Micro 649: Normal Idea Mafia (Game Over)

[Leonshade]

Really, two VTs being rolled is less likely. But I'm not going to doubt McMenno's claim just because of that.

2 VTs?

Aristophanes was a VT, McMenno has claimed to be one.

[callforjudgement]

2 VTs?

Aristophanes flipped VT.

That said, it'd be mathematically fallacious to assume that a second VT is less likely just because one's flipped. (That said, VT – and less powerful/protective roles in general – tend to be more common fakeclaims for scum because they're harder to confirm and give less information away. Additionally, many players who are used to more normal games are in the habit of claiming VT as the "default" claim for scum. So a VT claim in a game generated like this still makes me more suspicious of a player than most other claims would, just for different reasons.)

[Sgz13]

Of course, I need to pay more attention.

Stochasticity man. I hate it.

[Leonshade]

The odds of 3 rolls being protective are just incredibly low. Statistically.

There's four protectives (Doc, JK, Bodyguard, Roleblocker) and a JOAT, that's 5/27 or 5/25 chance to get protective. The chance for a town player to get VT is 1/27, and we possibly have two. I don't want to do the math, but I think the odds are higher for three protectives than two VTs.

I mean, someone has to be a blocker of some sorts anyway, Bodyguard is confirmed and I don't doubt Sgz13's doc.

[Leonshade]

@Leonshade: If Sgz is scum, it's with you or 1SVT.

I can understand why Gamma Emerald thought that Sgz was scum; he was blocking Sgz, there was no kill, it seems reasonable. However, a number of unexplained blocks have been claimed; and the fact that I was blocking Sgz repeatedly means that it's

less

likely that Sgz is responsible (because being blocked means that he couldn't block anyone else). Meanwhile, there's a need to explain the no-kill, and most likely either Sgz was performing the kill, or Sgz was the target (likely because scum had somehow determined he was a Weak Doctor and thus a huge threat).

Do you think I should have strong views on Sgz based on dayplay, or only on night actions? If it's based on night actions, then why don't you think 1SVT is scum?

Night actions. The unexplained blocks couldn't have been done by town, otherwise why lie during the massclaim? So yes, either Sgz was the target or scum from your POV.

I don't think 1SVT is scum, I think you're scum. 1SVT is my strongest TR.

[callforjudgement]

Wow, just reread McMenno as a result of this conversation, and the ISO is all sorts of terrible. I don't think he explained any reads all game until D4 (unless I missed something), and then tried to narrow the lynch pool to me/Heartache/Leonshade based on a dubious theory argument (#595 which translates to "I claimed VT therefore I can't possibly have taken any night actions even if I'm scum").

Why does it seem like everyone's ISO is terrible this game? At the moment it's hard for me to know who's scum because there are so many choices.

@McMenno

: Care to explain the reasoning behind some of your reads earlier in the game?

[Sgz13]

I'm back to wanting a McMenno lynch.

And the ISOs are terrible cause of itleprick mainly.

[Sgz13]

VOTE: McMenno

[callforjudgement]

Night actions. The unexplained blocks couldn't have been done by town, otherwise why lie during the massclaim? So yes, either Sgz was the target or scum from your POV.

I don't think 1SVT is scum, I think you're scum. 1SVT is my strongest TR.

There are a few situations involving multiple scum roleblockers/rolestoppers/jailkeepers too, but I agree that Sgz was most likely either the nightkill target or the nightkill performer N2.

However, what I don't get is why you'd think I'd conclude from that that Sgz is scum. There are unclaimed blocks going around. I know I wasn't responsible for that (and in a "my POV" argument, you have to make the assumption). I blocked Sgz. Thus isn't it more likely that the unclaimed blocks came from somebody else?

[Leonshade]

My point about the blocks wasn't that Sgz was the blocker (he couldn't have been if you're telling the truth). My point was that from your POV Sgz HAS to be either the target, or the performer, of the N2 NK. Scum wouldn't block their own kill. Town would claim their role honestly in a massclaim. As such, from your POV, the kill had to be blocked by you.

[callforjudgement]

There are plenty of other possibilities.

For example, say you're scum with Heartache and actually a roleblocker. You block me N2, Sgz's protection on 1SVT goes through and stops the kill. That doesn't seem that implausible to me.

[Sgz13]

Me being the target N2 isn't that unfeasible really. The major scum reads on me didn't come until D3, plus there's the possibility my role was discovered or maybe there was a gut feeling I had a strong PR because of my lesser activity early on.

[Leonshade]

There are plenty of other possibilities.

For example, say you're scum with Heartache and actually a roleblocker. You block me N2, Sgz's protection on 1SVT goes through and stops the kill. That doesn't seem that implausible to me.

Hmm, that's true. I hadn't considered that since I know it's not true, but it is a possibility you have to keep in mind.

Me being the target N2 isn't that unfeasible really. The major scum reads on me didn't come until D3, plus there's the possibility my role was discovered or maybe there was a gut feeling I had a strong PR because of my lesser activity early on.

Also true, scum might also have been afraid of NKing one of me and 1-Shot in case of a protective and decided to shoot you instead.

If CFJ is telling the truth, 1-Shot is not conftown. But if CFJ hasn't blocked Sgz13 both nights, 1-Shot is conftown. The only scenario in which scum!Sgz would claim 1-Shot is conftown is if he knew he was blocked both times and could later backtrack on it. That's not very likely, so I think Sgz is probtown.

[McMenno]

currently on a cfj/heartache scumteam

[Leonshade]

currently on a cfj/heartache scumteam

Willing to join me on the CFJ wagon?

[1 Shot Vanilla Town]

@1SVT: why did you change from thinking Heartache was scum to thinking Heartache was town in #486?

I was baiting the night visit onto heart.
Pushing for heart to be town I would have expected more scum actions there, however as said no one visited.

This is why I wanted people to claim heir roles then claim their actions after.
You catch scum out a lot more that way.

[1 Shot Vanilla Town]

currently on a cfj/heartache scumteam

This.really it should be a 1 v 1 against me and heart anyway right?
Heart claims no result meaning Roleblocker in some way. I am saying that only I visited so either I am confirmed Roleblockerror or heart is lying.

CoJ just seems to be focusing on me as the role blocker meaning that he believes I am flipping scum in this.
Trying to save the buddy and all.

[Heartache]

What about ascetic?

[1 Shot Vanilla Town]

I guess that's plausible. I'm not at my PC to look but did anyone ever target Leo?

[Heartache]

Apart from me no one claims to have. His claim is a little convenient with no actual results, but I townread his effort here now.

[Leonshade]

I'm still not sure why Heartache would lie about his night action result on me. Trying to cast doubt on me? I guess I just answered my own question.

[Leonshade]

And yes, nothing about my role is verifiable at this moment.

[Leonshade]

I'm willing to no lynch if we can figure out a plan to verify mine/someone else's role or alignment that way. Though with the unexplained action failures, and the possibility of losing the game if Sgz13 docs scum, means we'd have to come up with a good plan.

[Heartache]

VT is 1/27, or 3%

7*3% = 21% for one vt, which is okay. But another vt is 6*3% = 18% * 21% = back to 4%

That plus he voted me willynilly in mylo when even when his own conclusion in 596 should have him voting cfj.

ISO basically "x is town" "y is town" which makes almost no sense from a vt claim either...

VOTE: Mcmenno

[Heartache]

Actually, mcmenno/gamma was my original guess anyways.