a gambit than anything. I don't think town would give up so easily. I'll have to take a look at some past games of his to see if he's taken this defeatist attitude before as town when he's about to be lynched. dana, if you have past games of yours that you want to link to, feel free to help yourself out.

[Kdub]

You really are ignoring everything I've said, aren't you? THIS ISN'T A DEFEATIST ATTITUDE, NOR IS IT TOWN GIVING UP EASILY. I have looked at the way the game is going, and with this day having gone on for quite a while already, the only wagons picking up any kind of steam are mine and Ythan's. I WANT people to lynch me over Ythan. It's not even remotely like "I don't want you to lynch me, but you're going to apparently, so I'll just give up". That's why you won't find any past evidence of me doing that, which I bet you figured on anyway.

...

At any rate, it looks like I'm going to be mislynched at this point, and that's fine with me, really. I'm probably the best mislynch there is.

So you are "fine" with being lynched, and that's not giving up easily? I haven't seen town accept their own lynch except in cases where there is absolutely nothing that can prevent it (e.g. false role-related info that condemns them). That wasn't (and even now, still isn't) the case with you here.

[Kdub]

If you haven't seen vanilla town self-sacrifice to save a PR-claiming townread, then you've only seen stupid vanilla town in that position, imo.

No, I can't say I've seen that, and I doubt it is very common. I happen to think Ythan is town too, but if I were a VT, I would never sacrifice myself if it were between him and me. You know why? Because 1) I know that I am town whereas there is a chance, even if small, that he is scum, and 2) me getting lynched wouldn't remove pressure on him given the nature of the accusations he is facing. You're not going to convince anybody that sacrificing yourself is a reasonable town play, which is why it looks like a gambit to me.

So, just to make sure I'm catching up properly, the only claim we have on the table is thil's cop claim, am I correct? He claimed roleblocked at the beginning of this day?

Ythan claimed doctor.

[Kdub]

Prodded. I've already made it clear that I will not support a Ythan or thil lynch today. Barring any major revelations, I'm sticking with a dana lynch.

Regarding the speculation on kill flavors and number of kills, I still do not see how that implies anything about thil's alignment, which is what this whole thing came out of. Beyond that, I suppose we'll find out more after seeing what happens tonight, but I don't think it's productive discuss it further right now.

[Kdub]

Looking at the flips, it should be noted that Ythan's and dana's claim match with what we've seen so far while thil's doesn't. Of course, this is barring any fakeclaims scum probably have. I think we should consider mass nameclaiming tomorrow, since the game may be at least partially breakable.

Not sure what you mean here. What is wrong with thil's claim compared to the flips we've seen? And I highly doubt scum would not have safeclaims in this type of game.

I am responsible for no deaths N1. And no actions at all for that matter. I'm a JOAT, one of them was a mass block. I pretty much wasted all of my actions and the only informative thing is that PatB is a bit more likely town (which becomes a lot more likely looking at his recent play).

Good to know. This claim is very likely true (otherwise any sort of investigative role with a N1 result could counterclaim it), and I don't see scum using this role and then waiting until late D3 to claim it for town credit.

[Kdub]

I don't think he is acting scummy and I believe his claim.

[Kdub]

What have all flipped VTs and Goons in common that differs from the (mafia) PR? Now compare that to dana's, thil's and Ythan's claims (I take with Ythan's claim with a grain of salt, since I'm pretty sure, he'S picked up on it, too. But he is town regardless, so it's all good).

Hmm...I

think

I see what you are talking about, although I am still not convinced. I haven't played any of jmj's games before, but I would think that any mod qualified to run a large theme would have taken steps to guard against what you are getting at. Your idea of a mass nameclaim tomorrow might be feasible, obviously depending on the flips today and tonight.

How do you feel on his whole "I protected the cop (thil) and since someone else died, Thil must be scum" action/reason?

That reasoning makes no sense, as I said before. It should be obvious that a claimed cop would very likely draw protection, so someone else dying says nothing about thil.

Ironically Thil and Ythan are voting the same player. Kdub, are you really convinced both claimed PR are genuine and the whole war was about both being playing a very poor game? I don't, and I insist on the fact that Ythan's case on thil contains an unclear but pretty evident scumslip.

Yes, I think both thil and Ythan are telling the truth. Both are uncounterclaimed despite claiming very common PRs. thil's claim led directly to a scum lynch. Ythan had absolutely no scum motivation to gambit and fakeclaim doc there (especially if there are multiple non-town factions).

Like I said, I would reconsider my stance on thil if new evidence were to come up against him, but right now, I think he is likely town.

[Kdub]

1) Does not outweigh the fact that he is a PR and I am not.
2) Could be just as easily applied to me trying harder to defend myself. The same pressure is going to be on me tomorrow, so why would I try to get someone else lynched instead who I think is town? No, I want to at LEAST give Ythan another night of actions. If you're still wanting to lynch him tomorrow with whatever extra info you have, so be it. Doesn't mean I think it makes sense, though.

This can't seriously be your mindset as town. You know what townies actually do? They defend themselves and try to argue their way out of being lynched. They

never

volunteer themselves to be lynched in this situation unless their lynch is absolutely inevitable (e.g. false guilty result or some other incriminating info). Right now you are playing scummy, but certainly not in a situation that a normal town player would find unsalvageable.

And if dana does flips scum, tomorrow I am going after anybody who unvoted or claimed a town read on him after his attempted sacrifice gambit. The fact that the dana wagon has stalled in favor of bad wagons against uncounterclaimed PRs makes me pretty confident that there are scum trying to save him under the guise of believing his sacrifice attempt to be genuine.

ythan is scum. ythan slipped in assuming a correlation between night actions that town players cannot see.

Can you explain what extra info he would have as scum that would make his case against thil make any sense?

Ask yourself, why would Ythan claim doc in that situation if he were scum? First of all, if there is an SK in the game, he just put a big target on his back. Second, if he really wanted to gambit to get thil lynched, why didn't he just counterclaim cop?

[Kdub]

On the other hand, some people have been bringing up good points about Ythan that make me somewhat less sure that he's town. I suppose at this point if it's thil or Ythan getting lynched, I'll lynch Ythan, but I STILL want me lynched over either of them and Kdub lynched over me.

How convenient, after you just went on about you wanting to be lynched over Ythan because you thought he was town. And as for why townies don't behave the way you have been, I thought I already answered that. If you are town, you

know

that your own death guarantees a mislynch, whereas you obviously can't say that about anybody else (as evidenced by this recent wavering on Ythan). Town wants to maximize the chances of lynching scum, so town sacrificing themselves goes against this goal.

Also, since you are now claiming to prefer to lynch Ythan (whom you were willing to sacrifice yourself in place of because of your read on him) over thil, let me remind you of your stated reads on thil:

Hmm. After reviewing the evidence, I tend to agree that thil's actions read more like inept scum than unfortunate town.

thil's a complete wild card.

Also, I should mention that the thil thing isn't actually definite town, it's just that I have no idea where to put him.

The closest you come to defending him is this:

I thought those arguing for thil being scum made more convincing arguments. That is not important to me anymore, because thil has proven himself somewhat, and I don't really want to lynch him right now.

But that's hardly as emphatic as your defense of Ythan.

@Kdub
How far will your believe in thil's and Ythan's claims go? Is the fact they are un-cc'd in a closed setup, the only basis for your town reads on them?

It's mostly the basis for my town read on thil, along with the fact that his claim led directly to Pine's lynch. With Ythan, I have a decent town read based on his play alone, and it's not just the fact that his claim is uncountered, but the timing and nature of his claim that makes him look town.

I've put a scum one-shot mass roleblocker in a game before as an alternative to a traditional roleblocker. The version I used blocked only town abilities, but the SE3 version that TMH brought up did apply to all players. It seems redudnant to give scum a roleblocker and a mass roleblocker. If thil is telling the truth about being roleblocked last night, it strongly suggests that Dekes' is town. Obviously if Dekes turns out to be a scum mass roleblocker, thil is probably scum. Independent of that, Dekes is probably telling the truth because 1) if the mass block was one-shot, it would be stupid for scum to waste it on N1 instead of in a situation where they might need to stop an investigation or a one-shot town role, and 2) if it's not one-shot, and we have a future night where there are no kills and nobody gets investigation results, then obviously Dekes was lying, so he would not be able to use the ability again at any point or else he would be giving himself up. Also, like with Ythan, the timing of the claim seems town to me. What would scum-Dekes have gained by claiming there?

@thil:
Were you explicitly told that you were roleblocked? Could be important.

Nothing besides a Cop-guilty on dana would make me lynch him right now. This is how sure I am right now.

This is suspicious. I can maybe understand someone reading dana as town by believing his sacrifice attempt to be genuine, but I can't fathom how anybody can look at his play as a whole and say that he is a surefire town read.

Nevermind the deadline, I don't even think there is sufficient support for a thil or Ythan lynch even if time wasn't an issue. dana dies today.

[Kdub]

thil, any results last night? Also, please answer this:

@thil:
Were you explicitly told that you were roleblocked? Could be important.

How do people feel about a mass nameclaim?

My access may be a bit spotty through Sunday, but I should still be able to check in at least once per day.

[Kdub]

Jesus guys, did we have to claim role related information to get it through your fucking skulls that dana was town?
For fuck's sake, he couldn't have been townier.
IT DOESNT TAKE A ROCKET SCIENTIST.

I still think this is highly suspect. I can buy that you may have had a town read on dana, but you are getting way too indignant about how sure you were that he was town. You had him on your "unsure" list at one point, then the only reason you gave after that point for going to a town read on him was a "personal tell". Fine, but you didn't actually reveal what this personal tell was, nor did you actually defend dana to the extent that your certainty about his alignment suggests that you should have.

You know who had fallen off my radar again and is playing more passively than I've seen him play as town before? GhostWriter.

Regarding mass nameclaim, how about this. It appears that major characters have flipped as power roles and minor characters have flipped as VT/goon. The issue with thil's claim is that he claimed a minor character that is a power role, so it doesn't fit in. I had figured that the mod would have spread the PRs among both major and minor characters, but perhaps not. I think that if somebody either has a VT role as a major character, or a PR as a minor character, they should say so (without saying which one they are or claiming anything else). We can at least figure out whether thil's claim actually stands out without outing any PRs, or if we've just gotten unlucky with how the flips have gone so far.

I still feel thil is probably town, but the flips turned out to support what Dekes was getting at yesterday with the character-PR relationship. Also, if anybody has information that contradicts what thil said about the mechanics of him being roleblocked, they need to speak up.

VOTE: TMH
Willing to go for a GW lynch as well.

[Kdub]

PatB's claim seems legit. The only thing that gives me a bit of doubt is that it seems somewhat lucky for scum to have targeted him last night (which just happened to be an even night) as opposed to any other player, but I feel that scum-PatB would have claimed one-shot to avoid that potential complication. If he's telling the truth, thil is definitely scum.

GW, your theory had better be damn good because you are next if thil flips scum.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: thil

[Kdub]

Very well, I'll hear what you've got to say.

UNVOTE:

[Kdub]

There was no real reason for scum-PatB to claim when he did. thil was under a decent amount of pressure already, and PatB wasn't really on the radar as far as suspects go. He put himself on the line to implicate thil, which scum would be unlikely to do with multiple killing factions out there. That's why he's probably telling the truth.

If thil is scum, he's probably the roleblocker himself. We have a 1v1, let's not overthink this. One of them is today's lynch, and I'm pretty sure it's thil.

[Kdub]

I agree, we might as well do the nameclaims, and Alex most certainly should go next. I'll go last, if that's alright. My back is bugging out, and I've got to take some meds and sleep the pain off.

I thought you just needed lew's nameclaim to give your theory? Are you changing your story? Trying to put yourself last in the nameclaim order despite the fact that we're popcorning is also noted.

[Kdub]

GW, can you paraphrase flavor for why Luigi is a tracker? I'm not really seeing how that works. Then again, Wario as a doc is a stretch as well, but all the town PRs that have flipped so far seem to make sense from a flavor standpoint.

Who did you attempt to target on N1? What were your reasons for each of your targets?

Your theory is otherwise unconvincing.

[Kdub]

lew, why didn't you use your ability on N2?

[Kdub]

Aurora Unit 242 was the major "bad guy" and objective in one of the Metroid Prime games, just for reference.

Wrong, Aurora Unit 242 was the unit that helped Samus during Metroid Prime 3. I think it was one of the other units that was taken over and became a villain.

lew's claim doesn't confirm GW's role exactly. It does confirm that either GW is a town tracker, or that the scum have a tracking ability.

[Kdub]

@Everybody: Do you want me to do a Votecount Analysis today or in a few days when we have more flips? <- I WANT EVERYBODY'S OPINION ON THIS.

Wouldn't hurt to do it now and then re-evaluate after another round of flips.

So the best question is not why I didnt use my ability n2, but rather why I did not use in N3: I did not because at that point I was almost convinced of thil's claim, and I was afraid I would have wasted it if used it on someone who was gonna die the very same night. Then thil strated surviving his claim, and I decided to go for it.

Fair enough. Your ability does seem a bit useless (especially one-shot) if the scum were given safeclaims that were consistent flavor-wise with their role (e.g. if thil is scum but was given a Merlon safeclaim, and your investigation found something consistent with the safeclaim), but I guess it could work in cases where scum deviated from their safeclaims or swapped claims with each other.

Whatever the case, GW's theory is unconvincing, and we still have a 1v1. I think I'm ready for a thil lynch whenever.

[Kdub]

I'm sceptical of Dekes visiting nobody N3. I'll pull up the relevant quotes tomorrow morning when not on a phone.

Essentially, the gist of it is that he strongly implies he has used up all his actions (as a JOAT), but doing nothing N3 gives him just 2 Nights to use up his actions, when JOATs usually have 3 or 4 actions.

This is a reasonable point, but GW correctly calling lew's action kinda nullifies it. Right now, there are 3 options I see:
1) GW is a tracker
2) GW is scum and his faction has a tracker (could be GW himself) that saw lew target thil
3) GW and lew are buddies and made up the tracking story

Right now I'm leaning toward #2.

@ Kdub: Thoughts on SK hunting?

Well sure, killing an SK would be preferable right now, but we don't really have a solid lead on who that may be. What we do have is a 1v1 between likely town and likely mafia. I'd rather settle that now rather than lynch someone else and hope they turn out to be the SK.

[Kdub]

question to everybody: we have two distinct killing flavours that occurred more than 1 night, one is certainly scum, the other prolly a sk. Which one do you think is scum and which one do you think is the sk and why?

Not sure, but I'm leaning toward agreeing with alex that "incinerated" is more likely to be mafia. My feeling is that the SK would have left Ythan to be dealt with by the mafia.

What other issues need to be addressed before we proceed?

[Kdub]

attention, kdub: weirdalexv is confusing the situation. He says that hohum and smashbro are killed by two different parties, but flavour is the same. How is that possible?

I don't think he was saying that definitively. I think he's just unsure, just as I am.

Kdub)

I've actually never even heard of a scum tracker

, but it's seems that'd only be worth putting into a game with 2 scum teams and an SK. Otherwise, there are much better choices to put on a scum team.

You have a short memory

Thinking about it now, could it be that mafia has a jailkeeper who is JK'ing Thil and a RoleBlocker to RB random people

That is super-overpowered. Scum doctor+roleblocker+jailkeeper in the same faction? No.

[Kdub]

No, most likely one team + SK.

You're ignoring the simplest answer: one of PatB and thil is lying about being roleblocked.

[Kdub]

@Kdub: I"m not ignoring it. I see it, but I also see that if Thil is lying then we did not have a cop this game. If having no cop in games are pretty common, then I'll reconsider my stand point, but I don't think it is common.
But it could be possible for a 3 man scum team, and a 2 man scum team. Go look at A storm of swords, there were a scum team of 4 people then one of 3.

Two scum teams is a possibility, but it would pretty much have to be 14:3:3 I think. A 2-man scumteam in a game this size would be an unusual design choice. I still think an SK is more likely than a second mafia though.

Yeah, I really didn't remember that at all, actually, but it sort of proves my point: That game had not only town PR's, but an enemy scum team as well.

And this game has town PRs and apparently either an enemy scum team or SK. So what? I should note that if you are scum, it doesn't necessarily show that the scum team has a tracker specifically, just an ability that could have seen lew. Watcher is a possibility as well.

[Kdub]

lew, if you believe the scum+SK scenario, then doesn't one of thil/PatB have to be lying scum? Regardless of your read on alex or anybody else, it seems like a bad play to lynch outside of a 1v1 in the hopes that we happen to randomly hit the SK. Scum won't touch either of them at night, thil will claim to be roleblocked again, and we'll be left with the same scenario tomorrow.

I'm pretty knowledgeable when it comes to most Nintendo franchises, but Kirby is one that I am not so familiar with. Does "slashed to death" fit Kirby flavor-wise at all?

[Kdub]

Mod: If a player is killed at night by two different killing roles, would both kill flavors show up?

That should answer part of lew's first point (that scum and SK might have hit the same target).

Flavor-wise, there are plenty of Nintendo characters I could see being an SK. I don't think the speculation about Samus is very convincing.

SK and scum can almost never win jointly. Not sure why you are bringing that up.

In order for lynching someone other than PatB/thil to be correct, I think we need to be way more than 50% confident that someone is actually the SK. I don't feel that confident right now.

[Kdub]

I think I have an idea of what alex's role is based on that last post. Claim if you like, but I don't think it's going to change my opinion today (tomorrow might be another story). Can't speak for lew, but if you claim what I think you are going to claim, I doubt it will change his opinion either.

It's not lylo right now. I still think we settle the 1v1 then look at where we stand tomorrow. Honestly, I think lynching thil gives us a better than 50% chance of hitting scum (and a good chance of hitting the scum roleblocker at that). A 3:3:1 situation is pretty much the worst case scenario (we mislynch today and both kills are on town, but really, the SK should be aiming for scum tonight. 3:3:1 is an even worse spot for the SK to be in than it is for town.

[Kdub]

@kdub: my problem remains. I think both thil and patb are town. I have no idea how a double block could occur, tho... I am trying to avoid a situation in which we lynch one of them today, he flips town cop/sensor, and tomorrow everyone will acritically jump on the other one, potentially losing the game.

Is your town read on both of them so strong that you would defend them even in spite of role information that seems highly unlikely (both claiming roleblocked)? For me, it really would take some sort of role-related info to believe that. No matter how confident I am in my reads, I know that I can easily be wrong about them. I'd never put my reads above contradicting claims.

@kdub: why arent you voting at all?

I had unvoted so we could discuss PatB/thil further. Since there doesn't seem to be any danger of a quicklynch, I'll put my vote back on.

VOTE: thil

Alex: can you ask the mod what night you lost your one-shot BP?

[Kdub]

I thought I already explained. PatB's claim makes more sense from a town perspective.

[Kdub]

I thought I already explained. PatB's claim makes more sense from a town perspective.

Sensor claim > Cop claim?

lew pretty much nailed it. PatB's claim and the timing of it makes much more sense from a town motivation.

And kdub: I don't value reads over a blocked-cc in a mini, and of course not in an open. But in a large themed, the mechanics of which are unknown to me, sometimes I do, whenever the reads are strong enough.

What difference does the size of the game make, unless you are speculating the existence of two scum roleblockers (very rare)?

[Kdub]

The thing with alex not asking the mod in the first place about when he lost his BP is a bit odd, but not conclusive. With that plus his claim, I'd consider him to be a reasonable lynch candidate tomorrow (assuming we lynch the scum between PatB/thil today), but I'm still not convinced.

I don't know that there's anything that would change the minds of certain people right now. The people who aren't voting for one of the main candidates need to vote now and share their thoughts.

esurio:
I doubt thil is the SK. SK would be stupid to claim cop. Either he becomes a kill target, or his kill gets roleblocked by the scum every day.

Mod: can we get a vote count?

[Kdub]

Looker

- 1 - Bunnylover - (L-5)
Players not voting: GhostWriter, Looker, thil13

^ These people need to get their votes on a productive wagon.

[Kdub]

He claimed even-night, so it wouldn't matter tonight.

[Kdub]

Wish we had that Sensor role tonight. I'm pretty sure there's scum on wierdalex's wagon.

This is almost certain. Unless by some fluke alex is actually mafia, it's crazy to me that we have a 1v1 and the lynch with the most support is someone else.

If alex flips town, I highly suggest that the SK kill thil. The SK could be in a very bad spot if they do not kill scum tonight.

[Kdub]

Well, that throws a wrench into things. thil and GW were my top two suspects.

Anyone up for massclaim?

looker or esurio is the lynch for today. A lynch of either one will confirm patb's ability or make him auto-scum.

Why don't we just lynch PatB and find out directly? If he flips town, then we know exactly who the scum are.

[Kdub]

Thought about it a bit more, PatB is definitely the lynch:

- Claimed roleblocked on the same night as thil, thil flipped town.
- If he is telling the truth, then that means esurio is confirmed scum. But esurio just claimed vig who shot chkflip and thil, both of whom make a ton of sense as vig targets. If nobody counterclaims esurio, then she is confirmed town and PatB is lying.
- Balance-wise, town has a confirmed doc, JoaT, tracker, cop, and mostly-confirmed vig, plus possible other roles that haven't claimed yet. A sensor on top of all of that is overkill.

Going to wait for a few more people to check in first, but PatB is confirmed scum in my view.

[Kdub]

I would like to hear Looker's thoughts before I say anything else.

[Kdub]

I asked you a very precise question: are you cc'ing esurio's vig claim? You should be able to answer now. If no one is ccing, PatB is scum.

This is exactly what I was getting at when I wanted Looker to post before I said anything else. The only unclaimed players I believe are me, Looker, and TMH. It's obvious from our posts after esurio's claim that none of us are counterclaiming her, otherwise we would have done so. Looking at the kill flavors, it's clear that the two kills claimed by esurio are different from the scum kill. That means esurio is confirmed town. That means PatB is confirmed scum. Looker's post was the only thing I needed to be completely sure.

VOTE: PatB

Going to think more on who the remaining scum would be. I've got some suspicions, but I need some time to think about them.

[Kdub]

Leading me to conclude: Mafia Goon + Mafia Doc + Mafia Roleblocker + Mafia Jailkeeper(?) + Mafia Vig.

Mafia vig? I'm gonna have to hear the details on this one

Why would scum-PatB kill thil or GW when both were on the wagon for my 'fake-claim'?

Because GW was a power role, and you didn't count on thil dying last night.

Also, your post has no mention of esurio's vig claim, which is the one thing that proves you are a liar.

[Kdub]

What the hell? Killing Bunny makes no sense. Something is up here.

I've been tossing around a theory in my head, but I think me, TMH, and Looker should claim. I suggest esurio pick which one of us claims first, and we popcorn it from there?

[Kdub]

I am Daisy, Vanilla Townie.

And what do you mean as far as killing Bunny making no sense?

It makes no sense for two reasons:
1) esurio is confirmed town, Bunny was not.
2) Bunny had claimed VT while the rest of us hadn't claimed yet.
If you had asked me during night which player would be the least likely nightkill, it definitely would have been Bunny (even leaving aside the possibility that he was scum). The only thing I can think of is that the scum might have suspected BL was playing a gambit and lying about being a VT.

Anyway, here's what the setup might be:
Town: Doc, cop, JoaT, tracker, 2-shot vig, 1-shot flavor cop, 9x VT
Mafia: Doc, encryptor, roleblocker, goon
SK: One-shot BP

If you ask me, that setup seems town-favored. Town has 3 investigative roles (4 if Dekes had one) and a doc.

In terms of scumminess, TMH is definitely at the top of the list for me. His reaction to dana's lynch looked fake, and he tried to defend PatB yesterday until it was clear that nobody else was siding with him. Based on player reads alone, he is my top choice for scum and it's not really close.

However, one thing that bothered me was how strongly certain people were pushing for weirdalexv's lynch on D5, in spite of the 1v1. Obviously scum would want this, because they wanted to 1v1 to extend to the next day if possible, when they could then swing a thil lynch, which would have been quite easy. What they didn't expect, however, was that thil would get vigged that night. Take a look at D5, and you see that PatB (scum), TMH, and lew were strongly pushing for alex's lynch. Why? I didn't find the case on alex particularly convincing, but even if you did, was it strong enough to convince you to put off a 1v1?

Also, remember this post, where lew pegs alex's role. Coincidence?

Also, remember GW tracked lew to thil on the night thil claimed to have been roleblocked.

Also, lew's claimed role seems out of place when you look at the potential setup I posted above. One-shot flavor-cop when town already has a full cop and tracker? Why make a weaker role one-shot while having an unlimited role that is stronger (cop)? I might be able to buy a one-shot cop + full flavor-cop in the setup, but the opposite? And lew's claim of finding a crystal ball on thil still doesn't sit well with me. Given that scum safeclaims appear to be related flavor-wise to their actual role (Dark Samus - Samus, AU 313 - AU 242), that role can't possibly catch scum unless they deviate from their safeclaims.

So here's my theory. I propose that lew is the mafia roleblocker, and TMH is a mafia role cop. Balance-wise, it makes the setup look like this:
Town: Doc, cop, JoaT, tracker, 2-shot vig, 9x VT
Mafia: Doc, encryptor, roleblocker, role cop, goon
SK: One-shot BP

That looks more balanced to me. Also, it explains why PatB, lew, and TMH were so adamant about lynching alex on D5 instead of thil: because they had investigated alex on an earlier night and found that he was the SK, so they wanted to eliminate him since he was likely their biggest threat at the time. That, plus the fact that they didn't want to resolve the 1v1 yet, otherwise PatB would have been revealed as scum. Thanks to esurio's shot, that happened anyway. It also explains how lew was able to call alex's role name as Dark Samus, even though we didn't know yet that the scum safeclaims were closely tied to their actual role names.

I am still thinking about exactly who to lynch today. I admit that I have basically no read on Looker due to the replacement history of that player slot and his play so far. If my theory is wrong and there is only one scum left, we still have tomorrow so it probably doesn't matter. If I am right that there are two scum left but it is not TMH and lew, then what is a less likely scumteam: TMH+Looker or lew+Looker?

[Kdub]

You know that whole SK thing? It was better regardless of allignment because it meant one less kill.

Misses the point completely.

The town wasn't sure alex was the SK at the time

.

You know that whole 1 v1 thing? Thil would have lost hands down, because no one here saw him as more town then Patb

PatB was scum, why would he be telling the truth about his read? Yes, thil would have lost the 1v1,

that is exactly why the scum tried to avoid resolving the 1v1 on D5

, so they could get an easy thil mislynch on D6 and potentially win the game.

It still doesn't make sense why he would claim being roleblocked.

To set up the 1v1 with thil and to avoid having to make up another round of sensor results.

OH, and thil flipped cop. Just saying.

I don't see what you are trying to imply here.

[Kdub]

how do you know that scum had claims that were related to their real flavour? You are quoting two particular cases that allow it to happen. May I know what you imagine pine's and chk's fake claims to be?

I am going by what information we have. alex and PatB both had fakeclaims that were closely related flavor-wise to their actual roles. None of the other flipped scum claimed role names before they flipped. We don't know for certain, but given the evidence we have, it's a reasonable assumption.

That there are 5 scum makes it balanced, not that you added cop. You compare this to a 4-scum theory to make it look solid.

Setup analysis is a legitimate tactic. Is it 100% guaranteed to work? No, but I'm not claiming that my theory is absolutely correct, only that the evidence supports it. I think most people would agree that the 4-scum scenario looks town-favored.

we would be idiots, if we, as a scum team, grouped up in such an evident way to push a mislynch.

Again, I will point out that the scum didn't expect thil to die N5. If you and TMH were scum with PatB, but esurio didn't kill thil, it would have been a mylo on D6 with the 1v1 still intact, and thil almost certainly would have been lynched given the general opinions of him. Scum win. The scum just needed to eliminate their biggest threat at the time: the SK, and they wouldn't have to worry about anything else.

Now you come out with a theory that suggests two scum teams: guess what? Looker is in both.

You misread what I said, or maybe it wasn't clear. I am not suggesting two scum teams. If there is one scum player remaining, it is almost certainly you or TMH. If my theory is correct and there are two scum players remaining, it is you+TMH. If I am right that there are two scum players remaining, but I am wrong about you+TMH, then the only possibilities left are you+Looker and TMH+Looker. In that case, I need to think about which scenario is more likely before I decide who to vote for.

From my POV, esurio is confirmed town. If I am right about it being option 2, Looker is town as well. Then if there are two scum, it makes you and TMH mafia. Your last post reads very well in this direction. Attempt at framing Looker after bunny's death and distancing from TMH (note that your """case""" on him is even weaker than your """case""" on me).

Where am I "framing" looker?

question: if you think that there is a scum rolecop, how likely is it that they never hit a town pr before the claims happened?

Without doing the math in detail, it seems reasonable. If you assume a 5-man scum team, then 2/3 of the starting non-mafia players were not town PRs. I don't see the point you are trying to make here though. Scum roleblocked the claimed cop every night after his claim, and they killed claimed town PRs a couple times.

[Kdub]

Missing the point. I am accusing you to misrep the situation by comapring your own reconstruction with a 4-scum one, ignoring every other possible 5-scum patterns. It is a methodological remarl, as it is made clear by the parts of my post you do not quote. As for 4-scum being unlikely, I would agree if I hadn't a town read of TMH.

I don't see other 5-scum scenarios being that different balance-wise from each other. Can you give a specific example of a plausible 5-scum setup that does NOT seem more balanced than the 4-scum scenario? Because that really is my main point with this: the most likely 5-scum setup appears to be more balanced than the 4-scum case.

so your scum completely ignored the fact that someone killed chk and it was not the SK?

Scum had no reason to think that the vig had another shot. chkflip died on N3, and that kill flavor had not shown up on any other night. There were suggestions that Dekes might have been responsible for chkflip's death. They were caught by surprise when esurio killed thil.

you pushed so much on the fact that 4 scum is unlikely, that this objection sounds really weird.

I don't see your point here. I'm accounting for all possible scenarios in case my theory is wrong.

it is absolutely clear from what I have written that I think scum was going to attack Looker. Looker scum is almost an implication of what you have written. As I saw bunny's death, I sat on my chair and said to myself: let's see who is the first one who suggests Looker is scum.

And I have not accused Looker of being scum. It is absolutely clear from my post that I think you and TMH are scum, so logically, the implication is that Looker is town. If you think I "suggested" that Looker was scum, it was only in the part of my post where I accounted for all possible scenarios in the case I was wrong (as mentioned above). If you think I was attacking him, you are wrong, and I think any objective person can see that.

Ok. It's possible. But so you think that not only SK was not nk-immune but just one-shot BP, but there was also a role around capable of detecting him? Sounds extremely unlikely to me (balance-wise), ad trust me, I know the role a little bit.

There's already a role that has flipped that can detect him (thil), so there goes that argument.

[Kdub]

Sorry, Kdub, but I won't be much help to your balance discussion, seeing as I don't even balance the games I create. If it involves matching this game's roles with roles of past games then maybe, otherwise I'm useless.

The balance argument is only a part of my reasoning. Once you've read through, it would be good if you can comment on the rest of my points as well.

I still think that bunny's death must mean something. You implied so yourself (by rhetorically stating it made no sense) and then never bothered analysing it. I think that the likliest reason to kill bunny was to make Looker look guilty. I think this would work very well if you are the last scum.

The reason I'm not analyzing Bunny's death much is because I don't think any solid conclusions can be drawn from it. I think it was strange, but whatever the reason was for it, I don't think there are any obvious suspects that it points to. And again, I am not accusing Looker of being scum, so how does it follow that Bunny's death being intended to frame Looker somehow makes me scum? This is actually quite ironic that you keep bringing up Bunny's death and pushing the idea that someone is trying to use it to frame Looker, when it is

you

are the one who is actually trying to use it to accuse me.

as for the whole 1vs1 thing: I said it before and I stand by it. There were plenty of explanations for two players being blocked. A JK, a scum JOAT, cop investigating a player who returns no report. I believed cop's claim and had a strong town read on patb.

That's fine if you stand by it, I am just saying that it makes you likely to be scum. The fact is, the scum had a very obvious motive for not wanting to resolve the 1v1 on D5. There are some fairly obvious problems with those explanations you provided, but I'll just invoke Occam's razor and say the most likely explanation was that one of them was lying, and I think any reasonable town player would have seen that.

Tell me: how is ignoring an uncc'd cop report that turns out to be correct any better than not accepting an absolutely non-compelling 1vs1 situation on two players I used to read as town?

Bad comparison. The fact that thil turned out to be a cop is irrelevant to the 1v1. If thil had been scum and PatB was town instead, my argument would still hold. As for the "non-compelling" part of the 1v1, I realize that isn't something I can objectively disprove, but as I said, if you are standing by your stance on it, I think it makes your motivation quite clear.

why do you assume that thil would be able to detect sk?
and even so, do you realise that the more roles are able to detect an sk who is not nk immune, the less balanced the setup is? Or are you - again - ignoring this contraddiction on purpose?

Why wouldn't thil be able to detect the SK? SK doesn't automatically imply investigation immunity, especially when his role specifically included the word "bulletproof" but nothing about II. SK is generally a difficult role to win with, I don't see the lack of investigation immunity as a deal breaker.

I'd really like to hear from esurio and Looker (after he finishes reading). I'm engaging in this quote war mainly for their information since I'm becoming more confident that lew and TMH are scum given their reactions today.

[Kdub]

you should probably put things in the right perspective. n1 was generalised protection by JOAT. We all know that. N3 was 3 kills. Thil died n5: I think any rational scum team would have assumed an odd night vig. So either they decided to sacrifice patb to get rid of the tracker, or they planned to sacrifice him to make the players who did not support the 1vs1 thing look bad. another element pointing to you being scum.

Since only one kill had shown up with the "slashed" kill flavor, I don't think it was at all obvious what the vig was. As evidence, take a look at what players were speculating about in the game thread. People were suggesting it might have been Dekes, or even the SK (since we didn't know the SK kill flavor at the time). Did anybody suggest odd night vig? That couldn't be ruled out, but hardly something that would have been a natural assumption.

Your argument about the scum sacrificing PatB to make you look bad is WIFOM at its finest. You can always try to spin things in a way such that someone is trying to make someone else look bad, but the fact is, there is a clear, objective reason why the scum didn't want to resolve the 1v1, which is something you have failed to address.

And don't be ridiculous: 99% of cops are unable to detect SK's... is this the first time you play a game with a sk? (<-- real question: please answer)

I just glanced through my game history. I have played in 4 games that included both an SK and a cop. The SK was investigation immune in

none

of them. I will gladly provide links if you want. I don't know the overall statistics, but I'm pretty confident that your "99%" figure is wrong.

I haven't read most of the last two pages yet. Getting on that and considering whether or not to share why I think what I think.

No problem, I'll hear what you have to say.

[Kdub]

Kdub:

Why is lewarcher more likely scum than Looker?

1) He (and TMH) pushed strongly for alex's lynch on D5. I've stated many times why this is very scummy given that PatB was scum.
2) His role claim does not fit with the rest of the setup (one-shot version of a role that is already weaker than an unlimited role that has flipped), and based on his claimed result, the role seems quite weak since he couldn't have caught either alex or PatB.
3) GW tracked him to thil on a night thil was roleblocked. Note that lew came up with his claim after being confronted with this result.
4) If my theory about the mafia having a role cop is correct, it explains how lew was able to call alex's role before he flipped, as well as why he was so adamant that alex was the SK when the evidence certainly wasn't conclusive.

As I said, I don't have much of a read on Looker. He hasn't said a whole lot (having not caught up on the game), and his slot going through replacement hell during some critical moments was not helpful. I have to conclude that he is town though due to the fact that I think the scum are lew+TMH.

[Kdub]

You did not ask me what I think of Looker, but I am doing some thinking. If kdub is scum and he is pushing my mislynch in such a blatant way, he probably know that this is lylo. So I was entirely wrong in assuming that wifom pointed to Looker being town. The fact that: I proposed a theory with him town --> he still rejects my arguments in favour of him being town, may point to him being scum with kdub, whose case on me looker is now indirectly supporting without committing himself to it.

Come on, is this not the most obvious case of "throw shit at the wall and see what sticks" that you've seen? To recap:
1) I mention that Bunny's death is weird, but it's not conclusive so I don't say much about it.
2) lew tries to say that Bunny's death implies that Looker is town due to WIFOM, and that implicates me for pushing Looker-scum...
3) ...despite that fact that I didn't actually accuse Looker of being scum. I point this out.
4) lew brings up Bunny's death again, trying to implicate someone (me) with it,

even though this is exactly what he said himself that the scum would be trying to do

.
5) I point out again that I don't think Looker is scum. He finally backs off, now he reverses course and says Looker is

scum

, and that implicates me.
I don't expect to convince lew how ridiculous this is and how much it looks like scum scrambling to find a foothold since he is scum. For the others, just look back at his posts today and see how he has tried every possible way to discredit me, even doing complete flip-flops on his opinions to somehow conclude that I am scum.

I call for a claim, claim came and it was the name of a bounty hunter who has an evil doppelganger. Honestly, it is ridiculous not to see how easy the connection was.

Weird claimed a role that is the perfect fakeclaim of a SK.

This really is the main problem with your entire argument right here. Your explanation about your scumhunting style is nice and all, but the key fact is that

we didn't know at the time that scum safeclaims were related to their actual roles flavor-wise.

It's easy, in retrospect, to claim it was obvious, but this was before either alex or PatB flipped. How often is it, in a theme game, that scum safeclaims are constructed in this way? In my experience, it is certainly not what I would consider common (in fact, I'd say it's even discouraged in the current meta to prevent setup breaking,

especially in multi-faction setups

). Dark Samus is not even the only Metroid villain that works as a SK flavor-wise. Why not Ridley or Metroid Prime for instance? That you called alex out as Dark Samus tells me that you had some way of suspecting that the mod constructed safeclaims in this way, despite it not being common practice. There are two plausible ways I can see this occurring: 1) you knew that this was the case because it was the case for your own faction's safeclaims (in which case you still had to guess correctly that alex was Dark Samus specifically, though this would be a much easier deduction than if you were town), or 2) your actually knew alex's role due to an investigative result. Both ways point to you being mafia. If you are town, the explanation for you being able to do this is that you had to correctly conclude that the mod paired scum with safeclaims in a flavor-related way (which is a crapshoot at best given the current meta, and actually goes

against

standard mod meta/intuition),

which we had no way of knowing was true at the time

.

@All: You are forced to give someone a bulletproof vest that will block the mafia kill tonight. You cannot give it to me, and you can not keep it for yourself. Who do you pick and why?

Assuming we lynch lew or TMH today and they flip scum, I suppose I would pick Looker. I've detailed why I think lew is scum, and TMH's play with regard to the dana lynch and alex's lynch is scummy to me, while Looker is null. Process of elimination.

[Kdub]

role, kdub, r-o-l-e.

When I said a role that is a perfect fakeclaim for sk, I meant r-o-l-e. Role = BP. Not samus.

BP. And BP is the perfect claim for a sk who is in a game with a vig and, for what he knows, vig could confirm him being hit.

Post 1605 says otherwise:

I can hardly imagine a character name that is likelier to be a sk than Aran Samus; and I wonder: are you Aran Samus or are you Dark Samus, and

Aran Samus is your good doppelganger and perfect fakeclaim

?

Bolded is my emphasis. You're not getting out of this, no matter how many times you try to retcon your previous arguments.

Worst case scenario: What happens if we No Lynch?

If there are two scum left, we lose if we no lynch. There is no reason at all that we should consider no lynch today.

[Kdub]

@kdub: it is evident that you are tunneling me, or if you are not and we are both town (but I don't see how it is possible), you are so convinced that you are right that whatever I say you will just answer "not buying it".

This is a complete misrepresentation. Most of my arguments against you has been backed up by objective evidence, and even the ones that aren't are backed up by circumstantial evidence, which adds up and can't be ignored. That you are not addressing these points and are instead trying to lump my case against you as simply "not buying it" is an attempt to trivialize my case and brush aside my reasoning. Am I tunnelling you? If your definition of "tunnel" is "I am very confident that you are scum", then yes, I am tunnelling you. So what? If I were a cop and had a guilty on you, I'd be "tunnelling" you too. Saying that I am tunnelling does not actually address any of the

reasons

I think you are scum.

If you had spent 30 seconds considering the problem of the SK (whose elimination is the only damn reason why town has not lost this game, btw, although you always ignored this point), you'd see how easy to formulate was the dark samus hypothesis. First: the BP claim was relevant and conclusive, because of the presence of a vig and because of the fact that it confirmed my speculation that he could have been hit on one night with few deaths. Second: you don't need to know that fake claims are similar to real names (though I wonder what the fake claim for marx could be) in order to think that aran samus may be a fake claim for dark samus, once you have concluded, for reasons that only you seem to ignore, that the player is likely to be a sk.

1) i'm not ignoring that alex was the SK, in fact I mentioned it quite early on. The point is

it doesn't matter that alex was actually the SK

. It has no bearing on the fact that you pushed strongly for the lynch of a non-mafia player when we should have been lynching from the 1v1. You are trying to use the actual results of the flip instead of the motivation behind the lynch to justify this.
2) The rest of your post about why you suspected Dark Samus is just a restatement of your original position, which I responded to in detail in 1744 and which you did not address. Yes, in fact you do need to know that safeclaims are similar to real claims

because it is not usually the case in theme games

. The alternative explanation is that you just happened to guess that this was the case in this game (despite there being no evidence of it at the time) and got extremely lucky on multiple counts (again, why Dark Samus and not Ridley?).

I actually realized something from the flips that I hadn't before. Take a look at the kill flavors. Notice that the mafia kill flavor (incinerated) is missing on N2, the same night that alex said he was shot at. I suspect that the mafia tried to kill CP and failed. That is another reason why the mafia may have had information about alex that the town did not have.

This debate about the Dark Samus thing is actually quite amusing because it's not even the primary point of my case against lew. Of the points I listed in 1736, the Dark Samus thing is only circumstantial evidence that supports one of the more minor points (my role cop theory). If this debate is going to go on much longer, I'd rather shift the focus back to scum motivations and why scum would have played the way lew did on D5, but hopefully that is clear to esurio and (if they are being honest) TMH and Looker.

[Kdub]

everyone knows that... do you even read what I write? I went over this in one of my last posts. Today. The idea that sk could have been hit when no or little deaths occurred was one of the reason why I (1) wanted to discuss the flavours (remember?) and (2) assumed the sk was perhaps within the VB.

You said that you wanted to discuss it, but you didn't bring up the D2 kill flavor specifically, so I did so when I looked at it again. Your post is just trying to discredit me with a "I already said this, why are you bringing this up!" route, without actually addressing any of my arguments.

Is it possible that lew had some insider info? sure. Is it equally as possible that he had the power of common sense and basic deduction skills? Yes.

You are doing the same thing that lew is doing: restating (in different words) that it was somehow obvious that alex was SK/Dark Samus etc. without addressing the

reasons

why I said this was unlikely.

thil would have been lynched, then we would have to go after pinky, and by that time obvSK would have pwned us. We were looking for the SK, and alex was THE MOST OBVSCUM PLAYER. Like, taking the 1v1 out of the picture (which we did because there was no way in hell we were going to let obvcop get lynched), alex was scummy, fit the SK profile, and his successor played to his scum-meta.

If you thought it was a 1v1 and that thil was an "obvcop", then what did that make PatB? If you don't say "obvscum", then you are lying somewhere in this statement.

Alright, I'm going to break this down as simply as I possibly can. Everyone seems to be in agreement that there are two scum left. That means that on D5, the ratio of town:mafia:SK was 6:3:1. There was a 1v1 between thil and PatB, and between the two of them, more people were in favor of lynching thil than PatB at the time. thil was town, PatB was mafia.

Now, look at this from the mafia's point of view. What happens if they get thil lynched that day? It goes into night as 5:3:1. It looks like they are in good position against the town, but the SK is a wild card. Furthermore, PatB is sure to be lynched the following day, meaning it will be 3:2:1 or 4:2 at best (decent odds still), OR 4:1:1 at worst (pretty bad odds) going into N6. Now, what happens if instead, they get the SK lynched on D5? Then the SK kill is eliminated, and it is 5:3 going into D6

with the 1v1 still intact and thil likely to be lynched

. What happens then? Scum win on the spot. The only reason this did not happen was because esurio killed thil, which nobody saw coming.

Now, I want you to answer these questions:
1) Do you agree that out of all the players who could have been lynched on D5, the mafia would have strongly preferred to lynch the SK over any townie (even one other than thil) because the SK was the biggest threat to them?
2) Do you agree that even if the SK were not lynched on D5, the mafia still would have wanted to lynch a townie other than thil as opposed to thil himself?
2) Do you agree that the mafia, in light of their apparent failed kill attempt on CP D2, likely had reason to suspect that alex was the SK because of that?
4) Do you agree that if the mafia either knew or strongly suspected (through whatever means) that alex was the SK, that they would try very hard to get him lynched on D5 because it would give them an easy win by swinging a thil lynch the next day?

Note that in asking these questions, I have not brought up a number of things, such as lew's weak role claim after GW caught him roleblocking thil, the role cop theory or how lew was able to predict that alex was Dark Samus, or his flip-flop on Looker today. I want you to focus on the motivations of the players on D5, and what the scum would have been most likely to do.

[Kdub]

CALLED IT.

FUCKING CALLED IT.

LOL, this is actually helping me make my point about why you are probably scum with lew

@kdub: nobody is denying that scum had a good reason to eliminate sk. Wanna keep stating the obvious much longer? We have a perfect and public sample of scum pushing for a sk-lynch: it's PatB. But what he said was in the interest of both scum and town:

eliminating the sk was evidently a priority to everyone but the sk

Did eliminating the SK help the town? In the sense that it eliminated an anti-town faction, you can say that.

But if it were not for esurio, lynching the SK would have almost certainly lost the game for the town - a fact that only the mafia could have known at the time.

THAT is my point, that lynching the SK actually would have been VERY bad for the town had they been privy to the information that the mafia had.

at least to me, as I did (and do) not know if sk could joint with scum.

Sorry, you brought this up before, but I'm calling bullshit. Go look at as many games as you can that have both mafia and an SK. Tell me in what percentage of them can the SK have a joint-win with the mafia (and I'm not talking about draw scenarios). I'd be shocked if you come up with a percentage in the double digits. No town player would ever worry about this possibility.

Besides, 3:3(2):1 can be auto-lose for town, in case both scum and sk hit town the following night. It can lead to 1:2:1 even lynching scum the following day. Is it pro-town to cross-fingers and "hope" that there will be crossfire?

False dichotomy. First, see my point above that lynching the SK would have benefited the scum and hurt the town - a fact which only the scum could know. Second, it assumes that lynching the SK was guaranteed (which was NOT the case unless you had inside knowledge that allowed you to

know

alex was the SK, i.e. you are mafia).

Now it is my turn to ask you a question, kdub. What did you think about vigs before esurio's claim? Did you think we had one, or not? And why?

I did not. There had only been one kill with the "slashed" flavor, and I suspected it may have been Dekes (who claimed Kirby, JOAT). At one point, I asked if the "slashed" kill flavor made sense for Kirby since I was not that familiar with the flavor, and someone (I think GW) said yes. So no, I did not think we had a vig.

[Kdub]

the case on the SK was simply stronger than the 1vs1 to me. Believe it or not, thil looked like a damn genuine cop, and we all had a strong enough townread of PatB (incl. you, amirite?).

Like I said before, if you want to maintain this position, I can't objectively disprove it. It just happens to be a position that both shows a very strong scum motivation and suggests inside knowledge about who the SK was.

Yes, I (and most others) believed PatB was town at the time. So what?

That is a major reason why the scum didn't want to resolve the 1v1 - because it made a thil lynch more likely.

You're helping my case by saying that we had a town read on PatB.

I think PatB evidently made a mistake when he faked his reports (what else? please, answer)

PatB's initial sensor claim was believable. I think almost everyone agreed on that. He didn't get lynched because people saw a problem with his sensor report. He got lynched

because thil flipped town, proving PatB to be a liar

.

as for sk-joint-scum, I have no meta, and you know very well I have no time to go look for it. Significantly, after I announce I have troubles irl, you provoke me asking me to do legwork that you know very well i cannot do.

But I have my experience. I played SK twice. Once I could joint, once I could not. Deal with it. It is a normal consideration to make. Perhaps you, being scum, know if he could or not. but to someone who is not scum, it is natural to wonder whether.

You're trying to shift the burden of proof (and sprinkle in some AtE while you are at it). You are the one who has taken an unusual position (that scum could joint-win with the SK), the burden is on you to provide evidence that this is a reasonable consideration. But I'll withdraw my request and make things more simple for you. First of all, I would like you to link me to the game where you were SK and could joint win with the scum (that shouldn't be too much legwork). I also note that you have specifically mentioned games in which you were an SK, but surely you've played in other games that included one, even if it wasn't you who got the role, so what about those? Second, speaking from my own experiences, I can recall exactly one game (out of something like 6 or 7, not exactly sure) where the SK could have a joint win with the scum (Blackest Night). That was a case where the SK had a non-standard win condition (he would have left the game as a winner after killing certain players and the game would have continued), and in fact could have had a joint-win with any faction, including the town (which obviously is different from the type of joint scum-SK win that you are implying). Finally, I'll invite the others to weigh in on this and tell us how often they have seen games where the SK and mafia could have a joint win in the sense you are talking about. That should be a reasonable sample size to make my point.

[Kdub]

No it didn't. How many times do I have to repeat the fact that regardless of any 1v1 bull that everyone had to play along with, wierd was our biggest scum read. I felt more comfortable lynching someone who I considered to be obvscum to trying to figure out which of the two (pinky and thil) was lying. You continue to harp over something that worked out perfectly for town.

I really don't know what else to say about the issue, because I disagree completely with your conclusions. Lynching an SK helps everyone. As such, if a town player has reason to suspect someone of being an SK, they are required to pursue it. Thats what we did, thats what lew did, thats what the people on the wierd wagon did (regardless of alignment).

See my post above where I explain how lynching the SK

would have led to a town loss if not for esurio

. It "worked out" only because of esurio's kill, otherwise the game would be over. Stop with the results-oriented thinking and look at the knowledge that we had at the time, and the player motivations for pushing/avoiding certain lynches. I also point out to lew above, your excuse of "alex was my top scum read, so I didn't want to lynch out of the 1v1" is not something I can disprove, but that claim is very much consistent with scum trying to justify a non-PatB/thil lynch.

I also notice that you didn't answer my questions in 1759. Can you please do so?

We cannot know if the SK could joint-win or not. The scum-team wouldn't have known either. Stop harping on it, the SK is dead.
SK's can for the most part joint-win if their win-con is not "be the last player alive"
My bet would be that the SK couldn't joint-win, but its not worth speculating over.

The reason I am discussing it is because lew brought it up in an attempt to justify SK-hunting on D5. In response to him, I pointed out that a joint SK-scum win is not something that townies generally concern themselves with. Don't you tell me to stop speculating over it. When lew, who brought it up in the first place, admits that he was reaching for excuses here,

then

I'll drop it.

Another problem with your speculation: You assume that a want to keep thil alive=scummy. There is something missing between your statements and conclusions. I wanted thil alive because I was 90% sure he was our cop, even after Ythan flipped doctor. Excuse the WIFOM, but I have trouble understanding why you think players who were so obviously on thil's side would have suddenly changed their minds and gone for a thil-lynch.

If you were 90% sure that thil was the cop, then why the hell didn't you go after PatB? That you wanted to lynch alex instead of PatB then implies that you thought the chance of alex being scum was higher than the chance of PatB being scum, despite claiming a 90% town read on thil. Is that true?

[Kdub]

And it is absolutely normal for me to try and eliminate a sk before endgame.

I am not arguing that wanting to lynch the SK, in itself, was a problem. This should be perfectly clear by now. If I had known, with certainty, that alex was the SK, I would have wanted to lynch him too. And if not for esurio, that decision likely would have resulted in a town loss.

It is evident from all you are writing that you have decided to tunnel and you are constructing argumentations to support your position.

I've already told you that yes, I am tunneling. Simply stating that I am tunneling has nothing to do with the

reasons

I think you are scum.

Serious question: do you think tunneling is a scum tell?

This question has been answered several times.

I want to hear

his

reason, not yours. And while I have a feeling what his answer will be, I specifically mentioned the "90% sure about thil" thing that he brought up for a reason. I'd like to hear his response without help from anybody else.

[Kdub]

Can you tell me how sure you were that PatB was town? Sorry, I should have asked that at the same time I asked you about alex. Yes, I am going somewhere with this.

[Kdub]

Well duh, but I was hoping for more detail than that. Otherwise, saying "I had a read on X" is an excuse to justify any behavior, regardless of how scummy.

[Kdub]

Did you not read where I already admitted I am tunneling (though you moreso than TMH)? When I strongly believe someone is scum, I am going to explain exactly why I think so (which I have done repeatedly) and I'm going to highlight weaknesses in their positions to get them lynched. Continuing to say that I am tunneling does NOT address any of the reasons why I suspect you.

[Kdub]

I answered each point kdub. Do you want to ask all your question again? I will answer all of them again.

My point was that by continuing to complain about tunneling and whatnot, you are trying to discredit me without advancing the discussion in any way. You've admitted that you see that the scum were strongly motivated to push an alex lynch on D5, and you've said that you strongly wanted to lynch alex on D5 under the claim of "I had town reads on PatB/thil and an SK read on alex" (unprovable), yet you have not conceded that I have legitimate reasons to suspect you because of this. Sure, you "answered" my points in the sense that you gave the answer I would have expected scum to give. Do you at least see where I am coming from here?

Let's talk more about your analysis of D5 for the moment. Given that you admitted that the scum would have strongly wanted to lynch alex on D5 (especially if they had inside info that made him more likely to be the SK), do you find TMH scummy because he helped you push that wagon and appears to have the same excuse you do? Why or why not? Given that I was against the alex wagon, and Looker, being a replacement, only threw his vote on at the end when the deadline was an issue, what do you think our motivations were at the time (mine moreso than Looker)? Are those motivations consistent with scum?

You never did link me to the game where you were an SK and could joint-win with the scum. I want you to do so because I am genuinely curious. It's such an unusual thing to see in a game that I suspect it was a case of a draw scenario or a non-standard SK win condition, obviously different from a joint win in the sense you were talking about. I noticed that you tried to back out of this with your "if I'm stupid for thinking that..." thing, but I think you just don't want to admit that it was a bad excuse. You don't strike me as a dumb player, you actually strike me as a fairly competent one, so excuse me for doubting your claimed thought process there. If the game you played really did allow for this possibility, I'll concede the point.

@esurio:
What is your take on the thing between me and lew/TMH? You're really the person I am making this argument for. I know you said you wanted to wait for Looker and Andy to post some stuff, but I think this game is riding on your decision at this point.

[Kdub]

I'll respond to your post properly tomorrow, but I just want to highlight the problem I noticed immediately.

Now, I want you to answer these questions:
1) Do you agree that out of all the players who could have been lynched on D5, the mafia would have strongly preferred to lynch the SK over any townie (even one other than thil) because the SK was the biggest threat to them?

No. Vig was still likely, and

town-alligned players are more of a threat than 3rd parties.

4) Do you agree that if the mafia either knew or strongly suspected (through whatever means) that alex was the SK, that they would try very hard to get him lynched on D5 because it would give them an easy win by swinging a thil lynch the next day?

Yes.

Direct contradiction. You don't think the mafia preferred an SK lynch, then you think they would have tried very hard to get him lynched?

[Kdub]

No. Vig was still likely, and town-alligned players are more of a threat than 3rd parties. They certainly wouldn't mind an SK death, but if thil had been lynched, there would still be a high chance that the SK would help them by killing another townie.

You aren't thinking deep enough here. Look at this from the SK's perspective. If town is lynched, it is 5:3:1 going into N5. It is very much in the SK's interest to shoot at scum in this case. Why? Because if he hits town, it's 3:3:1 the next day, which is a nearly impossible situation for the SK to win without a huge amount of luck. So given that the SK was likely aiming for scum that night, how would he be any less of a threat than a hypothetical town vig (whose existence was not even a certainty at that point)?

Still, this question is more of a matter of "from my own experience" and I don't find it to be you trying to discover allignment. Also, your asking someone who has played as scum once as a replacement. Quite frankly, I suck at figuring out what a scum team would want. This isn't a newb card. This is a "wait for Andrius to answer because the bastard said he would like 3 days ago."

Completely false. I am not citing a past experience of mine to argue this point, I am flat out pointing out the likely motivations of the scum based on the evidence in

this

game, which you don't need experience to understand. Your past history as scum is irrelevant. In fact, it is your past history as

town

that I expect would give you insight into figuring out scum motivations. That, after all, is the basis of scumhunting.

cop vs. another townie? If they had figured out esurio was a vig, they may have switched to him, but thil was hands-down the safest lynch. I think we are in a situation where a scum team was very safe, but the whittling down of players had put them into a dilemma. Who are the safest players in the game? Kdub and lewarcher.

Remember that the scum have a roleblock. There was no risk of having thil catch anybody because the scum would have just blocked him again. I'm not saying that lynching thil would have been a bad play for them. I am saying that it was a much

better

play to leave him alive in a 1v1 with PatB because it would allow them to control the play and force the town into lynching in a specific manner the next day. I'm not even considering SK possibilities here, do you at least see that lynching thil would have been sub-optimal for the mafia?

They definitely would have taken note of it, but to say they would automatically assume OMGSK.

That's why I said "had reason to suspect" rather than "knew".

Do you agree that lynching an anti-town person is pro-town?
Do you agree that town has the ability to catch scum?
Do you agree that town-reads can turn out to be scum?

1) In general, yes, but when the anti-town person in question is 3rd party or a second scum group, then not necessarily. Ever play in a game before where an SK has been lynched? For the purpose of wagon analysis, you can treat the dead SK as a town mislynch. Do you see why?
2) Yes.
3) Yes.

Do you agree that town could have strongly suspected that alex was the SK, so they would try to get him lynched on D5 because it would eliminate a kill

Yes, I agree with this.

and

let them avoid making the decision of choosing to lynch a cop or a sensor

, even when they had a town read on both players and it was evident that the cop would end up being lynched?

No. I don't know how to make this more obvious to you, so I'm going to answer your question with a question of my own. Do you think that there was any chance in hell that either the mafia would have killed thil on N5, thereby "resolving" the 1v1? If you even think about saying yes, then you are either have a huge lack of understanding of my argument, or you are lying. And if you say no, then you should immediately see what the problem with your question is (hint: I've bolded it).

Your questions basically can only be answered with "yeah, that could happen." But that doesn't mean it did.

Q: Is the sun going to rise tomorrow?
A: Yeah, that could happen. But that doesn't mean it will.

I am not arguing about what is merely possible, as you seem to imply. I am arguing about what is

likely

based on the evidence.

You

are the one who has constantly said "I had X read on this player!" as your defense. I have explained why a scum, in your position, would have taken the same action and used the same excuse you did. This line from you is actually quite hypocritical, because the questions you asked me basically can be answered with "yeah, that could happen" as well. Yes, I think we all know that any of the scenarios you or I have brought up are

possible

. Has absolutely nothing to do with the basis for them.

@Kdub: see, you were just redundatly asking questions, hoping for a contradiction. I got news for you: Thats not a contradiction. Scum would prefer to kill anyone that they have a lot of information on. In other words, scum would RATHER kill a vig, but if they had a shit-ton of information about an SK, then they would push for that too. Somehow I don't think it was coincidental that esurio was on the "3 of these people are scum" tragedy wagon

LOL, trying to trivialize my arguments as "hoping for a contradiction". First of all, it most certainly is a contradiction. My first question made no mention of information or probability of hitting the SK. I was asking, if the scum had a choice between the SK dying and town dying, would they have picked the SK? Second, your point about esurio is garbage. We didn't know, at the time, that she was the vig, and there was no hope of getting her lynched over the other people on PatB's claimed sensor report.

At this point, I really want Andrius to post as well. I want to see his response to my arguments, and how they might be similar or different to yours. Of course, I don't expect to convince him that he is scum, but the manner in which he responds will be very telling to me.

@esurio and Looker
Please contribute something today. I can continue arguing with lew and TMH today, but you guys are the ones I'm really trying to reach. It's frustrating to have my efforts met by indifference from the people who the outcome of the game rests upon, even moreso than if you just disagreed with me.

[Kdub]

lew, please respond to my post 1783.

well, they were trivial.
1)I'm not talking about you.
2) "Do you think its possible that" questions don't mean shit, because it doesn't mean I think its the most likely outcome.
3) Wait, we were arguing?
4) Trust me, I want him to post too. Unfortunately I do not have complete control over what he does. so, you are going to either have to accept this as a one person slot or be VERY patient

1) What is this in response to?
2) Then provide some evidence. You can't just say "I don't think this was likely" and not back it up.
3) Uh, yes?
4) Deadline is in 4 days. There is a limit to how patient we can be.

[Kdub]

1) I was saying that from MY own experience (which is little as scum, mind you) its more likely that.....

OK, but isn't this exactly the type of argument that you were trying to use to undermine my position earlier?

Still, this question is more of a matter of "from my own experience"...

...

4) Then it looks like you're going to have to accept this as a one person slot.

It appears so. Unfortunately for you, I already think you are scum. Andrius's contribution wasn't likely to have made my scum read on you much stronger than it is.

No response to the rest of 1791?

[Kdub]

No shit we were pissed off. Did any of that sound fake to you? I think the fact that we went out of our way to GET A BAN on lelouch says that this wasn't a matter of "pushing a lynch." It was a matter of "either we replace out or something happens to lelouch." We both preferred the latter.

I have not said that your attitude toward Lelouch was fake, I was talking about your attitude toward dana, particularly after his lynch.

So I cannot tell you "what SK/mafia" could do because, quite frankly, it doesn't tell me anything. It just tells me what I THINK MIGHT HAPPEN---that's too many words with doubt for me to handle.

In other words, you are saying that you can't analyze anything because it's uncertain? Look, you can never know, with absolute certainty, how people are going to act. "What you think might happen" is often the best you can do. But mafia and town players do have very different goals and motivations, and you can look at players' actions to see which point of view it is more

likely

to come from. If you aren't willing to accept that under the premise of "it's too uncertain", then how do you ever catch scum?

2)Yep, you were looking for something, found something that WASN"T a contradiction at all and turned it into one.

I wasn't looking for it specifically, but it was so blatant that I had to call you on it.

3) I have an HUGE lack of understanding of your argument. I don't know what your getting at and I don't think any of those questions is helpful in determining allignment. I DID NOT WANT TO LYNCH THIL BECAUSE HE WAS OBVCOP. I DID NOT WANT TO LYNCH PATB BECAUSE WE HAD A STRONG TOWNREAD ON HIM AND I DIDN"T WANT TO TAKE THIS RISK ONLY TO HAVE ANDRIUS BITCH ABOUT HOW I MADE THE WRONG CHOICE. I wanted wierd to get lynch because it was someone we BOTH found scummy. We had meta reasons, we had SK profile, we had bad posts. Hence, he was a much better choice from our perspective.

This doesn't actually address the issue I was raising. My response was because you stated that not lynching one of thil/PatB would allow you to "avoid" making a decision between them. I was hoping to get you to see that this was not the case. To spell it out for you, "avoiding" a decision between them on D5 would have

forced

you to make a decision between them on D6, because there was no chance in hell the scum were going to kill thil (I

really

hope you can at least see why this is true).

4) So if I agree something is likely to happen, what then?

If you agree that it's likely to happen, then just maybe you can understand why I suspect you and lew. If you are town, then of course you would think that my conclusion is wrong, but that doesn't preclude you from understanding my argument, and hopefully give you insight into my thought process. In other words, I am looking for you to either acknowledge that my position makes sense, or to show evidence that it is wrong, neither of which you have done. If you can show convincing evidence that another player has acted in a way that makes them more likely to be scum than you are (which would necessitate you understanding exactly why I think you are scum), then my read on you could conceivably change, depending on the strength of that evidence. You have not done this and have continued to just say you have "reads" on players without backing them up.

[Kdub]

esurio, whatever you are holding back, I think we need to hear it. Deadline is in 3 days and it's pretty clear that Looker and Andrius are not going to post anything of substance.

[Kdub]

But you are perfectly right on one thing: your case is acceptable. None of your assertions is impossible, but none is conclusive either, and you try to present them as conclusive without the tiniest doubt.

Actually, quite the opposite. I am not saying and have never said that my case is 100% correct. I am saying that the evidence leads me to think it is the

most likely

explanation. This is exactly what I've been talking to TMH about (how have you not seen this?). My assertions are neither impossible nor conclusive, but it doesn't have to be one or the other for people to decide what is most probable. If you want to convince me, then I ask you (as I asked TMH) to present evidence that somebody else is more likely to be scum than you are. Where is your case on Looker if you think he is scum?

The only reason why I did not concede that your reasons are legitimate is that I still have my townread on TMH quite intact, which, if correct, makes you necessarily scum if there are 2 left.

Can you explain why you have a town read on TMH? What has he done this game that makes you think he is town? Also, my reasoning is independent of my alignment, so your argument here doesn't really make sense. I can think that a person's argument is perfectly reasonable but still think they are scum, or I can think a person's argument is crap but still think they are town.

No. I did not and do not find him scummy for that. As I said, every half-competent scum would have assumed the existence of a vig. As scum, with a fake-claimed sensor, you cannot just cross-fingers and assume that chk's kill came from a JOAT who had already claimed all his actions and didn't mention a killing power. Therefore, it was extremely likely that the 1vs1 (which scum knew to be real) would have resolved before lylo, and it would have been suicidal for scum to support PaTB's original suggestion of hunting the sk the way he did.

How could the scum "assume" there was a vig when there wasn't even a general agreement among the town that day about it? Even if the scum suspected a possible vig, there was no reason to suspect that it was more than one-shot, given the kill flavors over the first 4 nights. And (most importantly), even if the scum

knew

for certain that there was a vig who could shoot again, it was

still

to their benefit to lynch someone outside the 1v1, and preferably the SK. Would it have been risky to support SK hunting if a vig existed? Well the risk was potentially having associative tells with PatB, so yes to an extent, but the potential gain is a near-certain victory on D6. It's certainly a reasonable risk to take, if the scum even considered the possibility of a vig at all. I should ask you, what did you think the likelihood was on D5 of there being a vig who was more than one-shot?

Which also answer your last question: scum-kdub realises that weirdalexv was the big wagon and tried to distance from PaTB.

Uh, where did I "distance" from PatB? I was pretty clearly saying on D5 that I thought he was town.

I guess I just gave you a further reason to suspect me.

Since you're conceding the point, I won't push the argument here further, though this statement is accurate.

Correct.

Do us a favor and replace out please. It'll give us a deadline extension and hopefully bring in a player who will actually read the game and make informed decisions.

[Kdub]

not supporting his suggestion of hunting the sk is the distancing I refer to, and it was also pretty clear in what I have written. Going any further and overtly bussing your scumpartner would have been enormously scummy, as no one else thought he was scum.

Then you have a very different definition of "distance" than most people.

lolwut???? do you think scum would make their assumptions based on what town thinks? Or that scum would sincerely discuss their concerns about vigs in thread during day?

I admit "assume" was not the right word to use there, but let me try to make it more clear. We were all discussing the possibility of a vig or that the "slashed" kill came from Dekes. Nobody (save for esurio, who herself didn't publicly commit 100% to the idea of a vig, and for good reason) thought a vig was a given. Sure, the scum may have been lying, but since nobody other than a vig themselves (and possibly GW if he had tracked a vig) was privy to knowledge that made the existence of a vig more probable, the likelihood of there being a vig should have been the same, on average, in the minds of town and scum. And since nobody (except esurio), town included, seemed to think it was likely, then clearly the evidence did not suggest that there was one.

Now, I will concede that the scum may have had reason to "play it safe" by accounting for the possibility of a vig, even if they didn't think one was likely. But that gets back to the rest of my argument. 1) The potential reward (winning the game on D6) may have been worth the risk. Take a look at the current situation. The vig ended up messing up the scum's plans, yet they still find themselves in a 5-player endgame and likely two chances to win. Does that seem like a terrible or unwinnable situation to risk being in? 2) Vig or no vig, it was still in the scum's interest to lynch outside of PatB/thil (and if they got the SK, even better). And you didn't answer my question, what did YOU think the likelihood of a multi-shot vig was on D5 (and yes, I have a point here depending on your answer).

kdub's reconstruction assumes that scum was so sure of the absence of a vig that they tried to instant win the game by getting thil lynched the following day. I call this bullshit. Scum would be imbecile not to assume the existence of a vig, and i explained why.

Addressed above.

tl;dr: No quickhammer on lewarcher.

Good point. If me and Looker are scum as lew is suggesting, then each hour that goes by with no quicklynch or even one of us putting a vote on him blows more and more holes in his proposed scumteam.

I feel like this line of thinking could lose us the game. Kdub/lew is still a possibility.

LOL, seriously? Wasn't Toast the one who was saying lew and I were "safe"? Explain my play (and to an extent, his play) today then.

[Kdub]

When the hell did I call you "safe"? I said on multiple occasions that lew was a suspect, but you kept being all like "MER MER MER ANSWER THIS AND THIS AND THIS"

Post 1785:

I think we are in a situation where a scum team was very safe, but the whittling down of players had put them into a dilemma. Who are the safest players in the game? Kdub and lewarcher.

I think what you are implying here by "safe" is that we were not under suspicion (which, if you accept, makes Andy's Kdub-lew scumteam an insane proposal). If I am wrong, then please explain what you meant here.

I know for a fact that 3 is wrong. I don't think TMH is scum. If it is option 2 and there is only 1 scum left, I am expendable, and I am absolutely certain it is kdub.

Thanks for explaining your TMH town read

@esurio:
I'll give you 24 hours to finish whatever you were saying before I put my vote down. I'm pretty sure I'm going to vote lew since there's a bit more evidence against him than TMH, but I'd accept a TMH lynch as well.

[Kdub]

Well, that rules out TMH+Looker as the scumteam. Hey, guess who that leaves?

Not hammering until tomorrow in case esurio has anything left to say.

[Kdub]

Umm...no. "Safe" DOES mean that you were not under suspicion, but I was saying that being in that situation may have allowed you to sacrifice Patb, who was also safe at the time. Hence, you guys could be a scum team. If I thought being safe meant you weren't scum, why wouldn't I have just said "they aren't scum?"

If we weren't under suspicion (i.e. "safe"), does me+lew make any sense at all as a scumteam given our play today? I'm not arguing with you, it's that your other head is suggesting a scumteam that, if you are being consistent in your views, should be near impossible from your point of view.

All of you, please don't say anything further that could be construed as confirming or denying that you gave it to me or ask any questions about it that might indicate you're not the person who gave it to me - scum have enough clues as is and I don't want them having any more.

1) When did you get the vest?
2) who gave it to you?
3) Are you told if you're shot?
4) What day did you claim?

Andy, I highly suggest you read the entire game before talking about stuff that was resolved several pages ago.

Still a little drunk, but sober enough to see that the scumteam is lewarcher/esuriospiritus.

Sober up some more please. There is virtually no chance that esurio is mafia.

[Kdub]

I honestly think it's esurio's gambit + the possibility of esurio still having one shot that is keeping scum from scummy-hammering me.

Anyone who can count to 2 can see why this is false. You are confirmed scum.

I said I'd hammer ~24 hours from my post yesterday morning, and I'm going to be offline for the next few hours, so
VOTE: lewarcher

[Kdub]

...

I would have bet quite a bit that TMH was scum. I'm almost certain it has to be Looker now, but I'm going to think about all possible scenarios first. Looker, please post your thoughts when you get a chance.

[Kdub]

1. RedCoyote, Tetra, Vanilla Townie, was found incinerated with energy burns all around them.

Mod: Can you confirm that the above flip should say "Night 3" at the end of it? Just want to check that this was an oversight and not something significant.

[Kdub]

As an addendum to that question,

Mod: Is the distinction between "incinerated with energy burns all around them" (e.g. RC's death) and "incinerated and surrounded by energy burns" (e.g. Ythan, GW, Bunny, TMH) deliberate, or are they the same kill flavor?

[Kdub]

-did you play with lew at all prior to this game? if so, can you link the game(s)?

No, I don't recall playing any games with him before this one.

-link your most recent few scumgames, please.

Cowboy Bebop Remix
Ocarina of Time

These were the two games that completed this year where I was scum. I was also cult-recruited in Blackest Night, although I think that's not what you are looking for.

Still waiting for the mod to answer my questions. Basically, I'm trying to see if there is any possible way that you could be scum. I'm not seeing any way right now, and if the mod answers those questions the way I think he will, that will likely satisfy me.

[Kdub]

Looker, I'm giving you 24 hours to post, otherwise I'm voting you. I'm probably going to vote you anyway unless your post gives me a very good reason to consider the possibility of you as town or esurio as scum.

[Kdub]

...

I have no choice then. It's weird as hell that TMH was killed last night, but I'm not going to outguess myself. My questions to the mod aren't even going to prove anything now that I think about it. We know that the "slashed" and "incinerated" kill flavors have different sources since they occurred on N5, after the SK had been killed. Nobody has counterclaimed esurio, so she has to be the source of the "slashed" kill. There is no possible way she is mafia. Gotta go with the simplest explanation here: esurio is town.

VOTE: Looker

esurio, the game is in your hands. If you have any other questions for me, let me know.

[Kdub]

No problem esurio, looks like I got paranoid for nothing. Just FYI, I'm going to have limited access starting tomorrow, so if you have questions for me after today, you might have to wait a day or so before I can check in.

[Kdub]

Prodded, I still have limited access. I don't have anything to say unless esurio has a question for me.

[Kdub]

Just so you know, I'm about 99% sure I would have voted TMH if esurio had died the last night. I have no idea why TMH was killed. Glad I was wrong about them though.