Excalibur [Endgame]

[Auro]

Yeah, Merlin should especially never claim before Arthur has Excalibur, or we will just get 2 ICs die - back to back.

Think Dunn might also be town.

2 ICs who also can be trusted to lead town on D2, and one who can be trusted on D3, ALSO with a hidden BP.

[Nancy Drew 39]

Stealth IC would be wonderful if one of our stealth ICs wasn't entirely contingent on the other Stealth IC being alive.
Every single day that Merlin doesn't claim after N1 is another night where scum potentially wipes 2 ICs out with one kill.

But Merlin should never claim before Arthur has the sword, otherwise scum either kills Merlin before he can confirm Arthur or if he confirms Arthur before he has the sword, then scum would kill Arthur first, then Merlin next.

[DVa]

@DVa: Present a plan that doesn't go whack if two/three town don't stick to it.

Why don't you present a better plan than 216?

[SirCakez]

nancy who is scum?

[Auro]

But Merlin should never claim before Arthur has the sword, otherwise scum either kills Merlin before he can confirm Arthur or if he confirms Arthur before he has the sword, then scum would kill Arthur first, then Merlin next.

Premise behind Varsoon's strategy being that the BP sword-holder doesn't vig, so the Arthur stuff doesn't even matter.

@DVa: Present a plan that doesn't go whack if two/three town don't stick to it.

Why don't you present a better plan than 216?

I'm trying to think of one.
If I can think of a plan that isn't as cohesion-reliant as what we previously discussed, I'll gladly state it here.

[Nancy Drew 39]

Agree and doubling down on DVa townread. We should follow DVa.

The problems Varsoon and I have posed haven't been answered -- that plan is reliant on amazing town cohesion which is far fetched.
I'm following Varsoon till DVa/Dunnstral prove otherwise that Varsoon is incorrect.

I’m still confused as to which is the better plan. One thing I’m sure of is, that Merlin should never claim until after Arthur has the sword.

[Auro]

@DVa: Actually, I'm not going to let my disdain that town can't all work together destroy any attempt to.
I'll be fully happy if town CAN commit to that.
I, for one, am ready to commit to a best-case scenario.

@Varsoon: Cool, foolproof plan is fine, but I do think we should attempt to see if players ARE willing to work together first. You're saying you'll claim the sword ONLY because you don't think this is possible, so for now you can set this aside and see, right?

@Nancy: My opinion's above -- I think we should try reaching consensus and see if enough town are willing to stick to a plan, and THEN decide whether to fall back to Varsoon's.

[Nancy Drew 39]

Yeah, Merlin should especially never claim before Arthur has Excalibur, or we will just get 2 ICs die - back to back.

Think Dunn might also be town.

2 ICs who also can be trusted to lead town on D2, and one who can be trusted on D3, ALSO with a hidden BP.

nancy who is scum?

I don’t know yet. Why are you asking me specifically?

[Auro]

Yeah, Merlin should especially never claim before Arthur has Excalibur, or we will just get 2 ICs die - back to back.

Think Dunn might also be town.

2 ICs who also can be trusted to lead town on D2, and one who can be trusted on D3, ALSO with a hidden BP.

nancy who is scum?

I don’t know yet. Why are you asking me specifically?

What about my post 275? O.o

[Nancy Drew 39]

@DVa: Actually, I'm not going to let my disdain that town can't all work together destroy any attempt to.
I'll be fully happy if town CAN commit to that.
I, for one, am ready to commit to a best-case scenario.

@Varsoon: Cool, foolproof plan is fine, but I do think we should attempt to see if players ARE willing to work together first. You're saying you'll claim the sword ONLY because you don't think this is possible, so for now you can set this aside and see, right?

@Nancy: My opinion's above -- I think we should try reaching consensus and see if enough town are willing to stick to a plan, and THEN decide whether to fall back to Varsoon's.

The one problem I see with everyone claiming, is that it’s randomized, so only one person still gets it.

[Varsoon]

Having 3 ICs on D2 gives us a lynch pool of 12 players with 4 scum in it assuming a ML on D1.
You being all "Oh nooo scum shoots one of them then"
So what then? If we ML D2 then D3 is still 2 ICs with a lynch pool of 10 with 4 scum in it.
"Oh nooo scum shot the other IC"
Okay great we STILL have 1 BULLETPROOF IC with a lynch pool of 8 with 4 scum in it which is a 50/50 LYLO which is way better than most LYLO odds.

People who think the ICs should stay unclaimed don't understand optimal use of the role in how it narrows lynch pools and certifies town voices.

@Nancy: Arthur never gets the sword in DVa's scenario.
In fact, unless Town is willing to literally suicide itself, Arthur doesn't get the sword most of the time in this game anyway.
It's not reasonable to try to play towards Arthur getting the sword and Arthur having the sword just gives us a Vigilante shot which, realistically, just hits town more often than scum anyway and throttles us towards loss.

@Auro: Fat chance. I'm always going after the sword because DVa's plan throws away Bulletproof for not-really-a-cop shot that doesn't work most of the time.

[Nancy Drew 39]

Yeah, Merlin should especially never claim before Arthur has Excalibur, or we will just get 2 ICs die - back to back.

Think Dunn might also be town.

2 ICs who also can be trusted to lead town on D2, and one who can be trusted on D3, ALSO with a hidden BP.

nancy who is scum?

I don’t know yet. Why are you asking me specifically?

What about my post 275? O.o

No direct connection with your post. I was going to respond to this but I think I did that already, if indirectly.

[Auro]

@Varsoon: Not my point, I'm not saying we should follow DVa's proposed plan.
I'm saying that we should actually feel out whether town cohesion is possible, but I think this would be more relevant when a provably good cohesion-reliant strategy is proposed, anyway.

I've played multiple games with DVa can wholly see where DVa's coming from though, I think you're wrong on the scumread of her.
I think Nancy sees this too.

@Nancy: Oh, okay -- I guess Varsoon responded to your direct/indirect response anyway. What do you think of that?

[SirCakez]

@nancy because I'm trying to ferret out scumreads from people as an alternative to the ongoing "plan" battle and you're one of those people arguing

[Auro]

So what then? If we ML D2 then D3 is still 2 ICs with a lynch pool of 10 with 4 scum in it.
"Oh nooo scum shot the other IC"
Okay great we STILL have 1 BULLETPROOF IC with a lynch pool of 8 with 4 scum in it which is a 50/50 LYLO which is way better than most LYLO odds.

Also if there's only one scum remaining, they lose - so better than 50/50.
(Unless you factored this in already)

[Nancy Drew 39]

Having 3 ICs on D2 gives us a lynch pool of 12 players with 4 scum in it assuming a ML on D1.
You being all "Oh nooo scum shoots one of them then"
So what then? If we ML D2 then D3 is still 2 ICs with a lynch pool of 10 with 4 scum in it.
"Oh nooo scum shot the other IC"
Okay great we STILL have 1 BULLETPROOF IC with a lynch pool of 8 with 4 scum in it which is a 50/50 LYLO which is way better than most LYLO odds.

People who think the ICs should stay unclaimed don't understand optimal use of the role in how it narrows lynch pools and certifies town voices.

@Nancy: Arthur never gets the sword in DVa's scenario.
In fact, unless Town is willing to literally suicide itself, Arthur doesn't get the sword most of the time in this game anyway.
It's not reasonable to try to play towards Arthur getting the sword and Arthur having the sword just gives us a Vigilante shot which, realistically, just hits town more often than scum anyway and throttles us towards loss.

@Auro: Fat chance. I'm always going after the sword because DVa's plan throws away Bulletproof for not-really-a-cop shot that doesn't work most of the time.

Okay, I can see that her plan relies heavily on town cohesion. If Heroes is any example - where town was expected to send in cohesive votes - then someone having the sword and being able to possibly vig, is better than no one having it.

I think you and DVa are both equally sincere, so I’m townreading both of you for it.

[Gamma Emerald]

Why would they want to? If they aren’t Arthur they die, and their influence dies with them.
This looks like a scum thought.

They die only if they vig.
Which means a player with "influence" on getting the sword can just refuse to vig, and thus hold on to it stubbornly.

Also interesting. My fears that a player might work anti-town as an IC is scummy?

How would an IC work anti-town? The scummy part is you trying to suggest a play that hurts Town most of the time.

[Auro]

How would an IC work anti-town?

"Behave" anti-town, by refusing to follow optimal play from a pre-decided strategy.
This is outdated anyway, currently I agree with Varsoon, what's your take on Varsoon's philosophy vs DVa's?

[Nancy Drew 39]

@Varsoon: Not my point, I'm not saying we should follow DVa's proposed plan.
I'm saying that we should actually feel out whether town cohesion is possible, but I think this would be more relevant when a provably good cohesion-reliant strategy is proposed, anyway.

I've played multiple games with DVa can wholly see where DVa's coming from though, I think you're wrong on the scumread of her.
I think Nancy sees this too.

@Nancy: Oh, okay -- I guess Varsoon responded to your direct/indirect response anyway. What do you think of that?

Yeah, I can see his point but I can also see DVa’s as well. This game is confusing because of the different mechanics, so I’m judging the reactions more by intent than anything else.

[Gamma Emerald]

How would an IC work anti-town?

"Behave" anti-town, by refusing to follow optimal play from a pre-decided strategy.
This is outdated anyway, currently I agree with Varsoon, what's your take on Varsoon's philosophy vs DVa's?

How is using the sword optimal play?

[SirCakez]

@nancy because I'm trying to ferret out scumreads from people as an alternative to the ongoing "plan" battle and you're one of those people arguing

Pls

[Gamma Emerald]

Exactly. Does it seem smarter to gamble on the 1/12 chance you are Arthur (as there are 12 that receive Knight Errant PMs) with the cost of losing your ability to lead from then on, or to hold fast and remain an influence to town’s benefit?

In the abscence of strategy, the latter.
If there's a town strategy otherwise, former.

Merlin, if alive, could confirm the person holding it is Arthur. No Merlin approval means the person is definitely not Arthur -- following prior discussed strategy, what should they do then? Suicide to give it up, or hold on to it?

If they’re actively acting in town’s benefit they should holster. If they’re inactive or they’re performing poorly using it might be wiser.

[Auro]

@Gamma:
Also my belief at that time was that a strategy involving suicides to search for Arthur was good, if Arthur getting the sword meant a great swing towards town win. The thought that players, as part of strategy, vig to pass on the sword or prove themselves Arthur isn't scummy in itself.
I'll take it that you're scumreading me for what I was feeling out as the best town strategy WHICH I also approached not with perfect confidence, and seeked to correct.

How is using the sword optimal play?

It's an available mechanic, so I'm trying to figure out a way where using the sword can benefit town.
You're saying never use the sword, and there's NO way using the sword can be beneficial, right?

[Gamma Emerald]

with the cost of losing your ability to lead from then on, or to hold fast and remain an influence to town’s benefit?

Relatively new to the site, is there any individual who has reads much better than random?

Nancy, his post has nothing to do with Merlin holding the sword.

I would say yes, but in LLD’s case I trust her to be effective at leading and not fooled by bad reasoning.

[Auro]

If they’re actively acting in town’s benefit they should holster. If they’re inactive or they’re performing poorly using it might be wiser.

From their perspective they're always acting in town benefit. I'd trust this only if they have objective proof/consensus agreement on their own benefit/reads on the playerbase much higher than random chance.