Mini 607 - Cop Central [GAME OVER!]

[ZeekLTK]

vote: Skruffs

for being skruffs.

I'm pretty sure SensFan is not going to reveal what kind of cop was killed (see how he didn't reveal Jenter's) so Skruff's point about the Sane Cop is useless because we won't know if a sane cop died or not.

[ZeekLTK]

Yeah I looked on that wiki link and it says:

"After a player dies, only role (Mafia, Cop, or Retired Cop) is revealed; sanities are not revealed."

[ZeekLTK]

Way to immediately hope that a sane cop was killed.

And yes, in time, we WILL know if a sane cop was killed, through logic and deduction. That's all this game it. Thank you though for immediately trying to vote me while agreeing with me.

My vote had nothing to do with whether I agreed with you or not. It was just my first random vote to start the game, and since you're here obviously I'm going to vote for you (for 533).

But to me, what you said sounded like you were worried that if someone died and came up as "the sane cop" then we wouldn't know what their investigation results were if they didn't claim them. But I was just saying we won't know that they were the sane cop because the mod won't reveal what their sanity was when they die.

[ZeekLTK]

Also, I investigated TDC.

[ZeekLTK]

unvote; vote Fark

FoS: Tekk

Anyone else find is suspicious that Fark argues about releasing who he investigated, and then he claims he investigated the guy that's already dead... and before anything even happened Tekk already claimed that he got an innocent on Fark (why so eager to make Fark appear "innocent"?)

[ZeekLTK]

Tekk -> Fark | Innocent
Skruffs -> Aimless | Guilty
Aimless -> clammy | Guilty
drool -> Skruffs | Innocent
clammy -> Tekk | Guilty
Korlash -> Tekk | Innocent
TDC -> Zeek | Innocent
Raging Rabbit -> Fark | Innocent
ZeekLTK -> TDC | Innocent
Farkshinsoup -> Jenter | Guilty
queen_of_spades -> ??? | ???

[ZeekLTK]

Well, that depends on what you think gains us more - either having more basis for comparing (remember that scum will try to mislead us), or having some of the players know whether their results were true or false and thus figure out their sanity faster. Because this is a miny, I tend to lean towards the sencond option, but this definitely warrants more thought.

If we are going to lynch based on that, would it be better to lynch Tekk because we have one person with an innocent and another with a guilty on him?

[ZeekLTK]

I don't see how that's a good idea because:

a) Scum will most likely manipulate the "list" to their benefit (oh hey, everyone ends up investigating other townies, how convenient!)

b) We aren't necessarily revealing our investigations tomorrow

c) If the scum know who is investigating who before the night, they will be able to kill someone that might have a useful investigation target

....

[ZeekLTK]

unvote; vote Skruffs

There is nothing positive that we can gain, for the town, from lynching QoS IMO.

-No one investigated her so it doesn't help anyone narrow down their sanity.
-QoS hasn't posted here, but she also hasn't posted anywhere else on the site. In her profile it says her last post on the whole site was in this game. Clearly she just hasn't been online...

Skruffs is pushing us to lynch a player that won't help the town in any way... nice try scum.

Also, possibly influencing my vote here, I want to note that the two games I've been in with him, I've seen Skruffs try to pull this both times (try to get the town to do some ridiculous plan and lynch someone that in no way benefits the town). Both times he was anti-town.

In the one I was alive in (533), he was telling us to lynch the most pro-town player in the game (who turned out to be the doctor) and telling us if that guy didn't come up scum, after we'd be in LyLo the next day, we could lynch him. In the other game that I had already been killed in (random mafia 3), he was trying to get the town to lynch another clearly pro-town player and was trying to claim that guy was a cult recruiter when there was no evidence of a cult (and Skruffs was actually the cult recruiter). If they hadn't lynched Skruffs they would have lost.

Now I'm not saying QoS is "clearly pro-town", but Skruffs, as scum, would know QoS is pro-town AND that lynching QoS now would not benefit the town at all... This is turning into the same thing... "hey let's do [Skruff's plan], it's not going to help the town at all, and I don't really have any good reasons for it (other than it'll help Skruffs, as anti-town, win) but let's do it!"

I mean, look at his last post:

This is absolutely a horrible idea. We have the capability of four investigative results a night that are worth considering. The more the results are spread out, the more likely, later on in the game, that the results will incriminate or clear a player. Also, mafia can kill that player, effectively eliminating the amount of results that can actually be used to lynch someone to 0.

This is absolutely false. If we all target the same person, the worst thing the scum could do (for themselves) is to kill that person so that we enter Day 2 having narrowed down our possible sanities to 2 (possibly one based on Day 1 investigations).

For example, let's say we lynch Skruffs today (as he is the scummiest) and then the mafia kills someone we all targeted.

Based on that, both Fark (who has a result on Jenter) and drool (who has a result on Skruffs) would most likely be able to determine their own sanities because they will have 2 confirmed results (the person who had already died, and the person who everyone investigated). If either of them get a different result then they've already gotten, it proves they are one of the sanes (insane or sane), and they'll be able to know which one because they have proof. Then they can be useful in finding scum (and scum won't know if they figured out they were useful or not useful). Also, some other players will be able to figure out whether or not they are useful/not useful (and just won't be able to narrow down if they are sane/insane) based on if they get a different result during the investigation.

For example, I got an innocent on TDC, so if I investigate (whoever) on Night 1 and get a guilty then I know I am useful, I just need to figure out which person is scum.

So Skruffs is misleading us... trying to make us think that a good idea for the town won't work if the scum do something, but the reason for it "not working" (scum killing the target) is a reason why it would work even better, because then we wouldn't have to waste a lynch on Day 2 to get the guy's alignment! Basically, there really is nothing the scum can do to thwart us from gaining information from all investigating the same person, if that is what we choose to do.

But now that the scum know it's not a good idea to kill the target, let's assume we do have to lynch the target on Day 2. Even if we still haven't hit scum on the first two days (which I think will be unlikely given some of the arguments some players have made that are fairly anti-town when you really look at them (*cough* Skruffs *cough*)), by Night 3 a majority of people will be able to figure out their usefulness/sanities since, to begin Day 3, there will be 5 players dead (Jenter, day 1 lynch, night 1 kill, Day 2 lynch, night 2 kill). As Aimless said, we may be in LyLo, but with that many results, and that many players who most likely find out their usefulness/sanities, we should be okay and be able to lynch a scum (if we haven't already, which I kinda doubt we will fail to the way this game is going).

All things being equal: You are trying to avoid lynching someone who has not claimed their target or results to try and lynch one of two people who have both supplied their results and targets and are positing valid arguments.

Even if we, for whatever crazy reason, decided to lynch QoS... obviously we would wait until she came back and claimed... or until she was replaced and the replacement claimed. Well, not you apparently. You want us to lynch her ASAP so that she can't claim and then we get zero information from her instead of at least a little... Also I notice you're really trying to avoid us lynching Tekk or Fark...

We can not do anything to determine who's results are good vs wrong vs broken until we have at least two results. Waiting one day might clear BOTH Tekk and Fark. It is better to lynch someone with no results on them because there is no loss of information AND she's likely sucm anyways.

Again, you are awfully defensive of both Tekk and Fark considering how gun-ho you are about killing QoS... and again, it is NOT better to lynch someone with no results on them because that means no one gains any information from the lynch. If we lynch you, drool learns something. If we lynch me, TDC learns something. If we lynch Tekk or Fark then TWO players learn something. If we lynch QoS... no one learns anything.

So I'm not sure if you're being defensive of them just because you don't want the town to get information from them, or if it's because you're scumbuddies with one or both of them...

-----------

But, aside from Skruffs being so scummy...

If we decide to lynch Tekk or Fark because of the information it'll provide a lot of information, especially if we decide to use Rabbit's idea and all investigate the same player.

I think Tekk would be a better lynch because of the fact that two people have two different results on him.

By lynching him, and allowing those two (clammy and Korlash) to investigate someone else tonight (especially if it's someone we plan on lynching tomorrow), there is a good chance that they can figure out their usefulness (if they get a different result than they got on Tekk) and their sanity (they'll know whether they were right or wrong about Tekk).

And then, I know I voted Skruffs at the top of this post, and after writing this I'm more convinced he's scum than when I started... but I've changed my mind. We should lynch Tekk today to get the most information possible for the town and then we should investigate Skruffs because that ensures that we lynch him tomorrow (since he's most likely scum). As far as I'm aware, lynching scum Skruffs tomorrow vs today is not going to make that big of a difference (he'll have one more night to talk with his buddies, but that's about it), so...

unvote; vote: Tekk

And request: mass investigation Skruffs tonight to help determine everyone's usefulness/sanity.

Does that make sense? Does anyone agree with me?

[ZeekLTK]

You are being obtuse.

The point of this is that if everyone has investigated someone of known alignment, then we can distinguish between the sane and the insane. This is important, because it helps prevents mislynches later.

However, it does not yet distinguish between the useful and useless cops. The only way to distinguish between useful and useless is a useful cop will get different results for scum and town. Thus, the mass investigation doesn't help scum, because it doesn't tell them who is useful.

However, when any given cop later determines his usefulness, we are ahead, because that cop then immediately knows his sanity, and thus which of the players he investigated is indeed scum. In this instance, the town discovers the useful cop at exactly the same moment as the scum do, and at the same time discover a scum. 1-1 trades are good for the town.

This is all correct.

Of course, I'm pretty sure that you know all of this already, and are only arguing against it in an attempt to confuse the town.

This was my whole point about him earlier.

And this is why we should all investigate Skruffs as the "mass investigation".

[ZeekLTK]

Also, this is why we should lynch Tekk:

The best way to determine usefulness/sanities is to lynch a player that was investigated by the most people. In this case, we have two choices:

We can lynch Fark (was investigated by Tekk and RR) or Tekk (was investigated by clammy and Korlash).

All things being equal, it wouldn't matter which one we lynch because either way a total of TWO people will get a result they can use out of it.

However, remember that Fark investigated Jenter. So, that gives us one extra person who has a proven result they can compare against, if we leave him alive.

Basically, if we lynch Fark, only Tekk and RR will have results they can use on Day 2 to figure out their usefulness: if they get a guilty on anyone they will prove they are useful and be able to figure out their sanity:
---If Fark is scum, the person they investigated is town.
---If Fark is town, the person they investigated is scum.

However, if we lynch Tekk, then clammy, Korlash, and Fark will have results they can use on Day 2 to figure out their usefulness:
---Jenter was town, so if Fark gets an innocent he's useful and has caught scum.
---If Tekk is scum, a guilty by Korlash will prove he is useful and he will have caught scum - or an innocent by clammy will prove he is useful and he will prove someone is town.
-If Tekk is town, a guilty by Korlash will prove he is useful and he will prove someone is town - or an innocent by clammy will prove he is useful and he will have caught scum.

This is, of course, assuming all players that we want to "figure out their usefulness" are town, which I realize is a stretch, especially considering Tekk and Fark are involved...

[ZeekLTK]

Ah I didn't see QoS's post.

So now lynching Aimless is an option - for information - but since the two players who "investigated" Aimless were Skruffs and QoS I'm gonna go ahead and say it's probably not a good idea.

----

And basically, in summary, what I think we should do:

-We should lynch Tekk today (so Fark, clammy, and Korlash can try to determine their usefulness with Night 1 investigations)

-Everyone investigate Skruffs tonight (except drool, he already investigated Skruffs)

-Lynch Skruffs tomorrow to confirm numerous player's usefulness

-Catch the rest of the scum on Night 2 thanks to all of the useful cops knowing they are useful

[ZeekLTK]

Focussing hte game on confirming sanities and not about h unting scum is going to be useless when everyone knows their sanities and are outnumbered by scum.

So how can you hunt scum if you don't know your sanity? And it won't take that long to narrow down sanities if we are smart about it and follow a good plan (which you are trying to prevent us from doing).

You say "Attack", I say "Logically Refute". I would much rather have all four sane/insane cops targetting different players and CATCH SCUM then to waste two lynches and an entire nights' worth of iinvestigations on 2 players.

*You* would much rather have all four useful cops target different players... so that the odds of them actually determining their sanity is low.

Since the only way to see if you got a correct result is if the person you targeted gets killed, of course it would be nice for scum to have the cops investigate all over the place, that way the chances of the person they investigated actually being killed (especially if it's scum, because they won't be night killed) is very low, and therefore the chances of figuring out their usefulness/sanity is also very low with this 'plan' of yours.

I just want to note that now, RR wants us to not only remove all useful investigations (IE investigations on scum), but also to NOT TELL what the investigations are until day three, when we've lost two ADDITIONAL players (and their investigations), which only helps mafia fake claim more.

No, actually it's the opposite. If everyone claims their results, wouldn't the scum be able to figure out sanities easier than us? Especially if you got your way and we all investigated random people tonight?

I mean, let's say I'm a useful cop and I investigate a random player tonight. Let's say I get a guilty and I say it in the thread.

Then, I have an innocent on TDC and a guilty on [whoever] and I have no idea which of them is scum - but the scum know which of them is scum. So, unless we lynch one of my two targets tomorrow (and that's unlikely, since there will probably be at least another player in the same situation, if not more), then I won't know if I'm sane/insane, but the scum will. Then, the scum will kill me and be able to pretend they are my sanity, because no one else knows it except them.

However, if I get the two results and I keep it to myself, the scum won't know I have two results, they might not even suspect that I got a guilty and proved to be useful, and probably won't kill me. Then I can use my night 3 investigation to figure it out myself (if I get 2 innocents, I'm probably sane, if I get 2 guilties I'm probably insane [since odds are higher of hitting townies]) and then I can come out in the thread and explain my case and my results on Day 3 and nail a scum.

Since Aimless is dead tonight, we might want to lynch Clammy to narrow down HIS sanity to one or two possibilities. If he was a sane cop, clammy may very well be scum.

lol

Aimless won't have any further investigation results, so no matter what clammy's alignment is we won't know anything. If clammy is scum then Aimless was either sane or paranoid. If clammy is town then Aimless was either insane or naive.

There is nothing to possibly learn from this.

I suspect you're just trying to come up with yet *another* horrible plan to get us on the wrong track and lynch the wrong person...

I mean, basically...

-You want us to investigate different people so that very few of us can figure out anything from the results

-You want us to lynch a player that will give us no information on Day 1 (QoS - who no one investigated)

-You want us to lynch a player that will give us no information on Day 2 (clammy - because most likely everyone will investigate Aimless, so no one other than Aimless [who you've already pronounced as tonight's NK] will have investigated clammy at that point)

lol

[ZeekLTK]

Near the end... EBWOP:

-You want us to lynch a player that will give us no information on Day 1 (QoS

or RR

- who no one investigated)

*edit in bold

[ZeekLTK]

I love how you put me on your 'scumlist' just because I point out all the flaws in your plan(s).

I especially like how you conveniently ignored my main point about your actions:

I suspect you're just trying to come up with yet *another* horrible plan to get us on the wrong track and lynch the wrong person...

I mean, basically...

-You want us to investigate different people so that very few of us can figure out anything from the results

-You want us to lynch a player that will give us no information on Day 1 (QoS or RR - who no one investigated)

-You want us to lynch a player that will give us no information on Day 2 (clammy - because most likely everyone will investigate Aimless, so no one other than Aimless [who you've already pronounced as tonight's NK] will have investigated clammy at that point)

This is exactly what you are trying to get us to do, you didn't even bother to deny it - you just ignored it hoping others would forget about it and just tried to cast me as scummy (OMGUS) like you did to RR earlier.

And about the 'scum hunting', yes obviously it's not impossible to find scum without cops, but when that's all we have, don't you think it's easier if we use them to find scum rather than just completely ignore the fact that everyone ('cept for scum) is a cop?

But anyways, the two aren't mutually exclusive like some seem to think. The thought that we can't scum hunt if we try to determine our sanities (or at least that is what you want the town to think) is incorrect. We can scum hunt, and we are (that is why everyone is talking about possibly lynching Fark), but that doesn't mean we also can't work towards figuring out sanities and thus making it easier on ourselves to catch scum.

If four sane/insane cops target four people night one, and four different people night two, that is 8 people out of 8 or 9, investigated. Wow. Everyone is investigated.

Yeah everyone investigated, and the results spread around so much that no one knows what their sanity is, so the results are completely useless. Wow, that is real helpful isn't it...

And all I said is that we shouldn't massclaim tomorrow to allow scum to determine everyone's sanities when really only a handful of people will be able to determine their own. Tomorrow is the day we should 'scum hunt' and lynch the scummiest person. Today/tonight we should figure out sanities so that useful cops can investigate the scummiest people and determine which ones are actually scum or not.

This is why Tekk is the best lynch today, because it provides the most information (3 people leave the day having a confirmed result: clammy, Korlash, and Fark). If we lynch Aimless (which would be retarded) or Fark it's only 2, and if we lynch anyone else it's 1 or less.

[ZeekLTK]

b) If however someone claims two different investigations where both investigated players are in said group (or neither), then we (and scum) know he's useful, but not what for.

See, that is what I am worried about.

Using me as an example, let's say for some reason I don't investigate Aimless and I investigate a random player that is still alive tomorrow.

Let's say I get a guilty.

If I say it in the thread, then I have an innocent on TDC and a guilty on [whoever]. No one except the scum knows which of those players are scum. Unless we lynch one of them tomorrow, then I will be killed at night and no one will know which one is scum... and the scum will probably try to push to get the one who isn't scum lynched...

It's not a good situation.

However, if everyone does investigate Aimless then that is not as likely to happen. But, Skruffs is trying to tell us we should all randomly investigate players that most likely won't be dead tomorrow, so there is a higher chance of b) happening rather than a) if we listen to him.

[ZeekLTK]

Since you weren't investigated last night, this conveniently keeps you from being investigated again on N1. And you say "him", as if you already had someone in mind. Who were you thinking about at that point? (Not QoS, obviously)

We choose the second scummiest player (after the one who gets lynched), and everyone investigates him tonight (excepct for those who already did last night, obviously).Then tommorow, we lynch him.

I'm pretty sure "him" refers to "the second scummiest player". Most players on this site are male so I don't think there is any hidden meaning to using the word "him".

--

And I don't think he is trying to devise a plan that "prevents him from being investigated", I think he is devising a plan that allows ALL pro-town players to figure out our sanity...

Once we figure out sanities we can catch scum. I don't know why that is a hard concept for you and Skruffs to grasp... unless it's because you are scum and you've decided you will fight/argue to the bitter end to prevent us from doing it...

[ZeekLTK]

However, I disagree with who to investigate, because obviously we should investigate Aimless, as we already know his alignment - and the scum will probably kill him because of that.

If we investigate someone else then we have to lynch that person tomorrow for the investigation to be useful.

[ZeekLTK]

I know you're not asking me, but I still think it's better, in the long run, to lynch Tekk today:

a) The maximum number of players possible (3) get a confirmed result from their investigation from Night 0.

b) Everyone (who hasn't already) can investigate Aimless tonight and get a confirmed result (people who have can investigate scummy players like Fark/Skruffs) ... now, entering Day 2, everyone in the game will have at least 1 confirmed result, and 3 people will have 2.

c) We can then lynch a scummy player on Day 2 - and most likely we'll even have proof that someone is scum (due to investigation results).

d) Night 2 - useful cops (who have figured out their sanities due to results from Night 0 and Night 1) can investigate scummy players that are still alive and we can catch scum for sure (or clear scummy players as town to narrow down the pool of suspects).

[ZeekLTK]

I've finally managed to find time to read through the mountain of essays that is this game. Honestly, I took very little hard information out of the conversation that's been going on; a lot of it seems like fluff to me. Honestly, of Fark, Zeek, Skruffs, and RR I wouldn't be surprised if one or even two of them are scum.

One comment that really stuck out to me is this tidbit:

So how can you hunt scum if you don't know your sanity? And it won't take that long to narrow down sanities if we are smart about it and follow a good plan (which you are trying to prevent us from doing).

How can we hunt scum if we don't know our sanity?

It seems like you're so hung up on the idea of investigations that you've forgotten that we're even town.

I think we should stop discussing Game Theory and start playing mafia. It's already been said that these discussions about statistics are alienating several players and driving them to inactivity. This provides for easy claims against people for lurking.

You are sounding like Skruffs here.

First, taking one line that I said and blowing it out of proportion.

Second, trying to get us to do something for no logical reason.

This is what I meant: We have all cops. Yes they have different sanities, but they are still all cops. Therefore, it's stupid to IGNORE that we have so many cops and just try to play like regular mafia (as the people attacking me are suggesting we do). This is not something that would help the town. It's hard to find scum in a normal game, often things people say get taken the wrong way (see my comment you're attacking as evidence of this) and the wrong people end up getting lynched. Why would we play like that when we have been given an EASY way to find scum (FOUR useful cops)... why would we NOT want to use that? To use that though, we have to lynch some people for information to figure out who the useful cops are. It's just how it goes. Maybe that means we don't do as much "scum hunting" today (which is what I'm being attacked for suggesting I guess), but it means that it's basically impossible for the town to lose in the long run; because even if someone isn't seen as scummy at all, someone will have investigated them and be able to prove them as scum if they really are. What better way is there to catch scum than that?

And just because some people are *claiming* they don't understand or whatnot (whose to say those people aren't scum who are, again, just trying to detract us from using it?) does not mean it's a good idea and that we should stop. I honestly don't see how the scum can win once we have everyone's usefulness/sanities figured out, and I think the *most anti-town* thing anyone can do in this game is try to get us to NOT figure them out (as Skruffs was, and now you are)... so thanks, now we can lynch you for information AND because you're anti-town.

[ZeekLTK]

I think we should stop discussing Game Theory and start playing mafia. It's already been said that these discussions about statistics are alienating several players and driving them to inactivity. This provides for easy claims against people for lurking.

Also this is an appeal to emotion (or something like that) because it's not true. I'm pretty sure we all knew the set up coming in, so obviously this was going to be a game of stats and logic. If that's not someone's forte, why did they sign up?

[ZeekLTK]

Zeek - While I obviously support your logic, and believe you have the town's best interests at heart, I think you're taking this too far. To dissregard our 4 useful cops is stupid, I agree, but to treat this game as a pure "police logic puzzle" and dissregard regular scumhunting isn't much smarter. Our plan isn't infallible, no plan is, and I believe we shouldn't lynch Tekk just for being the best "sanity" lynch, since the benefits of this are outweighed by the benefits of lynching someone scummier - the slight gain of sanity infomation isn't worth sacrificing a portion of our chances to lynch correctly.

Well honestly, 8 cops vs 3 mafia... that's what I thought it was going to be: a "police logic puzzle". I figure all we need to do is determine sanities and then we can easily win by piecing together the investigations and creating situations where we can easily verify the validity of those investigations.

O RLY?

What? You signed up for a game called "Cop Central" and didn't know that it was going to be 8 cops vs 3 mafia? Seriously?

[ZeekLTK]

It's 3 scum vs. 4 unsure cops and 4 more townies that only serve to confuse the useful cops further, actually. And while determining sanities is a huge help, it won't necassarily win us the game by itself - look at Fark's example from post 234, and there are plenty of other possibilities for things to get screwed up - remember scum can fakeclaim and confuse us. We absolutely should'nt let this game turn into a logic puzzle and ignore regular scumhunting, in my opinion.

I was just clarifying myself, I wasn't arguing with you (it seems like your response is an argument back). But one more thing to point out - I think you are underestimating those "4 more townies that only serve to confuse the useful cops". I think, instead, they serve to help fit the pieces of the puzzle together.

If we can figure out that someone is naive or paranoid then that makes it harder for the scum to claim fake results. For example, if we have three people that we've narrowed down as being naive (or paranoid) then it's obvious one of those people is scum, and then other players can investigate them to find out which one...

[ZeekLTK]

charter's post is right up there with Skruffs' in terms of trying to derail the town and put us in the wrong direction...

"I don't want us to investigate Aimless" - lol

[ZeekLTK]

Also:

Example, we can't ignore the possibility that Jenter, Day 1 lynch, and N1 kill are 3 of the 4 useful cops.

Now he's using misinformation to try to scare the town into doing what he suggests. Even if Jenter was useful, that has no impact on the game because the Retired Cop took his usefulness/sanity.

And going back to the "let's not investigate Aimless" - since Aimless claimed, it means he is going to get killed on Night 1, so the only reason you (

QoS

charter) don't want us to investigate him is so as few people as possible benefit from his claim/death.

[ZeekLTK]

AND - this whole "let's claim in order"

combine that with "let's not investigate Aimless" and that means the scum will pretty much be able to figure out everyone's sanities on Day 2 while hardly anyone in the town will be able to figure out their own.

Yeah, great way to come into the game buddy. Could you be any MORE anti-town?

[ZeekLTK]

Oh hey, did you guys notice that both QoS and Skruffs claimed to have investigated Aimless on Night 1? Hmmm...

[ZeekLTK]

You're right about the retired cop taking his sanity. I'd forgotten about that.

A reason for everyone not to investigate Aimless.

Say you investigated someone you now think is town first night, and they actually are. You investigate Aimless. Now what? You have two of the same reads. That's a big help.

Whereas if you investigated someone you now think is scum last night, and they are, and you investigate Aimless, you MIGHT get something useful. Plus, it won't help us catch scum, unless we get some people to confirm sanities. You're trying to make it appear as if tomorrow, everyone will know their sanity. I'd be suprised if more than one REAL townie knew they were useful.

Everyone investigating Aimless isn't the right idea (in my opinion). Having some people investigate him, yes, but everyone, no.

Bolded: key word is "think" - that's the whole beauty of using the investigations to find scum - you can prove that someone is scum even if you don't *think* they are scum.

What happens if you investigate someone you think is town on Night 1 and then investigate Aimless? You *might* get a different result, and then all of a sudden the person you thought was town is suddenly a caught scum.

And it is a big help, because then you KNOW that the person you previously investigated IS the same alignment as Aimless AND when you investigate someone scummy on the next night you will KNOW they are scum if you get a different result.

Instead, let's say you investigate someone you *think* is scummy and get a different result. You don't *know* if the person you investigated is scum, or if the person from the first night is. That's not much of a help - and it could cost the town the game - especially if you're *wrong*.

[ZeekLTK]

If you really mean that you oppose a claim order (provided by Aimless) then I join charter in asking what the problem with that is.

You conveniently left out the rest of the sentance (I put a space so there would be emphasis on the main point (which was the second part).

AND - this whole "let's claim in order"

combine that with "let's not investigate Aimless" and that means the scum will pretty much be able to figure out everyone's sanities on Day 2 while hardly anyone in the town will be able to figure out their own.

[ZeekLTK]

The whole thing with scum fake claiming, I see only two scenarios:

1) Scum claim the same result as they got the first night so that their result is not of much use and no one can make anything out of it.

For example, QoS claimed a guilty on Aimless, if QoS is scum then he might just pick another townie and claim guilty on them too tomorrow.

2) Scum claim a different result as they got the first night in hopes that we lynch one of their two targets.

For example, QoS claimed a guilty on Aimless, if QoS is scum maybe tomorrow he claims an innocent on [someone] to try to get them mislynched.

The second is easy to catch (if we do believe them and lynch, then we will know they lied and lynch them the next day). The first doesn't really hurt the town at all so even though they are lying it won't matter.

---

The only way scum fake claiming can hurt us is if someone like TDC (just an example) is scum and they come out on Day 2 with two different investigations against two different players who are still alive.

TDC investigated me and got an innocent. If he is scum, tomorrow he could come out and say "oh, I got a guilty on [Player A]".

Now we are in trouble, because if we believe TDC to be town we will lynch either me or Player A - but the truth is BOTH me and Player A are townies. And, after we lynch incorrectly, TDC can just claim to be sane (if we lynch me) or insane (if we lynch Player A). Then tomorrow one of his scum buddies can come out with further "proof" against me/Player A (whichever is still alive) and get another mislynch, possibly winning if we don't lynch scum on Day 1.

This scenario (two different results against two people who are both alive) is the most dangerous to the town and it can be AVOIDED if we REQUIRE everyone to investigate Aimless - because then everyone will have at least one result against a proven target. So, continuing with this example, if TDC is scum and tries to get me mislynched by claiming a guilty on Aimless (instead of a random "Player A") - when I come up town everyone will know TDC is scum and lynch him.

The most dangerous thing tomorrow, IMO, is players who have multiple unconfirmed results. Therefore, everyone should have at least ONE result that can be checked against - either from Night 0's kill, Day 1's lynch, or Aimless - who will likely be killed on Night 1.

People who are advocating that everyone just "investigate whoever" are trying to put us in a situation where we can have players with 2 different results against 2 alive players - and that only benefits the scum IMO.

[ZeekLTK]

I don't understand how the rest of your post is relevant.
Regardless of what else we do, the information that scum gain is exactly the same no matter in what order we claim. The information that we gain, however, can be maximised if we force scum to claim first.

The point was: he wants us to claim results AND randomly investigate people - this won't be helpful at all because most likely players who claim to have 2 different results will have the results against alive players (since they didn't investigate Aimless, which charter said he "doesn't advocate") - so only the scum will know which results are correct and the town won't.

[ZeekLTK]

You're still hung up on how can we catch scum if we don't know our sanities aren't you? If we're playing with a bunch of people that can't win games unless the cop spells it out for them, then there's no chance we're going to win this game. I don't know about you, but I've found scum without being told by the mod they're scum. I don't see why we can't continue doing that here, AND use our investigations to help us.

Notice how he just pretends like myself or TDC never asked him what's wrong with a claim order. For the third time Zeek, why are you so opposed to claiming in an order that Aimless picks?

You're just doing what others did earlier about the "scum hunting" quote. I never said I was against the claim order and it was just PART of what the post was about (explained in 287).

Yes, we can scum hunt, but we should also be aware that we can catch scum simply by investigating them. I don't see how that is so hard to grasp - we have a mechanism that allows people to KNOW if someone is scum rather than trying to figure it out, am I the only one who thinks "hey we should probably use it"?

Yes, we all have caught scum on our own without using cops in other games - but we have all also lynched the WRONG players in other games because we incorrectly thought they were scum. The way this game is set up, once we can figure out our sanities we can avoid the "being wrong about our lynches" part and just lynch scum and win. Hey what a concept...

[ZeekLTK]

Regarding the Player A gets a guilty on B and an innocent on C problem:

Obviously, either A, B, or C is scum in this case. If one of the three is dead, it's 50/50 regarding the other two, which should be good odds for the town as long as we are not yet in LYLO.

In the case where all three are alive, the odds are not nearly so good.

Enough so that I would recommend the town treat that investigation as non-existent until one of the players alignments is known. (Well, really, I would say that we should try to avoid this situation - in fact, wanting to avoid it is the entire reason I offered myself up as a sacrificial lamb.)

This is all I was trying to say - and this can be completely avoided by not having people just investigate random people (which some people have suggested that we do...). I guess my way of saying that was too wordy or something.

For the FOURTH time Zeek, what problem do you have with claiming first?

For the "fourth time" where did I say I had a problem with it?

[ZeekLTK]

I was never "really defensive" - questions were asked of me (by you and TDC) so I answered them...

But yet you're still attacking me for things I either a) already explained my logic behind and/or b) never said (like this whole "opposed to claim" thing).

Basically your whole "case" on me is taking 2 things I said out of context and continually attacking me based on that.

-The "scum hunting" thing
-The "claim" thing

And even though I explained myself on both, you still won't accept my answer and keep blindly attacking me for no apparent reason. I don't even think you are reading my responses anyways based on your last post...

You got really defensive when it was brought up which would suggest you don't want to do it. And you never answered before now. I don't believe your answer at all, I don't know how you got so far down on Aimless's list...

"And I never answered before now" - oh really?

Uhm, you brought it up in #278, I answered in #283 and then TDC required further explanation so I FULLY explained it in #287. Then you STILL kept attacking me for it, several posts after the fact. You're making this big deal out of nothing...

The only thing I did was point out how you wanted us to investigate random people AND claim - and I already explained why that is such a bad idea.

But instead of focusing on the point of the post (how your plan was anti-town), you just focus on a stupid little detail (that isn't even relevant): where I left a space in the middle of the sentence (I thought I was helping give emphasis to the important [second] part, but apparently it only caused confusion). So if that's is how you "scum hunt" (take small insignificant parts of posts and take them out of context and attack the person based on it) then that only supports my reason as to why I want to figure out sanities as quickly as possible - because people like you will botch up the "scum hunting" aspect and attack the wrong people. No one can botch up investigation results. If you figure out you are sane, and you get a guilty, you found scum - ta da. It's easy and simple.

And also

you never explained yourself

- why do you want us to investigate random people and then claim the results (which I already explained will only benefit the scum)? That was the point I was making with my post that you keep attacking - but all you've done is, instead of answer it, take what I said out of context and try to attack me with it. Seems to me like you're just grasping at straws to attack me to try to divert attention from yourself and your horrible anti-town plans.

[ZeekLTK]

I think charter (aka QoS) wants to lynch me because he realizes I have a good plan to out the scum and since he can't night kill me (scum are basically forced to kill Aimless tonight) he is going to try to push for my lynch - even though he has absolutely nothing to attack me with (other than his made up stuff he keeps spouting)...

Okay, you still want to argue about this? Seriously? Okay.

This is what I said (you can actually go back and read it):

AND - this whole "let's claim in order"

combine that with "let's not investigate Aimless" and that means the scum will pretty much be able to figure out everyone's sanities on Day 2 while hardly anyone in the town will be able to figure out their own.

Yeah, great way to come into the game buddy. Could you be any MORE anti-town?

Read the whole quote. The WHOLE quote. No, don't only read the first line and stop, keep reading. Then read it again. Then probably again just to make sure that you comprehend what I am saying here and what I am ACTUALLY against (your anti-town plan), because it's quite obvious that, even after I already explained it (you'll see further below) that you still don't get it.

You said something else in #277 and then in #278 you said:

What problem do you have with claiming before others? Surely you shouldn't have one since you're God's gift to the town. If you have nothing to hide, then you should have no problem with an ordered claim.

See, here you are ignoring what the post was actually about (how your plan was horrible for the town) and you are taking what I said out of context (because apparently you only read the first line) and attacking me based on that. But that's okay, because your response prompted TDC to ask the same question, so I addressed BOTH of you (even though I only quoted HIM) below.

After reading #277, the part about investigating Aimless reminded me that you and Skruffs (the two scummiest players in the game) both claimed to have investigated Aimless and you both claimed the wrong result (guilty). I found that odd so I pointed it out in #279 (TDC questioned "And..." and I realized I never explained that... but doesn't that seem a bit strange that two players, who happen to be pushing anti-town plans upon us, both claimed to have investigated a townie [yes, they didn't know Aimless was the retired cop, but they would have obviously known Aimless was town none-the-less], and they both somehow have the WRONG result? That seems a bit fishy to me...)

Then I went to work on responding to your #277. In the meantime TDC said "And..." (addressed above) and then in #281:

If you really mean that you oppose a claim order (provided by Aimless) then I join charter in asking what the problem with that is.
Ensuring that the most scummy players claim first is a good way to make scum claim impossible results.

So I responded to your #277 in #282... and then responded to your #278 AND TDC's #281 in #283 with:

If you really mean that you oppose a claim order (provided by Aimless) then I join charter in asking what the problem with that is.

You conveniently left out the rest of the sentance (I put a space so there would be emphasis on the main point (which was the second part).

AND - this whole "let's claim in order"

combine that with "let's not investigate Aimless" and that means the scum will pretty much be able to figure out everyone's sanities on Day 2 while hardly anyone in the town will be able to figure out their own.

I figured here that I made it OBVIOUS that I in no way "opposed" claiming in order...

TDC had a follow up question in #284, I answered it in #285 by explaining what, IMO, are the only scenarios for claiming (scum fake claiming) - they can either claim the same result or a different result - there's not that many options.

And I expanded on what the POINT was, which was your plan wanted to help scum be able to claim two different results on two people who are both alive so then NO ONE (other than scum) would know which of the 3 people involved (the person claiming the results or one of the two people they "investigated") was scum.

You completely ignore this point and then have a 2 and a half page crusade against me for absolutely NO REASON AT ALL - attacking me for something that I DIDN'T EVEN SAY.

-------------------------------

And your further explanation above (on this page - #325) is still not satisfactory. You claim you want to be able to catch scum fake claiming - but I fail to see how we will be able to do that with your plan.

Because, as RR already pointed out - with your plan we could have someone say they have two different results on two different people... and then we have a situation where 1 of 3 people could be scum and we have no idea which one it could be.

This is what I wanted you to further explain, how we can handle this problem. You still didn't explain it though, and even when RR brought it up (the "2-1 comment") you still dodged it and didn't explain how it would help the town.

I have explained how mine will help the town: if everyone is expected to have investigated someone, they can't lie about their results as easily. So we tell the scum to investigate Aimless - HOW DOES THIS HURT THE TOWN? They already know EVERYONE'S ALIGNMENTS. They already KNOW the alignment of the person they claimed to have investigated from Night 0 - so tomorrow they will either claim they got the SAME result or they will claim a DIFFERENT result. There's not a lot of options.

If they investigate Aimless and claim the SAME result as they already claimed against someone else, then nothing negative will happen - we won't lynch the person that they claimed to have investigated Night 0. If they claim a DIFFERENT result AND if we lynch the person that they claimed to have a different result on... when that person comes up town then we will lynch the scum. It's not a hard concept - and it's not a good one for the scum.

You keep trying to tell us "we can catch scum lying" - but the plan you were suggesting (and that I was attacking) makes it HARDER to catch scum lying. You keep conveniently ignoring that though...

----

This was your response to RR's point about "2-1 trades" (aka having a situation where there are 3 people involved and no one in the town knows which of the three are scum):

I understand your arguments. I guess without numbers it's just a matter of opinion. I agree that 1-1 trades will be good for the town, but I just don't think it will be as easy as catching the scum lying about investigations.

You clearly DON'T understand his argument, he was trying to explain that we want to force scum into 1-1 trades whereas your plan will most likely force them into 2-1 trades (which is not good). You ignore this though and again throw out your catchphrase of "we should just try to catch scum lying about investigations" while STILL NOT EXPLAINING how we are going to do that, especially when you "don't advocate that we investigate Aimless".

I think the reason you don't explain it is because there is NO logical explanation for it. You just keep saying it so people will go "oh, we can just catch scum lying"... but NO WE CAN'T unless we force them to lie about something they don't want to (aka investigating Aimless). They would rather lie about investigating a random player that won't get killed so that way there is no pressure on them.

Do I have to spell it out?

These are two scenarios... Player X is scum, Player A, Player B, and Aimless are town.

Scenario 1:

Player X says he investigated Player A on Night 0 and got a guilty
Player X says he investigated Player B on Night 1 and got an innocent

HOW DO WE KNOW WHICH OF THE THREE IS SCUM? Is it Player A, Player B, or Player X? If we lynch Player A then Player X will say "oh, I must be insane, Player B is the real scum"... and then if we lynch Player B we will have lost two townies trying to figure out that Player X is the real scum.

*this is your plan*

Scenario 2:

Player X says he investigated Player A on Night 0 and got a guilty
Player X says he investigated Aimless on Night 1 and got an innocent

In this one, if we lynch Player A, then we KNOW Player X is scum... It's really easy.

*this is my plan*

So....

[ZeekLTK]

In the past few pages Zeek has said a lot to help me build a case on him, but an essay on my part requires time I don't have at the moment. Expect it tomorrow morning.

Oh I'd love to hear this case (based on the last few pages especially):

-Zeek is not opposed to claiming in order.
-Zeek wants to make it easier to catch scum lying.

Clearly we should lynch Zeek [/sarcasm]

[ZeekLTK]

Oh I forgot another point for your case Tekk...

-Zeek is opposed to plans that make it HARDER to catch scum lying.

You got me there!

[ZeekLTK]

Zeek, just because you say I'm wrong a bunch of times, doesn't mean you gave a direct answer to the "what problem do you have with claiming in order" question. Still can't think of a reason a townie would have for not directly answering it.

You asked me what problem do I have with claiming in order... I said (numerous times) that I do not have a problem with it. What is your problem that you can't get that through your thick skull? After the last three pages (especially after the my last post [the big one at the bottom of the last page]) you are still bringing it up... seriously???

And I love how you COMPLETELY IGNORE THE MAIN POINT of the post (and the main point of what I have said the last 3 pages) and just focus on this stupid little "claim issue" and the one comment about "it's kind of suspicious that you and Skruffs both claimed to have investigated Aimless".

I just hope I'm the insane cop so we can lynch you tomorrow.

I'm sure you're going to claim to be insane tomorrow anyways...

[ZeekLTK]

...

Now it's highly possible I'm missing some important detail, but other than being confirmed town how is Aimless a better NK than any other cop? This "If we don't investigate Aimless we lose period" attitude just reeks of fearmongering.

I see Korlash already explained this - why would they leave a confirmed townie alive? I mean, if they don't kill him, that's great for us, but I'm not going to expect to have more than one chance to investigate him to help figure out my sanity.

More of the same "LISTEN TO ME OR TOWN LOSES" attitude. Again, how exactly would scum be able to figure out sanities if we can't? Magic, I presume?

Uhm... if everyone just investigates random people and everyone claims their results (this is what I was attacking charter for suggesting we do) then we will have a lot of results against people who are still alive, thus that the town does not know - but the scum does.

I will again use my result as an example:

If I investigate someone other than Aimless, then I will have a result on them. Let's say I get a guilty.

Tomorrow, if I claim that, then I will have an innocent on TDC and a guilty on [Someone]. I will not know which of these two people is scum because all I have done is narrow down that I am sane/insane. However, the scum know which person is scum, so they now know my sanity before I do.

Also, if I get an innocent on someone... if that person is a different alignment than TDC then the scum know that I am naive, while I still think I could be naive/sane/insane. Again, they know my sanity before I do.

How? Not by magic, but because the scum already know EVERYONE's alignment. They know who their teammates are, and everyone who is not their teammate is town. So any results claimed against people who are all still alive - they will know which of the people involved is scum and which is town, and they will therefore know which results are correct or incorrect and thus they can figure out sanities while the town will simply only have "narrowed down the possibilities". Then they can manipulate that.

If we make sure that everyone has a confirmed result under their belt (like investigating Aimless) then we will all figure out our sanities at the same time as the scum do, meaning they won't be able to manipulate us.

What the crap is this. Since both of them revealed their investigations BEFORE AIMLESS CLAIMED this is misdirection to the finest degree.

I have explained this a few times... even though they didn't know Aimless was the RETIRED COP they still knew that Aimless was TOWN *before* he claimed (if they are scum). Aimless' claim only proved that he was town to the rest of us, scum already knew he was town though. So what is your point here?

[ZeekLTK]

All in all Zeek has taken on this mentality that anyone who doesn't blindly follow his ideals are scum. 15 posts of logic could have been summed up in 1 or 2. Although it's obvious he isn't going to sway charter, he continually filled the thread with verbose arguments that are more and more misdirecting.

15 posts of logic because every time I post something, someone argues it so I further explain it.

Would you just like to make my point and then be quiet so that everyone can ignore it in favor of more anti-town opinions/plans?

And no, you are misdirecting here because I'm not attacking people who don't agree with my "plan", I'm attacking people who propose alternate plans that are clearly anti-town and stand to benefit the scum more than us.

Plus, no one attacking me for "pushing my plan" has given even ONE good reason as to how what I am suggesting is bad, or won't help the town. They are just attacking me because I'm defending my proposal (and obviously I am defending it because I believe it to be the most pro-town plan we have). That's all I've done is attack people's plans, no one has attacked mine - they just attack me.

Even in that post - how many times do you reference my "plan"? Quite a few. How many times do you have anything negative to say about it (like why we shouldn't do it)? None. Obviously I am not pushing some "anti-town" agenda here, so what is your reason for voting me when there are players out there who are pushing anti-town plans?


The fact that you vote for me even after saying this:

285: More "Aimless or Lose". In this one he actually manages to support it, though.

is very suspicious. You basically admit that what I've been saying the whole time is true and yet you STILL vote for me. How suspicious is that?

[ZeekLTK]

And basically, Zeek, the biggest problem is that after you get everyone to target the same person tonight, you are going to have to do it my way tomorrow night anyways;

unless you plan on directing all of the investigations EVERY NIGHT for the rest of the game

, eventually cops are going to have to make their own decisions

That's not what I am advocating at all. Of course after we all investigate Aimless and get a CONFIRMED result under our belt then yes - everyone has free reign to investigate whoever they find scummy. But the key is to investigate Aimless FIRST so that everyone has that confirmed result to base past (Night 0) and future (Night 2-X) results off of.

That's why I am arguing so hard to make sure everyone understands the importance of this. And since Aimless will probably be killed, this is a "limited one-time offer" to get a free confirmed result by investigating him.

But it does not benefit us to all randomly investigate people tonight, because only 1-3 people (depending on the lynch) will actually have a confirmed result to base it off of, and especially if one of those people is scum then we're majorly screwed.

[ZeekLTK]

And also Skruffs, you keep claiming that your way "will find scum easier" but like I said earlier (when attacking what charter proposed - which was basically the same thing) it won't.

Every time you try to explain yours you leave out details that might be... oh I dunno... pretty important.

For example, you constantly ignore that in a situation where someone has two different results on two alive players that there are actually THREE possible scum in the group - one of the two people investigated OR the guy who is claiming the results.

You keep ignoring that the guy claiming results could be scum and telling us how "easy" it will be to catch scum in this situation - while this situation is actually horrible for the town and very hard to figure out which person is the scum. If you ignore that, then yes, your plan APPEARS better - but that's kind of a BIG DETAIL to overlook...

The other plan (the one RR and I have been arguing in favor of) - if someone has two different results, one of the results should be on Aimless, who will likely be proven to be town tomorrow, so then there are only TWO people who could be scum - the guy who is claiming the results or the guy he investigated that got an opposite result other than Aimless.

I fail to see how this is "harder" to catch scum than in your situation. Two possible scum vs three possible scum. Uhm...

Also I don't understand why you are telling us to "assume we investigated a townie on Night 1". WHY WOULD WE DO THAT?? That's a major bonus for the "investigate Aimless plan" - if you get a different result on Aimless then, besides figuring out your sanity, you caught scum from your night 0 investigation! So why on earth would you try to tell us to ignore our night 0 results? I think you are worried that some of your scum buddies HAVE been investigated so you just want us to ignore that...

I would hammer you (oh how I'd love to do that too ) but some people said they want to wait for Aimless, so I'll respect that wish.

[ZeekLTK]

So we're waiting on Alabaska...?

And Korlash - why would we possibly consider lynching RR?

[ZeekLTK]

Well nevermind, I re-read Korlash's posts and he's been against the "plan" RR and I have argued for all game too. I still didn't see anything in his posts as to what was bad about it, just another person (like Skruffs) spouting off that it's not a good idea with no reason as to why (because there isn't one).

And today's results will show why it was a good idea (if people listened and did it). Everyone will have their sanities narrowed down to one or two; and those who are at one will have caught scum. And those who are at two - the scum still won't know those people's sanities. So what exactly is bad about it again?

And just because Skruffs was town (I assume this is what you are alluding to - by bringing up "why Skruffs and not RR?") doesn't make his argument valid. It just means that, more than anything else, he just wasn't thinking - because if he was he wouldn't have come up with so many anti-town proposals to push on us (and wouldn't have gotten himself lynched for doing it).

[ZeekLTK]

Skruffs arguments weren't wrong, it's not a clear cut decision. I can't believe you're still not dropping this, Skruffs isn't even still here.

Skruffs arguments WERE wrong - that's why we lynched him: because he was suggesting anti-town plans.

That's what it seemed like Korlash was saying - bringing up how we lynched Skruffs instead of RR, seemingly implying that "hey look Skruffs was town, so his argument must have been right and those arguing against him [RR] must be scum" - but this isn't right.

Just because Skruffs was town doesn't make his argument correct (or those who argued against him incorrect).

[ZeekLTK]

Aimless -> Guilty

And today's results will show why it was a good idea (if people listened and did it)

That means...

Vote: TDC

Yes!

[ZeekLTK]

Damn, I was so sure he was scum...

There was a time and place where that one got you a heavy beating for something or another. Now adays it's pretty common for something like that to be said over anything, including actually believeing it.

I don't get what you are attacking. He was just alluding to his result - I think it was fairly obvious that when he said this it meant he investigated Aimless and got the same result as he had on Fark (which he claimed when it was his turn). However RR is forgetting he could just be naive... so it doesn't necessarily clear Fark. We'll see...

[ZeekLTK]

Okay, I outlined why investigating Aimless was the best idea - because it eliminates scenarios in which someone has two different results on multiple people - meaning any of the three could be scum.

Instead, it creates situations where one of two people is scum, and that's it. There is no third person involved because the third person is already confirmed town (Aimless).

@RR: I investigated TDC on Night 0 because I had just played a game with him and I hadn't played with anyone else from this game (well, I played with Skruffs too but he replaced in after I sent my choice for TDC).

But anyways, back to the main point. How could I possibly be scum after advocating this plan all day and explaining how it makes it impossible for scum to fake claim without being caught? And then you think that I would fake claim? Seriously?

TDC just saw that I had outted him, so he of course is going to try to confuse the town by claiming to have the same result and saying that I'm the scum. It's his only hope to survive at least one more night and also try to get a useful cop lynched - oh wouldn't that be great for the scum, have the town kill a useful cop that they KNOW is useful. Geez.

And then after his claim he's trying to divert us to lynch someone who's not even involved in this. Because he knows if he pushes for me to get lynched, then *if* somehow I do that after I come up town he's screwed. If he keeps me alive then there is still doubt about him being scum, but as soon as I die it's over for him.

I hit scum, I want to lynch scum... that's the whole point of the game. He "claims" he hit scum, but has no interest in pursuing it, and would rather lynch someone else that no one currently alive has investigated... yeah right.

[ZeekLTK]

My preferred claim order:

TDC
charter
Korlash
Fark
Tekk
Alabaska
RR

Also, wtf?

I don't like his hint at the reveal in #443 and the use of this at reveal time to try to jump the gun on TDC's lynch. I don't like his controlling manner throughout the game, i acknowledge i find his wordiness and eagerness highly annoying, but #443 sounds very like excited scum anxious to go at his plan with TDC.[/i]

What do you mean hint at my reveal? How is that, in any way, indication of me being scummy? If anything it shows that I didn't just make up my investigation on the spot, I already had it.

Also how is it scummy that I vote for the person that I PROVED to be scum?? Yeah great logic there.

The numbers don't lie. We've got this, clammy, TDC, [To Be Determined]. Shouldn't be too hard to find the last scum. I suspect it's charter - after I out TDC he immediately votes for me instead of even considering TDC to be scum and his vote on clammy doesn't feel genuine, it feels like he realizes that clammy is going to get lynched regardless, so he's jumping on as quickly as possible to avoid being linked.

vote: clammy

We can deal with TDC tomorrow and charter after that.

[ZeekLTK]

I got a guilty on Fark, meaning he is town and TDC is still scum.

vote: TDC

[ZeekLTK]

Well I think it's fairly obvious why they killed RR, he was the most likely to vote WITH me (against TDC).

Let's lynch this scum already...

[ZeekLTK]

Two other things I noticed:
1. If Fark is scum, then RR was naive. WIFOM or not, but scum knowingly killing a useless seems to be stupid.

2. I thought about why Zeek claimed Insane yesterday, here's how the claim sheet looked before he claimed:

Tekk -> Fark | Innocent; Aimless | Innocent
Skruffs -> Aimless | Guilty
Aimless -> clammy | Guilty
Alabaska J -> Skruffs | Innocent; Korlash | Innocent
clammy -> Tekk | Guilty; Aimless | Guilty
Korlash -> Tekk | Innocent; Aimless | Innocent
TDC -> Zeek | Innocent
Raging Rabbit -> Fark | Innocent; Aimless | Innocent
ZeekLTK -> TDC | Innocent
Farkshinsoup -> Jenter | Guilty; Raging Rabbit | Guilty
charter -> Aimless | Guilty; Korlash | Guilty

With the knowledge that clammy was scum and my knowledge that charter is town, this meant (from Zeek's point of view):
Skruffs Insane/Paranoid
Aimless Sane/Paranoid
TDC Insane/Paranoid
Fark Insane/Paranoid if Fark is town
charter Insane/Paranoid if Korlash is town, Paranoid if Korlash is scum.

This means that if either Fark or Korlash are scum, only three people could've been Insane, so the chances of me being Insane were 2/3. If neither of them is scum, then the chances were 1/2.

Or the simplest answers:

1) Fark isn't scum - as shown by my investigation of him.

2) I'm not scum so all I did was claim my result that SensFan gave me (which had nothing to do with percentages).


Here was the claim list before you claimed:

Zeek: TDC | Innocent ; Aimless | Guilty


You have to claim you investigated Aimless and got a guilty or else you get lynched. As you already pointed out there is no way that I would have known you were insane *if* I were scum.

Also you are attacking me for hammering a mafia. What further discussion did I prevent? You being able to talk us out of lynching clammy? Everyone had posted their claim orders and had decided on targets (forcing you to investigate charter, etc.), there wasn't a whole lot more to talk about.

[ZeekLTK]

Also TDC, how would including you on a claim sheet be incriminating of me? Obviously you aren't going to get killed at night, so of course I want to make you claim first if you're still alive and if the town decides to use my list.

[ZeekLTK]

It is the case because if you claimed an innocent on Aimless then it means that to everyone else:

Zeek is either insane or scum
TDC is either naive or scum

So you automatically get lynched because, all things equal, there would be a chance that I am useful while you aren't. But by claiming to be insane, you try to make it an equal chance of either of us getting lynched so that the town might possibly lynch me and kill a useful cop for you.

---

Because even though everyone would know you are scum, it would still be a new day and the town would still want to go through a claim order from the previous night. No one is going to believe your claim, but might as well make you do it. Might even be neat to see what kind of bogus claim you give us.

Although hopefully we lynch you today so we won't have to see what your next bogus claim is.

---

Okay let's look at the facts:

-I claimed BEFORE TDC *and* alluded to my results before anyone else even claimed [what I quoted during my claim].
---TDC even admits that, at best, I would have had to have taken a huge gamble if I were scum to try to anticipate that he would be insane (if he were town) -- what is more plausible? That I took a huge risk, or that I actually had the result I claimed and previously alluded to?

-clammy (scum) had a choice on Day 2 of either pushing for TDC's lynch or my lynch and clammy clearly went after me and showed absolutely no interest in voting TDC whatsoever.

-Other than me, RR was probably the most likely person to vote against TDC today and he gets killed at night...

The only thing against me is that I was a little too quick in hammering (a scum), but do remember that clammy was trying to get people to bandwagon against me [he put me on L-2 with his vote], so I think I was at least somewhat justified in hammering him quickly - to make sure that the scum weren't able to turn the tide and get me mislynched, like TDC and clammy were trying to do (they were both voting for me when the day ended).

[ZeekLTK]

Once again, false. Even if there was no chance TDC was a useful cop, I'd still try and lynch you because you've acted so scummy a useful result from you would be extremely suspect anyways.

What have I done that is scummy? Aside from the "quick hammer" which I just explained.

The only reason you say this is because you *STILL* think (incorrectly) that I was opposed to a claim order all those pages ago...

[ZeekLTK]

So basically you have nothing. And you've been trying to say I've been scummy all game - so what is your excuse for this BEFORE the hammer? Nothing. You're either scum or you just have some kind of vendetta against me because I said your plan was bad.

[ZeekLTK]

You've basically decided I am scum no matter what, which is stupid. But one more thing I'm going to point out to show this:

Once again, false. Even if there was no chance TDC was a useful cop, I'd still try and lynch you because you've acted so scummy a useful result from you would be extremely suspect anyways.

See, there is no logical reason to say this - or why anyone would choose to lynch the potentially useful cop over someone who had "no chance of being useful". So once again you show that you have no regard for logic and just want to attack me even though you have no reason to (other than TDC's fake result against me).

If you aren't scum you are playing right into his hands. But I suspect that you are, and that whole thing where you voted TDC and then quickly unvoted him a few posts later was just a little distancing act put on so that after we know that TDC is scum people will doubt that you are his scum buddy. Didn't fool me though.

[ZeekLTK]

This makes no sense.
If you kill the useless claimed cop and the useful claimed cop is town, then the useful claimed cop is nightkilled. There is no advantage in lynching the useless cop. Either lynch results in there being no investigation of the useful claimed cop.

If the useful cop is scum:

-Lynch the worthless cop, scum night kill someone, town lynch scum-"useful cop" next day = at most, 1 useful cop dead (possibly zero - depending on night kill)

If worthless cop is scum (or useful cop is scum and is lynched first):

-Lynch worthless cop, scum have to kill useful cop at night = at most, 1 useful cop killed


VS.

If worthless cop is scum:

-Lynch useful cop, scum kill another useful cop at night, lynch scum-"worthless cop" next day = possibly 2 useful cops dead.

Clearly it's more beneficial to lynch the worthless cop first.

[ZeekLTK]

Not really, the only scenario in which more than 1 useful cop COULD be killed (regardless of scum knowing who the useful cops are or not) is if the person who might be useful is lynched first.

Lynching the worthless cop first means that, no matter what, at most only one useful cop will be killed, possibly 0.

Also that's a nice reversal. You claim that if I were scum I would have known you were insane and that's why I claimed my result, but now you suggest that the scum wouldn't know who is useful.

Also responding with "bussing" and "WIFOM" just casts some doubt on my points - but it does NOT prove them to be wrong.

[ZeekLTK]

How is 50% or even 67% a "huge" gamble?

Okay, if I were scum...

If there was even a possibility that you were town and might be naive (claim innocent on me) then that would be a huge risk in outting myself like that. Especially because, as I just outlined above, if we were faced with a situation of me as useful/scum and you as worthless/scum then even though you'd get lynched first, at best, only one useful cop (pending the night kill) would get taken out during this.

That is a pretty big risk with a small reward for scum on a 50/50 chance that you might be naive and not out them.

[ZeekLTK]

My lies?

I did claim before you.

I did allude to my claim.

There, I've said something about my supposed "lies"...

Seriously though,

"And today's results will show why it was a good idea (if people listened and did it)."

I added the parenthesis to simply clarify that the results would only show it was a good idea if people followed it. I obviously already knew that it would show why it was a good idea because of my results from following the plan...

[ZeekLTK]

I claimed because I knew you were insane. After Alabaska claimed his result to prove he was naive it meant either Tekk or RR had to be the other naive (and one of them sane) so that meant you had to be insane.

When I claimed I knew that Alabaska and Tekk/RR were naive, charter and Skruffs/Fark were paranoid, Aimless and Tekk/RR were sane and TDC and Skruffs/Fark were insane.

What really killed us was I sent out a message to my teammates on Night 1 but no one responded to it, so we had no game plan for Day 2...

If we had talked, we probably could have figured out that clammy might be exposed and figured out what to do about it, but...

Also, I realized that Korlash had been against the Aimless plan on Day 1 - that night the message I sent out said "for claims: just claim you investigated Aimless and got the same result as you did on your Night 0 claim" - so at the beginning of Day 2 I tried to remind Korlash by arguing with him in the thread saying "hey, you were against the plan to investigate Aimless [implying: so maybe you shouldn't claim that you followed it]" - but he still claimed a result on Aimless, and no one really noticed, so I guess it didn't matter.

If TDC hadn't investigated me Night 0 (pure luck) or if he had been naive (again, luck) then we would have been set...

Also I didn't want to kill RR because I knew he would vote for TDC the following day (or at least assumed he would, that's what he was leaning towards when Day 2 ended) - but Tekk said he was going to investigate me, so we decided that we would know if Tekk was sane/naive and that RR was the opposite, so Korlash could just pretend to be whatever RR was - but then Tekk didn't investigate me, so killing RR was a waste. :/

I proposed a plan to NK Alabaska on Night 2 so that Korlash could pretend to be naive and so everyone would assume Alabaska was sane. Korlash thought this was too risky and wanted to kill RR instead because RR could potentially be sane, but if we had done it and you had all believed Alabaska was sane (by assuming scum knew he was sane and that's why they killed him) it would have "confirmed" Korlash as town. I dunno if it would have worked, but I would have liked to try it.

---

My plan on Day 1 was to get everyone to agree to investigate Skruffs (who most people felt was scummy [obviously since he got lynched]) and then we would have to lynch him on Day 2 - meaning we would go into Day 3 in LyLo (because there was no way a scum was getting lynched Day 1) and very few people would have investigated us - so then we could have come up with a set of fake results to try to "prove" someone else was scum to get a mislynch on Day 3 to win.

[ZeekLTK]

I think if the retired cop weren't able to claim (aka when he died he just came up as a normal cop) then the town wouldn't have such an advantage.

As we see, on the last day there was 1 scum and two confirmed townies... that is impossible for the scum to win. If the retired cop can't claim then it makes it more likely that getting to the last day there is only 1 confirmed townie, 1 scum, and 1 unknown townie (who could be scum).

[ZeekLTK]

Last but not least, charter. Great game, dude. You replaced in, and you had Zeek's number from your very first post. You really went after him. As you know, I still thought he was a townie at that point. After you were confirmed town, you kept your cool and we won the game because of you.

Also that's BS.

Charter "had my number" because he didn't read the game correctly. He thought I opposed the claim order (which would be scummy) when I never did and because of this he thought I was scum. I would have made that comment about how bad his plan was regardless of my alignment, so the fact that he read it wrong and went bullheaded at me is just luck that I turned out to be scum.

Also he attacked me for my plan, which was identical to what RR and Aimless were both arguing for at the time, so again he was just lucky and had no good reason to assume I was scum since I was fighting for the same thing 2 other townies were fighting for.

[ZeekLTK]

He was also wrong there.

He says that if Jenter was useful (he was) that it's one useful cop down, but this is wrong because Aimless took Jenter's usefulness.

Aside from that, he says that on Day 2 the scum will know that they have killed 3 useful cops - there is no way to possibly know this given that one of them would have 0 investigations (Jenter) and two would only have 1 investigation. Especially considering it got down to the last day and we still didn't know whether Fark was useful or not and which of Tekk/RR were useful. So he is wrong here again.

Then he says he wants to lynch me to help TDC find his sanity (when I was saying all day we should lynch Tekk to help multiple players find their sanity). So now he contradicts himself (he's using an argument that I used except he just changes the names).

He also said "assuming he needs to" - how would TDC know his sanity from one investigation of me and nothing else. Even if I came up scum TDC still wouldn't know if he was insane or naive. So again he is wrong here.

At the end he says he wants to lynch RR too. The only reason he thought I was scum is because he thought everyone who was pushing the Aimless plan was scum. I was the only scum pushing the Aimless plan, everyone else was town - so he was mostly wrong here too.

I just happened to be scum, but all his logic and reasoning as to why he suspected me was poor or incorrect, so it's just luck more than anything.