Scummies 2012 Nominations (Deadline For Noms)

[Mr. Flay]

Nominate GreyIce for Best Replacement for Kunkstar's Switchboard Mafia

Grey replaced in Night 2 after Town (for a number of reasons not germaine to the nomination) had mislynched two Days running and was poised to do so again. Grey resurrected a completely dead slot and focused Town on actual scummy play. Scum 1 was lynched Day 3, he caught the second with his Tracker role Night 3, and coordinated with DeltaWave to lynch the last scum on Day 5. He quickly and effectively turned the game around for Town.

Seconded.

Town, which I was a part of, had no business winning this game. GreyIce came in, took over, and completely gave town a win it did not deserve. One of the best replacement jobs I have ever seen.

3rd on the strength of that nomination alone. That's good stuff.

[MattP]

4th the GreyICE Best Replacement nom

[UberNinja]

Nominate Salamence20 for Most Cunning Manipulation for Disney Villains Mafia

Because HOLY SHIT.

And yes, this is 100% a serious nom. Fuck the haters.

Also gonna

nominate Disney Villains Mafia for Most Enjoyable Game

[Klick]

2nd Sala

[rapidcanyon]

3rd Sal/Sala

[Salamence20]

2nd Disney Villains

[Nexus]

Nominate Hito's Abarat: Days of Magic, Nights of War for Best Flavour Text. Amazing from start to finish, whatever your view on the result.

[Hinduragi]

2nd Abarat: DoM, NoW

for Best Flavour Text

3rd Abarat Mafia

(New Backup Link) for Best Setup

[GreyICE]

3rd Abarat for flavortext

[Knight of Cydonia]

Anti-nom

Same reason that the town of Star Trek: Voyager mafia doesn't deserve it, or the scumteam of Blood Bowl doesn't deserve it. Setup was heavily inclined towards them winning, with three "Lynches" per day but the scum having an unlimited ability to abort one of those three lynches, letting the town constantly kill town but only kill scum when scum wanted them to (while scum were able to preserve scummy townies for days when town screwed up). In addition the voting mechanics let scum control another lynch outright, making it so that the town basically had to hit two scum with only two lynches to even kill 1. And given that advantage, it was still 16:5, AND the scum had a 1-shot vig and an unlimited kill on the one confirmed townie in the setup (and the ability to pardon one player, meaning that they could create a day where the town effectively had NO town-controlled lynches) while the town had only two weak power roles, thanks to mod error.

Even given all of that, they still didn't play great.

Translation: "KoC outgambited town

twice

, engineered a lynch of an obv-town player D1 and got away scot-free, pulled off TWO separate fakeclaims, and helped his scumteam completely dominate the game, and I don't like him, so I'm going to oppose this."

[UberNinja]

Idk KoC. That setup seems ridiculously scum sided if that's even

close

to an accurate description of the mechanics.

[Knight of Cydonia]

Idk KoC. That setup seems ridiculously scum sided if that's even

close

to an accurate description of the mechanics.

You expect GreyICE to think about things logically and rationally? As Mastin said in the initial nomination, it was an incredibly swingy setup which the town of that game lost due to being outplayed just as much as that one missing power-role. It took us until night 4 to actually land that "unlimited kill of the one confirmed townie", whose role immediately passed onto another town player. All 3 of our abilities (as in, 3 abilities for the whole scum team) were 1-shots apart from that kill. One town PR got himself modkilled after we nudged the wagon along until he self-hammered, town had several opportunities to lynch players who were obviously scum or should at least have gone to the Jury, and completely failed to recognise them.

[Parama]

You're making a good point for town incompetence but not much of one for scum excellence btw

[Nero Cain]

Wasn't SC strung up like twice? So its not that town failed to lynch scum but we were unable to do so thanks to the mechanics.

edit: I agree that several townies played terrible but there was some good play as well.

[Parama]

I know nothing about the game.

KoC is making it sound like scum outplayed town because scum played average and town played awful.

[Nero Cain]

If I had to put the reasons why the town lost in order it would be bad town play, scum sided mechanics, average scum play.

Obviously I'm of the opinion that scum didn't play as great as KOC thinks he did but meh. We've been arguing about that since the game ended and neither of us are going to agree with the other.

Even if this nom goes through, I don't think there's any chance of this winning and it would just be a big waste of the judges time.

[GreyICE]

I know nothing about the game.

KoC is making it sound like scum outplayed town because scum played average and town played awful.

Combined with mechanics that made it impossible for scum to die when they were lynched (as NC said, SC was obvious scum and kept getting strung up and living) yeah, pretty much that. The town was pretty bad. Of course since usually 1 out of the 3 lynches would survive the night (and often 2 out of 3), it got to the point where the town didn't really care anymore, because lynching people was fairly pointless. So everyone was playing pretty subpar by the end because no one cared anymore. It's rather draining to get a wagon together. It's ridiculously draining to get the same wagon together again and again and again and again while the player refuses to die and watch townies get pardoned and then die and flip town... there's no way you can draw associative tells. Scum can bus to the max then keep their buddy from flipping... it was bad.

[Faraday]

KoC is making it sound like scum outplayed town because scum played average and town played awful.

(If scum played ok and town played awful then the scum did outplay the town, though? It just didn't take muchy effort?)

[Parama]

You don't nominate a side simply for outplaying the other, you nominate them for outplaying the other AND playing especially good.

[petapan]

Awarded to the anti-town team that performed the most impressively in winning their game. Judges may consider how much the anti-town team won by as well as how challenging the task of winning was.

idk it just says winning impressively not winning impressively against opposition deemed to be adequateby those viewing the game (although setup balance is relevant to how challenging it was to win). every time people bitch about a "best x performance" nom it's always "well the opposing side was shit" like it would be a more worthy nomination if they won LESS impressively - because ppl automatically think if the winning team never encountered any adversity they didn't "earn" the win which is bullshit because getting a flawless win is inherently not an easy thing or it would happen all the time

but strangercoug was voted up 3 times and never killed that game which is pretty messed up because it shows town didn't perform that badly they just got boned by the mechanics but w/e that's been covered already

[chesskid3]

If there are no other candidates for best performance third party, I automatically win, right?

CHESSKID GONNA WIN

[petapan]

no, actually.

[MattP]

Nominate Petapan for best third party performance

[chesskid3]

Nominate Petapan for best third party performance

[Faraday]

You don't nominate a side simply for outplaying the other, you nominate them for outplaying the other AND playing especially good.

Sure? But that wasn't my point or relevant to what I responded to.