Night Watch Open 95 - Game Over before 703

[icemanE]

/CONFIRM.

[icemanE]

vote: afatchic

Shape up!

[icemanE]

Personally I don't see what's wrong with a RV stage in an open setup - I also don't see the argument against Crazy as valid.

[icemanE]

I agree with fatchic's idea - beyond being a sort of "bomb" role, I don't see the point of the hider, so it seems like there should be a hypoclaim of sorts if we're going to spin things that way. I don't see an outstanding advantage to the hider claiming on day one - a bit further down the road, maybe day 3, the hider claiming would be quite useful in clearing townies, but at this stage, keep quiet.

[icemanE]

I am going to

unvote - vote: TCS

for trying to bring down what is clearly a protown plan.

[icemanE]

Getting voted by bio for agreeing with his logic - classic.

[icemanE]

My main concern with the plan is that, if the mafia luck out and hit the hider on their own, we might make the mistake of assuming that the hider hid behind mafia and lynch someone based on their hypoclaim - that could be a problem, now that I think of it.

[icemanE]

I guess I was confused by the role then.

To clear it up - If the mafia target the hider, it will kill whomever the hider hid behind instead of the hider? But if the hider hides behind scum at night, the hider dies?

[icemanE]

Thanks bio. Makes much more sense now.

I hid behind afatchic last night (for purely logistical reasons - more to hide behind if you catch my drift) and tonight I'm going to hide behind StrangerCoug.

[icemanE]

Yes, please expand on why this is a bad wagon.

[icemanE]

Xtoxm, while your defense was subpar, your comment made me look back through the votes. Beyond mine, and maybe the second vote on TCS (placed by StrangerCoug), which was justified with Stranger calling TCS out for craplogic, the third and fourth votes on TCS are totally unjustified. The third and fourth votes were placed by afatchic and biochop. Something interesting to note:

# Third person on a wagon is likely to be mafia (+15)
# Fourth person on a wagon is likely to be mafia (+10)

Coincidentally fat and bio placed the third and fourth votes, and had little to no reasoning behind them.

# Voting without any good reason, or indeed any reason whatsoever.

Another wiki-reinforced scumtell which often holds true in real application as well.

So, with that in mind, I'm going to

unvote - vote: afatchic

and

FoS: bio

while I do a readthrough (and perhaps a PBPA, if I find it necessary) on the two of them.

[icemanE]

Add OMGUS to the list of scumtells.

[icemanE]

Are you kidding or something, bio? You're attempting to defend your actions by saying that, since someone wrote on the wiki that it's "probably out of date", that those things are no longer scumtells? That voting without reason isn't scummy no matter whether the wiki says so or not?

Bio's a pro guys, don't forget it.

How can you say your vote on me was "intentionally vague"? What did you hope to accomplish with its being vague? In short, what was your "intent"?

[icemanE]

Yeah bio, that trap explanation is crap. I've seen it used before and it's garbage justification.

[icemanE]

Last page I implied that a scumteam of bio and afatchic was possible. In a quick reread I noticed that they were the two major proponents of the hypoclaim plan. I'm trying to think of a possible scum motivation for suggesting this plan. It is ostensibly protown, from what I can tell. However, they had N1 to discuss how they'd proceed. I will mull it over.

Also, bio's main priority in previous pages seemed to be discussing how the hider should proceed. Coupled with the fact that fat suggested the plan, with bio quickly agreeing with it and then starting it - I dunno, I'll have to watch these two in coming posts.

[icemanE]

Specifically that the one you chose hasn't been valid in any games I have played. Others in that list also are irrelevant now. The list was made in 2004 and players have adapted over the course of the last 4 years.

You're correct there - as a general trend, scum have probably become more aware of what not to do over the years based at least in part on what the wiki says - they can see what they're not expected to do. However, from my experience, scum do tend to slip nicely and easily onto a wagon while it's forming more often than they start their own wagons. Is this to say that every time someone joins a wagon third or fourth, they're automatically scum? No. In fact, it's not even scummy much of the time. However, when two players join a wagon third and fourth and provide no substantive reasons for doing so... that IS scummy.

I was seeing if your response would match my assumption of what your response would be. It did.

Might I ask where this assumption came from? PS - I've only seen a player successfully pull off a move like this once - it was vollkan in a game that's currently ongoing, so I can't get too into the details, but he self-voted to draw attention to himself - I pressed him incredibly hard for it, and he claimed that was his whole reason for self-voting, to get people to press him. I wound up being lynched for it - I was a townie. Granted, there were many other reasons I was lynched - my flavor was misleading in that game - but what I'm saying is, challenging someone for self-voting OR for voting without reason is NOT something only scum do, so your experiment (and vollkan's) are flawed in nature.

You are playing by the textbook, so I figured I would do something else which is mentioned on the page and I don't agree with. Now I need to decide (as afatchic kind of pointed out) if you are an eager townie assuming the wiki tells are true and thinking you are on to something, or scum using an appeal to authority to plant seeds of suspicion. If I decide you are probably townie, then I can look at how other people responded to our interactions.

I think if you read a few of my games you'll quickly realize that I'm anything but a textbook player. Check out high school mafia or Meatworldish mafia if you feel like you need proof of that. I only reference and quote the wiki when I see something that makes me think "Oh yeah, that's in the wiki", or when it just makes more sense to quote it than not.

@ Fat - Yeah, buddying up is definitely common scum. If that's what YOU think is happening here, I'm assuming your view is also that bio is the scum and you're the townie. Is that the case, or are you simply saying it happens?

TCS - his reasoning in post 192 are pretty weak. It looks like pretty lazy justification for what he's done over the course of the game.

Another lazy player (at the moment, anyways): camn, with her list of "I think everyone is scum". 200 makes better sense of it, but the post where she copied and pasted everyone's name into her scummiest list just seems like a very lazy way to get out of actually doing any scumhunting. It's not until she's challenged that she actually reasons it out.

At the moment I'm going to

unvote

as I feel that fat has played well and brought up good points - that, and I still can't see anything anti-town or pro-scum about the hypo plan. I'm going to switch over to

vote: bio

for that nonsense scheme he cooked up.

[icemanE]

So, in the same breathe you admit the tell is not reliable, yet hold firm that in this case it is? That is kind of a relativist fallacy there.

No, that's inaccurate.

You think I slipped when I voted in the 4th spot? What advantage did I gain by jumping in the 4th spot?

An easily joined wagon. You didn't start it, so you didn't need a case - you didn't second it, so you didn't have to explain why you agree or disagree - and you didn't finish it. You're a face in the crowd, which is awfully nice for scum.

Since you were pulling directly from unreliable tells, I assumed you would try to say my vote was OMGUS (even though you never even voted for me).

Wait - so your master plan for catching scum was based on someone calling you out for what appeared to be an OMGUS vote? Wow, that's foolproof!

You contradict yourself. You say it was successful, but it was also flawed. I don't see how it was 'successful' if it lead to a lynch of a town player and I also don't see how you can relate self-voting to bandwagoning.

He

succeeded

in his aim, which was to get me lynched. I didn't relate self-voting and bandwagoning - I said the two of you set up the same trap. You both did something to appear scummy and then called people out for mentioning it.

I didn't say you were a textbook player, but you are playing by the textbook in this game. You are using information which is not reliable and applying it to justify a FoS/vote.

Typically when people say you're doing things by the textbook, they mean you're doing precisely the right thing as ordered.

Please identify what I have done 'over the course of the game' so I can respond to it.

That was addressed to TCS, hence the paragraph begins with: TCS -.

I 'buddied up' to the idea. I couldn't care less whose name was attached to it. The idea was good. Both scum and town can agree to a pro-town idea.

That was addressed to fat, hence the paragraph beings with: @Fat.

Remember when you added OMGUS to your short list of scummy actions I did? This is where pot meets kettle and admits to him that OMGUS is just a red herring. Since all of your few reasons listed why I am scum are null tells, your vote is left with only my vote preceding it and no valid reason associated.

First off, when I originally voted fat, I had a whole paragraph about why I was doing it, and it ended with this:

So, with that in mind, I'm going to unvote - vote: afatchic and FoS: bio while I do a readthrough (and perhaps a PBPA, if I find it necessary) on the two of them.

If I could have just voted for both of you, I would have. As it were, if you read the paragraph you'll realize I said no more about fat than I did about you - my reasons for both of you were exactly the same, and as such my vote and FoS were interchangeable.

And what I said weren't nulltells. Your plan is just stupid, if nothing else, it yields at very best a nulltell, which is "you accused me of being scummy for doing something easily interpretable as scummy. You must be scum".

Come on bio, get some sense.

[icemanE]

I'm still fine with bio.

[icemanE]

I've read what's been posted since my last post, and nothing there has convinced me I should unvote bio.

[icemanE]

My guess would be there must be some reason for Hash wanting the bullets. I doubt that reason is that he doesn't want to read. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt until he does something legitimately scummy.

What made you modify your opinion of the hypoclaim plan between these two posts?

I said I'd think about it over the course of the day, and after thinking about it, I didn't find anything scummy or anti-town about it. I didn't change my mind, rather, I came to a decision, which is all I said I was going to do in the first place.

[icemanE]

Yeah, the OP wagon seems like it's just... there... without any reason to be there...

[icemanE]

fat is either misinterpreting what camn said or actively trying to put spin on it. Reading camn's post in question, I did not get the impression that camn was proposing a lynch regardless of alignment.

I agree that it's impossible to say there's NEVER a reason to lynch a townie - wacky situations and problems arise in mafia all the time, so it's naive to say a situation like that doesn't and will never exist. In this particular instance, no, it's clearly not OK.

Now that you mention it, bio, the fact that Ice isn't bandwagon-hopping like a madman is almost suspicious. In the few games I've played with him, he's been town, and he's hopped around a lot in the early going.

True. I do like bandwagons. But only if I think they're going to be even slightly productive or accurate. You'll see I agree with bandwagons when I join them, if you look at my play, and don't join when I don't like them. You make it seem as if I jump on every bandwagon that forms, and that's not accurate.

Sadly, much like life, the universe, and everything, something has to come out of nothing at some point.

Apparently we're playing with God himself.

And: "Nothing can come of nothing."

King Lear

The significance: TCS is saying that a wagon based on nothing is appropriate... which it's not. Maybe on page 3. Not on page 13. Duh.

I also don't understand TCS's point about OP's win in PD Mafia (which I was in - in fact, I was one of the two scum he killed to win the game). First of all, the game mechanics in PD mafia were insanely different than this game's. Secondly, I was sent to jail because the town thought myself and my scumpartner were town, and OP used his power which killed two people the townies thought were town. Finally, you seem to be arguing that OP is a good player - and what's your point? He says he's bad, you say he's good... where were you trying to go with that?

That active lurking point on OP is also bull.

Gonna look through and see if I want to vote TCS.

[icemanE]

No lynches on day one are a terrible thing. The last thing I said about TCS was:

TCS is saying that a wagon based on nothing is appropriate... which it's not. Maybe on page 3. Not on page 13. Duh.

I also don't understand TCS's point about OP's win in PD Mafia (which I was in - in fact, I was one of the two scum he killed to win the game). First of all, the game mechanics in PD mafia were insanely different than this game's. Secondly, I was sent to jail because the town thought myself and my scumpartner were town, and OP used his power which killed two people the townies thought were town. Finally, you seem to be arguing that OP is a good player - and what's your point? He says he's bad, you say he's good... where were you trying to go with that?

That active lurking point on OP is also bull.

Gonna look through and see if I want to vote TCS.

...and I do. He's scummy enough for a day one lynch, in my evaluation, and I forsee a no lynch occurring if we don't act quickly, which is detrimental to the rest of the game.

unvote - vote: TCS

[icemanE]

Yeah I'm switching to HC because we need to lynch today, period.

unvote - vote: HC

[icemanE]

Even though my vote was the one that basically changed the lynch from the wathcer to the mafia...

Worst distancing ever.

vote: HC

Applicable?

[icemanE]

I dunno...

unless bio and Xtoxm are scum partners, (buckle in for some WIFOM) I doubt he'd say:

Bio has claimed Hider, clearing me and Camn.

...and even then, it would be a stupid move. I'm feeling Xtoxm as town now.

[icemanE]

@bio -

I think you rely on meta WAYYY too much. You can't automatically rule out someone being scum because you don't find them scummy in other games. That's so flawed.

[icemanE]

Meta sucks for specifically that reason you mentioned:

If someone does something scummy, it should count as a scumtell, no matter what. If a person consistently does scummy things and it becomes their meta, they should correct their play, because if a person is allowed to get away doing scummy things and someone else is going to toss out anything they do that's scummy, they'll get away that easily.

Once a player becomes aware of their own meta, then it becomes unreliable.

And you just pointed it out to him. So according to yourself, it's unreliable.

[icemanE]

I am putting Xtoxm at L-1 right... now:

vote: Xtoxm

[icemanE]

any objections to me hammering xtoxm?

Rock him like a hurricane.

[icemanE]

I seem to have forgotten - why is fatchic proven again?

[icemanE]

claimed hider and hasn't been counter-claimed- he's why you're proven also, remember?

Oh. Guess I missed that among everyone else (mostly bio) talking about being hider.

[icemanE]

Here's the thing:

This is all hinging on crazy being scum. Here is what I propose:

If crazy IS scum, fat hides behind bio. If bio is scum, we win. If he's not, we have a good chance of winning the next day.

If crazy ISN'T scum, fat hides behind another one of the unconfirmed, whomever he chooses. At this stage I don't know why it wouldn't make sense not to hide - and fat hiding unannounced (since he'll most likely be the NK anyways) means the scum won't know what to expect.

If there's a hole in this plan (which I don't doubt that there is), inform me.

Gently, I'm so sensitive...