Mini 368: Town Of Suspicion - Game over!

[Thok]

Would it make you feel better if I promised to make a breadcrumb about my target before we mass claim? (I realize that's not perfect, but it forces me to make some sort of commitment that can back fire one me horribly.)

[petroleumjelly]

Feel free to leave a breadcrumb if you wish, but I haven't decided when I want you to claim your target. I am fairly tired, so I don't think I'm in a good state of mind to be deciding things like that. And that's not even considering the fact that it's not like I'm guaranteed pro-town and everything I say will be looked upon with awe and anything I ask for will be done in complete deference. There are other players who should have a say on when you reveal your target.

While I'm here, though:

This is WIFOM, but do people really thing I'd have let yesterday last so long if I was scum? Conversation helps the town, and it's not like hammering alko would have made me look any scummier than hammering M4yhem1 already made me look.

Just don't even say things like this. Yes: you would let a conversation continue as scum. Al_Ko was probably going to be lynched no matter what happens, and since conversation wasn't exactly bubbling from the ground, there was pretty much no harm in letting it continue. And I guarantee if you had hammered Al_Ko yesterday, I would be calling for your head on a platter today: that would have been completely unacceptable.

TSQ still needs to answer my question from yesterday.

[petroleumjelly]

Ah, frick, ignore that last line. I realized TSQ was dead just as I hit submit.

[Thok]

You're already calling for my head on a platter; me hammering alko wouldn't change that. (I guess it moves me from being third to first; I consider this a fairly trivial change gven that you are only one person.) If I'm hypothetically scum then after an alkotown lynch we only need one mislynch in three tries (ignoring vig/1-shot vig/unnightkillable/lynch protection issues, of course)-I'm better off protecting my hypothetical partners by ending the day quickly and not giving you anything to work with today. Heck, in that scenario, I'd hypothetically hammer myself today.

Basically I'm just making the observation that hypothetical me scum was already half way under the bus yesterday; hypothetical me scum would likely finish the job.

(And no, I do not plan to hammer myself today.)

[Thok]

As a side note, is there anybody out there who people would describe as being wishy-washy about the M4yhem or alko lynches? I have a scum tell I want to try out, that's worked decently well in a few empirical examples.

(Yes, I plan to doublecheck people's reactions to the lynches myself. But, I figure I should bring up this idea first to see how people react.)

[petroleumjelly]

You're already calling for my head on a platter...

Our definitions differ, then. If I was calling for your head on a platter, that would mean I vote you immediately, argue absolutely everything possible I can think of against you, relentlessly pick apart everything I can find to pick apart, and flat out refuse to vote anybody but you today despite the fact that I know we are likely in Lynch-in-Lose. I would say there is a conserable difference between that and what I am doing.

As an answer to your side note, I would characterize myself as "wishy-washy" on both lynches.

[petroleumjelly]

EBWOP:

Conserable = Considerable. I am tired.

[Thestatusquo]

[Best bah post ever] OH THANK GOD [/best bah post ever]

[mith]

FoS: mith, your post was completely dumb. You look at TSQ's posts and automatically figure that TSQ didn't have an innocent investigation on those four people and somehow missed the person TSQ was going out of his way to avoid voting? Methinks you were purposely omitting that.

OMGYFS: pj.

If

I thought it was apparent that TSQ had al as innocent, why would I "purposely omit" that information? Just so you could bring it up as something against me? That was a rushed post, and I only looked at votes.

I think you're overstating your case, though. I don't think it's nearly as obvious as you make it out to be, and while the potential information to gain here is pretty weak anyway - even if he definitely got an innocent result on someone still alive - but I don't think we should ignore it completely, and it bothers me that you're taking this stance.

Where did he say the case against al was weak? Tsq didn't say anything at all about al (aside from "I'll post more relevant read throughs (alko, and thok) when I get to them.") until Jan 12. He didn't say anything about al after Jan 12, either. In those four posts, he was addressing one particular point, made by Thok, regarding al's apathy.

Now, I don't really have the slightest idea how Tsq plays any role, much less how he plays a cop role, but he had plenty of opportunity to try to push things away from al without looking obvious about it; it's not as though he was the only one not voting for al. Jan 9, for example. The vote count at that point was 3 for al, 2 for me, and no other votes. If you're the cop, and the voting is split like that between someone you have an innocent result on and someone you don't, don't you at least *look* at the other guy?

What does Tsq do? He votes for you. I don't think he even said my name the entire day.

Now, I think it's

possible

he checked al and was trying to play it really subtly. I think it's possible he checked Norinel.

But I also think it's possible he checked LL/Rosso - who he was suspicious of day 1 and didn't mention much if any day 2. I think it's possible he checked CTD (though personally I think CTD is scum scum scum, for reasons I'll get into later). And I think it's possible he checked me. And I think you might be trying to get us to ignore those possibilities.

Thok: I would be satisfied with a breadcrumb - it's the best of both worlds if it works, and it's in your best interest to be convincing.

I find your wording strange, though - you seem to be saying that it

can

backfire; that is, that you're going to be lying. I guess you intended an unstated "if I'm scum" or something, but this bothers me about as much as the M4yhem thing yesterday.

Keep getting distracted today, and I've hardly even started reading on the players that are actually alive. TBC tomorrow, hopefully.

[petroleumjelly]

When Thok attacks Alky for giving up, TSQ contends that it is a “null tell”. He then tells Thok he is stretching. He then explains what Alky’s state of mind may have been (“he hates this game”). Since other players have expressed equal hatred of the game and TSQ made no efforts to protect

them

in such a manner, this leads me to believe Alky would have been TSQ’s investigation.

OMGYFS: pj. If I thought it was apparent that TSQ had al as innocent, why would I "purposely omit" that information? Just so you could bring it up as something against me? That was a rushed post, and I only looked at votes.

If nobody brought it up, that would certainly have worked to your advantage. Hence why you would omit it as scum; if you could try to call one of your scumbuddies (or yourself) as likely to have been invesigated innocent, it makes perfect sense why you would fail to mention something like that.

[Thok]

Mith, yes, I meant to put an "if lying" at the end of the relevant post. I also misspelled "on", for what it's worth [showing that I was already innattentive in reading that post].

In any case, I already set the breadcrumb in 723 (I figured it would be needed). I'll even let you know that the role of this sentence is to breadcrumb how to interpret that breadcrumb (it's a bit convoluted).

Waiting for M4yhem and LuckayLuck to say stuff.

[LuckayLuck]

Mith is nearly a lock to be mafia.
Townie consensus + I feel like the mafia tried to bandwagon him yesterday.

{Mith, M4yhem, CTD}? Is it really that easy, since I feel like all others are townie?

[M4yhem]

My top suspect would be Thok, for various reasons. I don't see the harm in him claiming his target now. I am also in favour of a mass-claim, since we appear to be in lynch-or-lose.

Luckay- Any particular reason for your suspicions? You never seem to go into much detail about what you think and neither did Rosso, which makes you hard to read.

On the subjet of cop TSQ, surely if he had an innocent on Al he would have said so? Though it's hard to see how such speculation will help, since he's dead and unable to confirm anything.

[Thok]

My top suspect would be Thok, for various reasons. I don't see the harm in him claiming his target now. I am also in favour of a mass-claim, since we appear to be in lynch-or-lose.

I'd like to hear your "various reasons". I suspect that you can come up with one (which is a big reason, but it's only one.)

If you can't see the benefit of having me breadcrumb, well

Also, I'm curious, do you have anything to say with respect to your role on the alko wagon? I think your last 10 posts yesterday were of the form "Everything else is irrelevant, lynch alko. Everything else is irrelevant, lynch alko."

[LuckayLuck]

Luckay- Any particular reason for your suspicions? You never seem to go into much detail about what you think and neither did Rosso, which makes you hard to read.

this is actually sort of easy to say why


PJ & Pablito I'm considering town. Due to several posts.
Thok I'm considering a town even-night roleblocker (my brain considered him being an EVIL COUNTERPART, but given his hammer day1, I feel that this is not so
I know I'm town

there are 7 people in this game

I listed 4 as townies
that makes the last 3, mafia.

[M4yhem]

Thok-
Obviously the hammer on day one is still bugging me, but that's not the only reason. I mistrust your roleclaim; as PJ points out, it doesn't make much sense for there to be two pro-town roleblockers in a normal setup. A scum roleblocker would fit much better, I feel. This odd/even thing might be a way of hiding your real targets.
Your conduct today isn't exactly inspirational either. You use a lot of Wifom about how you would have hammered Al as well if you were scum.

As for the whole not claiming your target thing- yes, of course I understand why you are breadcrumbing. What I don't understand is how it makes sense to announce

to the entire thread

that you intend to trap the scum in a lie- surely that destroys any chance of your plan working? Which make me wonder if you actually want to catch scum at all, or if you just want to look useful.

Luckay- Thank you. That makes a bit of sense. What makes you think Thok's hammer is a pro-town sign?

[LuckayLuck]

What makes you think Thok's hammer is a pro-town sign?

• Thok didn't need to hammer there, as scum.
  
• Thok, scum, would have known it would look scummy to hammer there.
  
• Thok gave the reasoning of being the the role that m4yhem was was his, which made it an easy lynch. Quite believable.
  
• It would be an amazing coincidence if Thok was a evil, even-night blocker, as evil.

Theory:
Thok = townie even-night blocker

[petroleumjelly]

Luckay: stop being so blind.

1.) Nobody needed to hammer

anybody

, technically speaking. The person with the most votes is lynched in this game. The only thing hammering did in that situation was end discussion.
2.) Thok, as scum, would very well know that he would probably be able to talk himself out of a lynch on Day 2, especially if he claims something similar to M4yhem's role as justification. Try looking at Verbose 2 Mafia: Thok has no qualms being on town-lynches as scum whatsoever.
3.) Thok's reasoning

could can from town or scum

. Seriously sit down and think. What do you

think

scum would claim as a role if they got caught hammering a townsperson? They're going to need a

good

reason. Hammering and then saying "I was basically counter-claiming" is the

first

explanation anybody would think of.
4.) This assumes that Thok is telling the

truth

about his role.

Mass-claim is probably in our best interests. We should determine an order soon.

[petroleumjelly]

Edit:

3.) Thok's reasoning

could

can

come from town or scum

...

[LuckayLuck]

Sure, but claiming even/odd night roleblocker when the person we just lynched is even/odd night roleblocker? That's a pretty sexy claim, and the way the lynch went down + the way he claimed just

sounds

like pro-town to me. And if he's pro-town, then I will assume that he is telling the truth about his role.

I mean, I think you have to assume that he's telling the truth about his claim. Because nobody is counter-claiming even-night roleblocker. And it definitely seems like somebody COULD have been an even-night roleblocker given that a role was odd-night roleblocker. So, Thok IS an even-night roleblocker, the question is if he's town/scum, and I lean town

[petroleumjelly]

Luckay, M4yhem was

not

an even/odd-night role-blocker. Try reading his claim again.

Furthermore,

if

that was what M4yhem had claimed, wouldn't that make it

more likely

that M4yhem was telling the truth? I have never seen a game with even/odd-night role-blockers. Assume Thok is telling the truth and is an even-night role-blocker. In that same game, for the first time, somebody claims odd-night role-blocker (extremely unlikely). Since the two roles would complement each other so cleanly (each blocking on different nights), that would only make it more likely that M4yhem was being completely

truthful

, not lying.

Your logic from that position (which is incorrect) does not make sense.

[LuckayLuck]

You win this round, PJ.
(I read the claim incorrectly)

[Kelly Chen]

ChannelDelibird replaces CrashTextDummie.

Thanks!

[ChannelDelibird]

No problem.

Anyway, hi guys. Am currently on page 5 on my first read-through, I'll let you know my thoughts when I've finished.

[Thok]

Luckay: stop being so blind.

1.) Nobody needed to hammer

anybody

, technically speaking. The person with the most votes is lynched in this game. The only thing hammering did in that situation was end discussion.
2.) Thok, as scum, would very well know that he would probably be able to talk himself out of a lynch on Day 2, especially if he claims something similar to M4yhem's role as justification. Try looking at Verbose 2 Mafia: Thok has no qualms being on town-lynches as scum whatsoever.
3.) Thok's reasoning

could can from town or scum

. Seriously sit down and think. What do you

think

scum would claim as a role if they got caught hammering a townsperson? They're going to need a

good

reason. Hammering and then saying "I was basically counter-claiming" is the

first

explanation anybody would think of.
4.) This assumes that Thok is telling the

truth

about his role.

Mass-claim is probably in our best interests. We should determine an order soon.

1. If ending discussion day 1 is a bad thing, then not ending discussion day 2 has to be a good thing. Especially when I could have cut off 2 weeks of discussion day 2 (as opposed to around 2 days of discussion day 1. This is entirely the point of the WIFOM argument people are complaining about. Does anybody really think this town would have been more productive the last two days of day 1 then they were the last two weeks of day 2?

2. Thok, as scum, generally doesn't try to get himself into positions where he is attacked in the first place, especially not on day 1.

3/4. Both are possibilities. Whatever.

Given that everybody believes pablito is protown, and he's already claimed vanilla, perhaps he should choose role order. Alternatively we can use dice function. I have no preference for either.

@M4yhem-the alternative was not "announcing a breadcrumb" or hiding in wait for a trap. The alternatives presented were "Thok claims his target first" or "announcing a breadcrumb". Clearly in the former case I cannot hope to trap somebody. In the latter case, my chance of trapping people is lessened, but it potentially forces all of the scum to be worried about my target and potentially limits there claims.