Mini #764: Notre Dame Mafia, Game Over

[Kast]

Welcome!

@Charter-
I realize it is a random/joke/non-serious vote, but does that mean that in general you feel Kinetic is a strong player? Also, I assume that means you have played with Kinetic before and have some ideas about how he normally plays.

@Mod-

With the long but important night phases, it seems even more important for this game than probably a lot of other games, that we can replace inactive players quickly.

Seeing as we have already had one replacement, if it becomes a more serious problem (ie. in my first game, 1/3 of the players were completely inactive), will future deadlines be adjusted to deal with this?

[Kast]

I've been thinking about mass claim as well. I think on the whole it is probably neutral and depends strongly on what cards scum got in their first round pick. I am not against, but I don't see it as a game breaking strategy or at all a sure catch scum.

@Charter-
Does the mechanism by which your plan successfully catches scum depend on the scum NOT knowing the mechanism?

@Kinetic-
Same question to you?

If no to either, I'd like each of you to share your method. More minds can help find benefits or flaws. If it really is a sure fire method to catch scum, then I think it is definitely worth sharing and making sure that we do engage in it.

POSITIVES (I don't believe these benefit scum from knowing)
-If we catch players drafting 1/4 NK's early, I'd think that's a pretty damning signal of scum.
-If scum lie about anything passed, we could catch them directly.
-If scum lie about the first card kept, we could catch them on Draft #2 or Draft #3 when they are potentially forced to pick the card that they initially false claimed. Either they claim to pick the card they originally picked (which may be a scummy first choice), or Draft#2 they might false claim again (potentially claiming a suboptimal choice).
-Passing BOTH apothecary AND sanctuary seems potentially scummy.
-We force scum to pick less than ideal cards on Draft 2 since they must worry about being found out.

NEUTRAL
-One thing that I keep coming to when I think about this is that scum can safely lie about the first card they picked, I don't see any guaranteed way to catch them TODAY.
-Potentially Draft 2 or Draft 3 could catch them (as above), but even assuming perfect initial distribution, they could manipulate the picking order with kills by Draft 2 (and certianly by Draft 3).
-Another thing, I asked the mod prior to game start, and cards are not revealed upon death. Not really a positive or negative regarding a mass claim, but I think it is important to keep in mind.
-Committing to mass claiming will need to be a commitment for at least the first two drafting nights. If we commit now but don't follow through later, we give scum HUGE freedom to lie.

NEGATIVE
-Mass claiming seems perfectly suited for removing any *cops* or *vigilante* town players.
-While I think the 1/4 NK is probably the absolutely worst card townies could use (3 wasted nights, then probable NK protection AND commitment prior to knowing if you'll ever get any more of those cards); I think the 1/2 cop is extremely valuable for the town and mass claiming will probably screw us regarding that.
-Rishi's point of protection is also valid (although I'd argue more the apothecary is important rather than the sanctuary and both over doc).
-This COMPLETELY SCREWS the town if scum have lots of plagues (arguably we are already screwed if they have lots of plagues).

I need to think about it more, but if you have sure fire reasons for doing this, then please share them. The positives are only really useful depending what cards scum got, same for the negatives.

Personally, I prefer having more information, so I would definitely go along with this plan. Atm, I don't think it is such a clear slam dunk pro-town strategy that it warrants trying to convince others to follow it.

[Kast]

@Scum distribution-
One thing I missed. I realize you were positing on potential distribution that gives scum the maximum information about cards, HOWEVER, I want to make it clear that I don't think this is a safe assumption (you aren't pushing it, but I don't want anyone to later jump on this and lead the town astray with it). If we catch one scum, I think it is very unsafe to jump down four players and lynch.

I do think that having a pick order gives us an additional tool to help evaluate whether a player is potentially scum and who their scumbuddies are.

[Kast]

@Kinetic-
Sorry, one more thing, I can't imagine that you could determine any player with 90% certainty as early in the game as you did. There is a clear but unspoken inference that the player above you (who passed you cards) is your certain townie, but I can't imagine any combination of cards passed that could give you a 90% confidence.

There are 648 combinations of cards he could have passed you, I would imagine that the majority of those combinations are not very indicative of alignment. I assume you will explain if we go ahead with the mass claim?

[Kast]

@Kinetic-
Explain?

[Kast]

@Kinetic-
If I hit on your *ways to catch scum* then sorry, but those aren't surefire. If you thought they were, you should reassess.

If I missed something, then I hardly think it is appropriate to resort to personal insults over it.

Excuse me if I'm not all gung-ho about executing a plan just because two players say "THIS WILL DEFINITELY CATCH SCUM, BUT I WON'T TELL YOU UNTIL YOU AGREE TO IT".

[Kast]

@Kinetic-
I expect an explanation from you later when you have more time.

[Kast]

@Charter/Kinetic-
So...you were assuming that scum are STUPID and could not think about LYING about their cards without being able to communicate with each other?

Also, please explain what part of my sharing my thoughts makes it so that we cannot catch scum who we would have caught if I had not posted.

You proposed a plan which you claim is guaranteed to catch scum, but fail to explain how it would do so, and when someone actually thinks about it and questions whether it is really guaranteed to catch scum, you want to lynch the person for derailing your plan?

To be fair, Kinetic has not called for my lynch, just insulted me.

@Kinetic-
Your math about scum knowing 50% is incomplete. Feel free to call me an idiot for sharing this. I tend to believe that townies should explain themselves and their statements instead of leaving things vague. I'm not in favor of allowing players to get away with making unjustified claims.

Each of three scum only have to be separated by 2 players (not 3 players) in order to maximize card exposure.

Each scum player has knowledge of the 3 cards they receive. They have knowledge of the 1 card that they pass in the third pick. They have knowledge of the 2 cards they pass, but not specific knowledge of which player following them receives which of those cards. You could get away with calling that knowledge of 6 cards each for a total of knowledge of 18 cards.

From the 2 cards they are passed and the 1 card they are given, they also have partial knowledge of cards that the players before them in drafting order do not have and/or will not receive in future drafts.

[Kast]

@Kinetic-
Please provide an explanation for how any of what I posted helps scum avoid being caught by a mass claim.

@Charter-
Same for you.

You claim that my post makes it so that a mass claim is no longer good. Please explain how it does so.

[Kast]

@Charter-
Is this an accurate representation of your objections to my posts?
(1) You were counting on scum being stupid and not considering that there may be a mass card claim.
(1B) You were counting on scum also being unable to independently think of lying for the first pick.
(1C) You think scum are smart enough to independently realize they cannot lie on the second or final pick.

(2) You believe that my raising the possibility that scum may be lying will help them realize that they can lie.
(2Bi) You intentionally lied to the town when you stated that scum cannot lie except when they are in consecutive picking order, despite knowing full well that they could lie.
(2Bii) You also do not believe that you directly telling them one situation in which they can lie does not help them realize that they can lie.

Specifics:
(3) You were counting on every single townie to automatically know that the 1/4 NK card is a bad choice
(3B) You were counting on every single mafia to NOT know that the 1/4 NK card is bad for townies

(4) You avoid the possibility of defensive drafting for players who picked a plague card.
(4B) You avoid the possibility of a townie vigilante via plague card.

(5) You think that a 1/2 cop card such a good card that passing it in favor of a plague card is a guaranteed sign that the player is scum, BUT this only applies for the first pick and does not apply after scum have learned that they can lie.

(6) You recognize that mass card claiming has significant drawbacks for the town, BUT you feel that the possibility that scum would BOTH not have discussed potential card claiming AND not be able to independently think about lying, compounded with the chance that scum would draw and pick cards the right combination of cards to indicate they are scum, all together outweigh all of those drawbacks.

Incidentally, if my thoughts helped you realize that your analysis of ABR's card passing was flawed, then I am glad and I hope it helps you realize that you are not infallible and there are benefits to discussing instead of keeping everything secret.

@Kinetic-
I will decline your request. You have done nothing to explain or show how my posts have hurt your secret plan.

@Kinetic & Charter-
If the mafia could independently think of the possibility of lying, OR if they did not receive either the plague OR the 1/4 NK card, then what benefit do we gain AND how does this compare to the drawbacks.

If the plan for a mass claim was not so guaranteed that it would be acceptable to ignore it and proceed with normal scumhunting, then why is it so damningly bad that I discussed it and pointed out both benefits and drawbacks?

If the plan was so guaranteed, then all the more reason to discuss it more and try to get the town to follow it.

[Kast]

@Charter-
Please confirm if that means my understanding of your objections is accurate. If you think any of it is mistaken then let me know, I don't want to waste time discussing something that you will just dismiss by claiming I am misrepresenting something.

Also, does your post 64 mean you are voting for me and have no intention of further the subject of that vote?

And to the best of my knowledge, I have considered and shared my thoughts on the pros as well as cons of card claiming, certainly more pros than you shared. I also made my position on claiming clear, I think it has both positive and negative effects, and probably balances out fairly neutral. Overall I would participate, but don't think the benefits outweigh the risks to a degree that justifies promoting the plan.

I don't believe that the plan has become significantly worse after sharing my thoughts, nor do I believe you have shown or come anywhere near showing the opposite.

POSITIVES (I don't believe these benefit scum from knowing)
-If we catch players drafting 1/4 NK's early, I'd think that's a pretty damning signal of scum.
-If scum lie about anything passed, we could catch them directly.
-If scum lie about the first card kept, we could catch them on Draft #2 or Draft #3 when they are potentially forced to pick the card that they initially false claimed. Either they claim to pick the card they originally picked (which may be a scummy first choice), or Draft#2 they might false claim again (potentially claiming a suboptimal choice).
-Passing BOTH apothecary AND sanctuary seems potentially scummy.
-We force scum to pick less than ideal cards on Draft 2 since they must worry about being found out.

-I'll agree that if we assume that scum are both STUPID and drafted 1/4 NK cards on their first pick, then posting as I did would help them avoid revealing themselves in that way.
-While we are assuming they are STUPID, let's maintain some consistency and acknowledge that we would catch them if they were stupid enough to lie about any passed cards. You were the one who warned scum against telling any of these lies. Does that indicate that you were warning your buddies against lying?
-In the event the scum were not stupid OR in the event that they were but Charter or Kast tipped them off, we STILL catch them on either Draft #2 or Draft #3.
-Any scummy combination of passed cards is STILL scummy and impossible for scum to lie about without being caught.
-We still force scum to pick sub-optimal cards.

It is extremely arrogant to assume that all the scum players will automatically and necessarily be stupid, and the opposite about townies.

I also don't know, nor have you shown, that prior to me posting anything, your plan definitely benefits the town. I think it is probably pretty close to neutral. Calling me scummy for wanting to discuss the benefits of your plan begs the question of whether your plan is beneficial for the town. In your initial post on the subject, you yourself admitted that you don't know if it is that great.

@Kinetic-
Your argument about the town gaining 80% more information being superior to scum gaining 50-60% is incomplete and includes a fallacy (also misuses statistics, but that's pretty irrelevant).

When an event causes both town and mafia to learn information, the town learning a larger quantity than scum does not necessarily mean that the town benefits more than scum.

I can give examples if you can't see this for yourself.

In our particular case, the information learned has different impacts on long term and short term play. This is arguable, but I would say the short term impact is beneficial for scum and the long term is beneficial to the town.

It isn't as 100% clear-cut as you presented.

@Zwet-
I think it depends. I can easily see scum lying about their first card pick if it was a 1/4 NK. They would have to be stupid to lie about any second or third pick (and we still catch them on these picks). Lying about a first pick 1/4 NK buys them time; but they still eventually get caught (if they do not win the game prior to that).

To clarify, do you believe that a hypothetical scum player who picked a 1/4 NK card as his first pick would be really stupid to lie and claim that he did not pick a 1/4 NK card?

@KidIcarus-
To clarify, are you saying you believe:
-Scum probably would not have lied PRIOR to someone telling them they should lie, but will now lie AFTER someone has told them?
-Scum probably would not have lied PRIOR to someone telling them they should lie, and STILL will not lie even AFTER someone has told them?
-Something else?
I assume the former, but correct me if I am wrong on that. I don't know but I suspect that Zwet's point is not quite the same as yours.

I think you are getting ahead of yourself in asserting that me sharing my thoughts actually benefited scum. Please establish:
(1) That scum benefit from not having a mass card claim.
(2) That my post makes the benefit to town from a mass card claim significantly worse than the benefit prior to my post.
(3) That scum would not benefit from a mass card claim prior to my post.
(4) That scum would need to be warned against participating in a mass card claim.

@Ace-
Charter carefully left himself a disclaimer by specifically naming passing a 1/2 Cop in favor of a plague card and by not calling the act of drafting a plague card a guaranteed sign of scum.

I agree that defensive drafting of plague cards is not an anti-town move. I could even understand if a townie took a plague card with the intention to use it as a vigilante.

In addition, I think that passing a 1/2 Cop is a viable and necessary move for some townies (else we get stuck in a volunteer's dilemma). It would suck if every townie grabbed their own 1/2 Cop card and the town ends the game full of 1/2 Cops but no full ones. While we could quite probably still win even without any investigations, it would be sub-optimal for the town as a whole.

[Kast]

@Budja-
-I agree that scum probably considered mass card claims. I disagree with the implication that scum planning for a mass card claim can make it completely ineffective as a strategy.

-I acknowledge that my analysis had the *potential* to reduce the effectiveness of a mass card claim. I disagree that this potential was very large or that it significantly chances the value of a mass card claim to the town.

Nobody has even attempted to show the opposite to this.

-I don't see the value in a partial card claim.

Take for instance Sanctuary cards. If everyone who started with a Sanctuary card claimed, and we followed the cards to the final destination, the town has learned more information in quantity than the scum. But this information greatly helps scum in night kill targeting, but does not help townies very much. You can take this as one example of the town gaining more information overall, but scum benefiting more.

In particular, I don't see the value in plague claiming. A plague card does not necessarily imply that the player is scum. Also, knowing where townie passed plague cards end up does not help the town with providing answers against those plague cards.

In the event that we see several plagues in effect, I guess there is a chance that we can eliminate certain players from the pool of people who had access to a plague card, but once again, if scum lie about first pick plague cards, we may be setting ourselves up for false-positive identification of scum.

-Simple example:
Consider a newbie game with 1 cop, 1 doctor, 1 mafia goon, 1 mafia roleblocker, and 5 vanilla townies.

Mafia begin the game with information that there is is 1 doctor and 1 cop, or 0 power role townies.
Vanilla townies begins the game with information that there may be 1 doctor and two goons; 1 cop and two goons; 1 doctor, 1 cop, 1 goon, and 1 roleblocker; or 0 power role townies, 1 goon, and 1 roleblocker.
Cop begins the game with information that there may be 1 cop and two goons; or 1 doctor, 1 cop, 1 goon, and 1 roleblocker.
Doctor begins the game with information that there may be 1 doctor and two goons; or 1 doctor, 1 cop, 1 goon, and 1 roleblocker.

If the town chose to engage in a day 1 mass claim, they would learn that there is both a doctor and a cop, as well as that there is one mafia roleblocker. They would also learn the identities of the doctor and cop and could fairly safely eliminate them from the lynch pool.
Mafia learn much less, only the identities of that cop and doctor. However, mafia would be much better able to make use of this information than townies, and can both kill the doctor, and kill or block the cop. This claim gives the town more information by quantity, but puts them in a much worse situation than before.

-You can apply this to most closed setup games and some open setup games as well and even consider different levels of completeness for early universal claiming. Townies start off knowing much less than mafia. Due to this, almost every early universal claim gives the town more information than it gives to scum. However, most of these games will become much harder for the town to win after the claim and as a result of the claim, which is why early day claims like this are not widely used.

[Kast]

@Charter-
Okay, so instead of discussing or considering that you may be mistaken, you are going to cut off further discussion.

In ending discussion of "masscardclaim", you are also ending discussion of your vote and reasons behind it. Does this mean you do not intend to move your vote?

[Kast]

@Budja-
A few points:
-The point is valid regardless of cards or players; the town can gain more information from a claim without necessarily gaining greater benefits than the scum.

-The example using the "Sanctuary" card is an example using cards.

-Given many potential setups for our current game, scum could easily benefit from avoiding sanctuaries and apothecaries, as well as killing 1/2 cops before they can set off their investigations.

-Creating a more similar example than the newbie game:
Assume there is a game with 12 players whose roles are all selected from a list of different of the Jack-of-all trades roles. For sake of argument, pretend there are 6 roles as follows:
Jack A:
-Doctor
Jack B:
-Nightkill
Jack C:
-Cop
-Bulletproof
Jack D:
-Tracker
-Roleblock
Jack E:
-Doctor
-Roleblock
Jack F:
-Bulletproof
-Nightkill

In addition to whatever powers they receive from their randomly selected Jack-of-all-trades roles, the mafia are given a team night kill every night with the option of a one time use enhanced night kill which is unblockable, and undetectable, and unpreventable.

The mafia begin with information about all of their own powers. Each townie only knows his own power. There is an equal chance for each player to be each role (ie. each role is selected independently of all others and the game could be entirely composed of night killers).

Generating a random sequence (you don't have to believe it is random...it isn't really important) gives:
Mafia:
D, C, A
Townies:
A, A, E, E, F, B, A, C, A

Initially, mafia know about 6 of the powers out of the 22.
Initially, each townie only knows about his 2 (or 1) out of the 22.

Any early mass claim will give the town much more information than it will give scum (in a similar manner to our current game).

It will allow scum to kill dangerous investigative roles and plan around protections. In this example, they could pretty safely use their enhanced kill on the cop and later off kill trackers.

@Charter-
Okay. I don't feel that you have addressed the issue adequately and I don't think your attitude about it is very pro-town.

I agree that doctor first round is pretty useless to scum, but that also makes it a good false claim if scum need or want to false claim something.

[Kast]

Checking in. I've done a quick read. I'll be gone for the weekend but I'll respond more in depth on Monday. Enjoy your weekend's all.

I think Kinetic's disagreement with Charter's and some points of my analysis just show how screwed up his original concept of catching scum through a mass cardclaim would have been.

His analysis of Plague is spot on and mimics what I've been saying.

His analysis of 1/4 NK and 1/2 cop are completely screwed up, as is his implicit assertion should be prioritizing defensive drafting OVER drafting cards to play.

Quick run on 1/4 NK:
-There are 12 1/4 NK cards, total of 3 *bonus* night kills. Townies only have to hold on to 5 of these cards to limit scum to only 1 bonus kill and 3 wasted nights.
-Anyone who assumes that every single townie will first draft pick 1/4 NK is UTTERLY STUPID. Scum only needs one passed to receive 1 bonus kill.
-It is extremely unlikely that scum will get 4 1/4 NK cards to use within the first draft round (haven't run numbers but if needed I'll do so on Monday). First draft round they also would likely be drafting plague as top priority which further reduces the chance of gaining a bonus NK.

1/2 Cop:
It takes two of these. If a townie is passed one, then absolutely take it as you are GUARANTEED to get another one. In the event of a mass card claim, it becomes even more valuable since the town can potentially coordinate to make the 1/2 cops actually useful (both successfully investigating AND successfully keeping that investigation alive if necessary).

Playing cards and burning cards:
You must play one card each night. There is value in depriving scum of cards, but there is also huge value in using cards.

In Kinetic's own case, he is stuck with three scummy cards and must play two of the three.
-Unless he successfully vigs or can safely target an apothecary player (which assumes a mass card claim), he's just doing them a favor.
-The 1/4 NK isn't necessarily bad for a townie to play, but it's a waste of a night.
-Rats are useful to scum throughout the game, and with no possibility for townies sending in a night kill tonight, he can only help scum by playing the rat. Understandably, he asserts that he will not use this.

I agree with the point on defensive drafting plague cards in Draft #1.

Anyway, there's probably a lot more and I will go more in depth on Monday.

Have a great weekend all.

@Kinetic-
Try using more reasons and less emotional appeal in some of your points. Emphatically stating that something is true does not necessarily mean it is.

[Kast]

Also, as stated before, I am willing to proceed with a mass card claim. If people want to wait on me to give my cards before sharing theirs, say so and I'll do it when I get back on Monday.

[Kast]

@KidIcarus-
That's content-less semantics BS. You need to start contributing.

@All-
Long posts to follow. Got back a few hours ago, started reading, posting, and doing a bunch of math (not strictly in that order).

Summary on the first post. I think it hits the main points. There's more focus on the beginning in the summary. I'd advise reading the entirety of Post 5/6 and possibly 4/6. If anyone has questions, let me know.

[Kast]

SUMMARY:

-Charter's objection has no merit. He based the entire mass claim on scum getting 1 of the 9 cards and being too stupid to talk to his buddies or consider lying to the town.
-Kinetic provided scum with "safe" explanations for *any* card they pick, then calls me scummy for potentially giving them an explanation for a specific card pick.
-C falsely accuses me of letting scum know that they should lie.
-K falsely accuses my of giving scum explanations for their picks.
-K&C falsely accuses me of ruining the chances of a mass claim.
-We can limit scum to AT MOST ONE bonus NK, and possibly limit them to a choice between ZERO bonus NKs OR getting caught on Draft #3.
-Kinetic's drafting list is BS and will make things much easier for scum and much harder for the town.
-KidIcarus has been providing little content, just jumping in with "I agree" even when that contradicts the last thing he just said, but does not provide his own reasons. IGMEOY
-Kinetic's decision to vig with Plague is solid and I'd say pro-town.
-Charter seems like he disappeared, particularly when I started calling him on stuff. Please be more active. His advice to me in our recently finished newbie game was to not let him get away with disappearing after being suspected.
-There are lots of posts with little content.
-I had a great but exhausting weekend, hope you guys enjoyed yours (probably doesn't help that I just spent 4 hours reading and responding to mafiascum as soon as I got back).

***Post 1/6***

@Charter & Kinetic (KidIcarus to a lesser degree

he seems to be agreeing with them but hasn’t presented any original thoughts

)-
Firstly, you have both falsely put forth that (1) I suggested that scum should AND would lie, (2) suggesting that scum should and would lie changes the very game state in such a way that scum are significantly less likely to be caught by a mass card claim AND this change in likelihood significantly harms the town.

(1) My post held open the possibility of scum lying. In the event that they lie, I pointed out that we can catch them in that lie. I did not say or imply that they would or should lie.

I agree with Zwet's position that discussion about scum lying in a mass card claim is WiFoM. If they do lie, there is a strong chance that we will catch them.

(2) Althought Charter and Kinetic both attack me, they do so for essentially opposite reasons. I will address separately.

-None of Charter's points show that my thoughts actually change anything for scum. His argument also only applies to the unlikely case where at least one scum picked a 1/4 NK card first pick; did not initially think of lying about the pick but will decide to lie after reading my post; AND did not speak with his mafia buddies.

He has not established how or why it is a sure thing that a player claiming to first pick a 1/4 NK card is scum. He has also failed to show that my post would incline scum to lie about their picks. He also presents no credible reasons to suspect that scum would not talk with their mafia buddies.

In fact, his vote expresses belief that the "at least one..." clause above is actually "at least one" out of two of the scum. The probability of this event (at least one scum out of two scum drawing a 1/4 NK card) is 55.56%. This is before taking into account several less objective but non-negligible factors that I list below. These factors all reduce the likelihood of this case, but I am not including quantifiable analysis due to the subjective nature of each of them.

Chance that scum independently thinks about lying
Chance that scum decides to tell the truth
Chance that scum discussed mass claims
Chance that scum decided to pick something OTHER than 1/4 NK

-I can see a weak case against me pointing out that scum can kill townies so that they are adjacent (allowing them to lie). I actually listed this under NEUTRAL because it requires that scum reserve their NK for this purpose AND forces them to create a trail.

-Kinetic's accusations are BS, but I will address in detail in next post.

[Kast]

***Post 2/6***
@Charter, 80-
I want to clarify a point about the doctor card. I think it is not as potent as you imply. Rat cards make the doctor card nowhere near a safe bet. Multiple doctor and sanctuary cards mean that even if scum fail to make a successful nightkill, you cannot accurately determine whether your target is scum or not.

@Kinetic-
That helped me think of one very unlikely, contrived situation where using a Rat card would help the town. Since you seem to enjoy basing your understanding of the game on very unlikely, contrived situations, this might fit well with you.

If a townie plays a Rat on a suspected scum, the scum claims to have sanctuaried himself, one other townie sanctuaries himself, there are no other claimed protection abilities that night, and there is no successful nightkill. The Rat will show that the scum who sanctuaried himself was not the target of the kill, so the other player who claimed to use a sanctuary will be a practically confirmed townie.

@KidIcarus, 87-
-You have not answered my questions. Why do you assume that scum would be outted by a mass claim? How did my post prevent them from outing themselves?

-Why should I claim at all, unless we are doing a mass claim? If you think we are doing a mass claim, what about Charter's stated opposition?

-If you feel that we should still participate in a mass claim, then obviously any effects from my post were not a significant enough to reduce the benefits of mass claiming below the risks. Kinetic did not provide any positive benefits of mass claiming that I had not already stated. Why are the reasons valid now that he has stated them, but were not valid when I initially raised them?

-Also, you indicated that you were no longer for claiming after my post. Now you are for it. Please give some reasons for this change. You look like you are just buddying to Kinetic and aiming to get in early on a wagon.

@Ace,ABR 87,88-
I think I answered this in my quick response on Friday. I'm going to answer again if I have. I think partial claims should be looked at on an individual basis, but most of them benefit scum more. This is where the information asymmetry rears it's ugly head and really screws the town. It helps scum piece together and "solve" the game much more easily than townies. the discussion of partial claims is only in event that we do not mass claim all cards. If we are mass claiming all cards, then some of these reasons become irrelevant.

I would support a 1/4 NK partial claim *BECAUSE* there is a concrete and fool-proof method we can use to stop bonus NKs. Also, because Kinetic's posts have been full of incomplete and/or craplogic and it irks me that the town just accepts that junk.

I support a 1/2 Cop claim (either now or on Day #3). 1/2 Cop claim on Day 3 will keep scum from killing the 1/2 Cops earlier (they may not have incentive and may kill them anyway, but IN CASE they are aiming for them, it will be harder). A Day 3 claim will probably flood them with too many targets, and we can expect to have 4 investigations and lose 1-2 from death and/or scum pretending to be a Cop. If there is a lying scum 1/2 Cop claimer, we force him into playing one 1/2 Cop card and potentially a protection card.

Plague claim is questionable.Townies who defensively drafted plagues or decided to play vigilante could be setup as mislynches. I don't really see the benefits. The argument that we can find townies who use the plagues seems intended to setup for false-positive identification.

@ABR,Kid 91,101,102-
Kid is not the only one supporting a massclaim. Why don't you FOS the other supporters?

I agree that Kid should be pressured because I want him to give reasons for his vote and support for massclaims (since he has flipped positions twice now, both times not providing reasons, just parroting agreement with charter or Kinetic).

@Ace,Budja,Zwet,ortolan 92,94,96,97,98,99,100-
Were you guys were saying Ace posted "oh shit" as a scumslip (indicating his regret/displeasure with himself) because he passed a 1/4 NK instead of keeping it?

The other reasonable contextual reading that I can see is that he said "oh shit" as an exclamation of shock at how the 1/4 NK went from something miniscule to something major.

The latter doesn't make sense as a scumslip. The former implies that you understand and realize that he did indeed pass a 1/4 NK (so is not necessarily a scumslip).

@ortolan-
Thank you, for using some logic and realizing that ABR passing two 1/4 NK cards means that Ace had to have passed him one. Let me know what you think of my other posts.

@Zwet, 95-
Agreed with Zwet about lying. Note Charter has been trying to falsely pin me as saying scum would lie. I pointed out both possibilities (lying and telling the truth), then defended against his argument that scum would lie because of my post.

I don't know if you read long posts and just don't like answering, or if you just skip them entirely. I'd like you to read and comment on my take on Kinetic's analysis.

@ABR, 106-
Why do we need a partial claim to find out when a townie kills a townie? What stops scum from claiming to be a townie killing another townie? What stops scum from pretending they don't have a plague, then killing a player and letting the townies who honestly claimed plague cards take the fall?

I don't really see *problems* with plague claims (I doubt any lynches over false-positives will fly), however, I don't see the benefit the town really gains from it.

[Kast]

***Post 3/6***

It's an AMAZINGLY scummy set of cards, looking at it in the stupid way that Kast has.

-Please don't twist things or make things up. I will grant that you possibly confused Charter's post for one of mine.

I did not say anything about the scumminess of picking plague or rat cards. I did not say or imply that Pick#3 indicates affiliation. Also, I specifically stated that I don't think we will immediately find scum after mass claiming.

-I said that early drafting ¼ NKs is pretty scummy. If I find that you picked a 1/4 NK on Draft #1-Pick #1 OR that you pick a 1/4 NK on Draft #2-Pickt #1, you will have my vote.

My reasons are below, short of it is that we can stop or limit scum's ability to enact a bonus NK. Townies individually grabbing 1/4 NK's fails to effectively prevent a scum bonus NK. Kinetic's pick list practically guarantees one bonus NK, allows for two bonus NKs, AND protects scum from being caught in either possibility.

First, I wanted a mass claim because I knew most of the town might not realize the important of some cards.

-You did not reliably assess the values of cards.

Your drafting lists are a joke and, if followed, provide excuses for scum to draft their most ideal cards. I find it extremely ironic that you blatantly provide scum with explanations for ANY and EVERY pick they make, while simultaneously calling me scummy for allegedly providing ONE explanation for ONE specific pick.

Such as: If you pass a 1/4 NK, you are a COMPLETE AND UTTER ANTI-TOWN IDIOT. Phew. Got that off my chest. Scum can only get a total of 3 1/4s from their own draw. Thus in order for them to NEVER get an additional NK from those cards all town has to do is choose cards defensively first.

-Too bad you weren't bright enough to consider that one player passing a 1/4 NK, indicates that other players may follow similar reasoning and also pass 1/4 NK cards.

There is an extremely small chance that multiple townies passed 1/4 NK's to scum and the scum were stupid enough to grab all the 1/4 NK cards passed to them; scum would need 5 cards to achieve 2 bonus kills. The chance of townies drawing 5 or more NK cards is 14.48%. This situation would also require that no two scum are adjacent in picking order AND at least two scum have two or more townies passing cards to them. It also strongly indicates that those players are scum (this was my point in the initial post).

-Fortunately, Kinetic's doomsaying notwithstanding, we can take measures to limit scum to 1 bonus NK. As long as nobody drafted two 1/4 NK cards this round (it looks like Kinetic is the only one "special" enough to attempt that), then we can ALSO force them to choose between either not getting ANY bonus NK OR guaranteeing capture of at least 1 scum by Draft #3 (which still limits them to only one ¼ NK).

Also, I confirm that Charter passed me ABR's 1/4 NK. Charter should have Ace's 1/4 NK card. Kinetic's, despite ALREADY having a card that for throwing away, decided to draft KidIcarus' one 1/4 NK card.

This is less than ideal picking, but if we agree that all future ¼ NK cards must be either single passed OR double passed, we can limit the only double ¼ NK to one of {Charter, Kast, KidIcarus, Kinetic} (ideally we pick the single/double pass randomly and we pick which player gets the double 1/4 NK randomly OR potentially we could vote on each or use some other method). Lynching any of them by Day 2 (or if one dies on night 1) allows us to guarantee no bonus NK unless scum lie about a first pick NK card. If a player lies, he will be caught by Draft #3.

Think before you run your mouth attacking people please.

I was passed the 1/4th NK (and the Rat), two AMAZING scum cards, and because of that I feel the person passing them to me (KidIcarus) is most likely town because of it.

-Do you also feel that KidIcarus is a “COMPLETE AND UTTER ANTI-TOWN IDIOT”?

-You fail at maintaining a consistent reference frame (you also fail at math).

Minor point first:

You essentially stated that KidIcarus is a “COMPLETE AND UTTER ANTI-TOWN IDIOT”, but also believe that his passed cards reflect his affiliation; this implicitly states that a “COMPLETE AND UTTER ANTI-TOWN IDIOT” will follow a consistent and predictable set of behavior. Ignoring the double negative in your insult

(you are welcome to claim the double negative is intentional; I will not believe that)

, it is illogical to assume that a “COMPLETE AND UTTER ANTI-TOWN IDIOT” would conform to any predictable set of behavior. Your assumption about KidIcarus' affiliation admits an assumption of some level of “non-idiocy”.

More relevant point:

You demonstrate a double standard; one which you apply to your card picks, and another which you use to evaluate KidIcarus' picks.

Another relevant point:

For completeness, I will look at this situation from the two extremes, an in-between view, and what I think is a likely view. This is analysis for Draft #1 only (some portions may apply to Draft #2 or #3, but none are presented as doing so or necessary to do so for this purpose). Here are the states: {DEFENSIVE DRAFT

(aka Kinetic's fantasy land)

, UTILITY DRAFT, MIXED DRAFT, MY VIEW

(aka. Kast's fantasy land)

}

(1)Kinetic's Fantasy Land:
-Assumes that townies will defensively draft both cards when possible
-Assumes that scum will utility draft both cards when possible

(implicit)

-Assumes that all players prioritize picking: Plague, Rat, ¼ NK

(2)Utility:
-Assumes that all players will utility draft both cards when possible
-Unordered townie pick list: {Apothecary, ½ Cop, Doc, Double, Mimic, Sanctuary}
-Unordered scum pick list: Plague, Rat, ¼ NK

(3)Mixed:
-Assumes that all players will defensively draft one card and utility draft one card when possible
-Ordered and unordered pick lists are too subjective to list for this case
-After defensively drafting one card, a player will utility draft the next card and vice versa

(4)Kast's Fantasy Land:
-Assumes that all players will defensively draft one card and utility draft one card when possible
-There are no picks which are sure fire identifications of scum
-Ordered personal pick list: Plague, ½ Cop, Apothecary, Sanctuary, Doctor, Rat, Double, Mimic, ¼ NK
-Ordered estimated scum pick list (somewhat subjective and depends on what teammates receive): Plague, ¼ NK, Rat/Apothecary, Mimic, ½ Cop, Double, Doctor, Sanctuary

Draft #1-Pick #1, KidIcarus passed you Mimic and 1/4 NK. He could have kept one of 7 potential cards.

(1) Only 2 out of the 7 remaining cards fit this reference frame's townie profile. They both also fit the scum profile. Not conclusive about affiliation.

(2) Assuming that all townie cards are equivalent allows a 71.43% indication that KidIcarus is town. If an objective ordered list can be made OR an ordered list can be accepted for sake of argument AND the Double is not at the bottom of that list, then the chance drops.

(3) Assuming that all cards are equivalently valued in this reference frame's townie profile, at least 2 of the cards also fit the scum profile. There is at most a 71.43% indication that KidIcarus is town.

(4) There are 6 cards that fit the townie profile, but 1 of them also fits the scum profile. This also allows a base 71.43% indication that KidIcarus is town. Allowing for intelligent scum who may pick cards to confuse the town decreases this confidence and arguably reduces the determination to a WiFoM case.

Draft #1, Pick #2, Kidicarus passed Rat. There are 8 potential cards that he may have kept.

(1) Assuming that all three "scum" cards are equivalently valued, he still only has 2 positive matches. Scum would also take these cards. Inconclusive about affiliation.

(2) There are 6 townie cards and no overlap with scum cards. This gives a 75% indication that KidIcarus is a townie.

(3) Using same assumption as above, all 8 cards are reasonable for townies, but 2 overlap with scum. This also gives 75%

(4) There are 5 townie cards that beat Rat, and 1 overlap with scum. 50% indication that KidIcarus is a townie.

Multiplying out chances from both picks gives (2) and (3) the highest chances of indicating KidIcarus' affiliation. Neither is close to 90%.

I chose the 1/4th kill so I could burn it and scum cannot use it.

That seems reasonable. If you picked the mimic, you would only be able to mimic the plague or whatever you receive in pick #3. Mimic on plague is not necessarily terrible for a townie to play, but it is less ideal than protecting, investigating, or immunizing, AND it may make you appear more suspicious.

Also, there is a greater chance that the cards being passed to you are coming from a townie. Intuitively, this implies that you will be less likely to get a town utility card.

I chose plague for the same reason. I drew Plague, Mimic and Apothacary. I could have taken Apoth, used it on myself, and been immune to plague all game. Instead, I took the plague and made sure no one else could use it.

Agree with this decision. I would add reasoning that plague is a utility town card (it is playable).

My second set was Mimic/ 1/4th NK. Seriously, I could have pulled a Plague/Mimic combo off the first two night phases if I was scum. I chose the NK to both prevent scum from getting it (in case the person after me was scum) and to burn it.

Your first reason demonstrates a failure to think through the NK situation.

As explained above, it is extremely unlikely that there will be enough cards in the first round to give scum more than one bonus NK. In the event that there are enough cards, it will be very obvious who the scum are. It is also extremely unlikely that we will prevent scum from ever having any 1/4 NK cards passed to them, but we can adopt a policy that will limit scum to at most 1 bonus NK AND catch at least one scum (and potentially all 3, though that would mean a town loss) on Draft #3.

My third card was Rat. Which, is worst than 1/4th NK, and will most likely be my discarded card.

There is no reason to play the Rat. There is no possible way for any townies to NK scum within the first two nights. At best, you waste a night cycle, at worst you allow scum to NK a townie through his protection. This should not be most likely. This should be definite.

I supported mass claim because I wanted to look at exactly what people drew and I wanted them to explain WHY they drew such cards. The fact is Kast FUCKED a lot of that up by explaining PERFECT SCUM STRATEGY to the scum and the town.

Bullshit. I provided a list of pros and cons and provided comprehensive reasons for why I believed the more complicated situations. There was little to no talk about scum strategy, let alone perfect scum strategy. There are two levels to this accusation, both of which fail.

-First, the claim that my posts will help scum avoid suspicion when claiming which cards they drew, picked, and were passed. Specifically, I have been charged with letting them realize that they could lie if they picked specific, undesirable cards. For this, the only possible effect that anything I said could have is on whether scum decide to lie about the first pick, and what they decide to say in that lie. I addressed this first pick lie issues from both sides (telling the truth AND lying)after charter mentioned scum lying. I showed that neither is a "good" solution for scum; both result at worst in more attention on the scum player and at best can directly catch scum in a lie. There is no clear best choice for them.

-Second, the claim that my posts will help scum give unsuspicious reasons for the two picks. I made two statements about specific cards. One statement referenced Draft #1-Pick#1, Draft #1-Pick#2, and Draft #2-Pick #1, and specified that if we see players using these picks to grab NKs, then they are probably scum. If scum pick NKs on any first pick, we cannot tell until Draft #3 when we directly catch them. However, they cannot lie about Pick#2, and will have to give a good reason for grabbing that card. I have not provided them with any pro-town reasons for doing this. Kinetic HAS.

The other statement specified that a player who passes BOTH sanctuary AND apothecary is suspicious. There are some cards that I would pick over both of those, but not many. I didn't name which cards and there are obviously difference in opinion between multiple players. This could not help them explain their first pick even if they did pass BOTH sanctuary AND apothecary, because I did not provide any reasons to explain card picks in preference to Sanctuary or Apothecary. I didn't even name the cards that I believe are better picks. Now, Kinetic has attempted to share his thoughts with scum.

I wanted to scum hunt. I knew everything he stated already, but I was keeping it to myself so that I could see if anyone slipped and help use that to determine their alignment.

You can still scum hunt. You obviously did not know everything I stated already. You obviously did not agree with everything I stated already. It would suck enormously if we proceeded blindly with a mass card claim, then allowed scum to invent justifications for finding specific player choices scummy after the fact.

Was it full-proof, absolutely going to catch every scum. No, I never said it was.

Charter directly claimed that it would catch at least one scum immediately. I acknowledge that you did not make that direct claim.

Slicey said he does not see it helping to catch scum. You replied that it has multiple ways to catch scum.

Dropping the word "help" implies actually catching scum as opposed to potentially catching scum. It is possible that you could not understand the distinction (unlikely given charter's strong player assessmentand you pointed out your many awards), are just careless (quite possible), intentionally used misleading language to bolster support for your plan. Those are major ones, there are probably others.

Could it have? Yes.

Will it now? No.

Mass card claiming was unlikely to immediately catch scum and remains unlikely to immediately catch scum. It still can and might.

Also, the main reason I wanted mass claim was so that people were forced to stick with the claim in the mid-late game when people were drawing the last of their cards. If no one claimed their plague and all of a sudden 3 plague victims died, that would be quite suspicious.

This supports MY point. This is unaffected by my posts.

The fact remains, Kast completely blew it. Completely.

BS. Try making a valid and coherent argument instead relying solely on emotional appeals and name calling.

He did EXACTLY what scum should do, and he warned his scum buddies to what might happen.

Pics or it didn't happen.

I still want to go forth with the Mass Claim so that I can tack people to their claims for later, but I doubt it will catch any scum now. Once that is done, I plan I pushing for Kast's lynch.

He is either scum or an incredibly idiotic townie. Either way, I don't mind lynching him to find out which at this point.

No reason to not vote me if that is the case.

[Kast]

***Post 4/6***
@Budja & Kinetic- Firstly, you guys are using a quote pulled from the middle of my example game. Fortunately, it applies pretty well to our current game (mostly because the example was created to be similar).

Based on perfect card drawing, the cop cards are virtually useless and are extremely low on the totem poll for any townie to grab. It sucks, but that is the way of it.

Based on perfect card drawing, if a Cop is passed to you, then you should take it as long as you have not already passed the cop card that you drew. You should only pass a cop card if you already passed your personally drawn cop card.

As for the protections, unless you decided we also must claim who we are protecting, it isn't going to do that.

-For one of our three protection cards (arguably the most directly useful one, and the only one guaranteed to protect a known townie), claiming the card DOES claim who we are protecting.

In a perfect world, there would be apothecaries for all, and nobody would die of the plague. This isn't a perfect world. You don't know who else is worth protecting. Statistically, it is better to use the apothecary on yourself (known townie) than to guess a player. If you have a strong feeling that another player is a townie, you could use the apothecary there. This runs into the classic doctor's dilemma; you could try protecting the most townie player, but scum have more information that helps them determine who the most townie player(s) are so they can avoid killing them. This becomes a guessing game. On the other hand, a self-protecting doctor is extremely good for the town, and the apothecary is essentially that. Protect yourself now and forever. Bonus if you were passed the apothecary card since you can likely use it again.

If there is only one player with one doctor card, guess what? He is unprotected.

Letting scum know how many protection cards are in the game also lets them plan out their Rats to maximum efficiency (note, I am not telling them what that maximum efficiency is ).

Since this isn't a doctor where they can protect every night, killing someone on the night they use their protection is at best idiotic and at worst counterproductive.

Killing someone on the night that the doctor uses protection on them is idiotic for scum to do or counterproductive for scum. I think you slipped reference frames again. Are you giving advice to your scumbuddy? How does scum know which night the doctor uses his power anyway?

I really don't get this segment. Please explain.

Actually, originally I was not going to mention this, however it might help our players for protections:

The people who should MOST likely gain protections from players who have them now is those who have not drawn their protection cards yet. These are the players more likely to draw them and use them in the late game when it matters.

I don't know if you are serious, or if you are going to jump out later and say, "that was just to trick people and get their reactions!"

Does anyone know if Kinetic is a player who traditionally likes to play scummy to trick townies and get their reactions (links to examples would be awesome, though I can understand if nobody wants to do that work)?

Scum's best strategy is to eliminate players who haven't yet drawn cards which are good for town, and keep players who have cards which are good for scum left to draw.

By protecting the players with good draws left we force the scum to kill less optimal players and therefore gain an advantage.

Ignoring whether this is actually best strategies or not; if we follow your picking scheme, then the townies who have the protection cards will be the same townies who have not yet drawn their own protection cards.

Also, in case you don't understand, doctor only stops 1 kill. Same with sanctuary. Sanctuary only targets self.

[Kast]

***Post 5/6***

Second Draft
-----
1/4-Shot Nightkill
1-Shot Rat
1-Shot Plague
1-Shot Doctor
1-Shot Sanctuary
1-Shot Apothecary
1-Shot Mimic
1-Shot Double
1/2-Shot Cop Card

Third Draft
1/4-Shot Nightkill
1-Shot Rat
1-Shot Sanctuary
1-Shot Doctor
1/2-Shot Cop Card
1-Shot Mimic
1-Shot Apothecary
1-Shot Double
1-Shot Plague


For every townie this should be your draft priority list. I'm giving you this so your second and third drafts won't be idiotic.

Take everything Kinetic posts with a grain of salt.

He is completely wrong about keeping 1/4 NK. There are at least 3 players, as of post 88, who have 1/4 NK cards. There is a 61.82% chance that at least one player out of charter, Kast, and Kinetic is scum. If we follow Kinetic's plan, we give scum a 61.82% chance to guarantee an NK AND we will have no way to determine which of the three out of Charter, Kinetic, and Kast is that scum.

If we decide to only allow one player to have double NK cards, then we reduce that to a 25% chance of scum having a bonus NK AND we either know that the one player is scum, OR we catch scum the lying scum on Draft #3. Either way, we either stop the bonus NK or catch guaranteed scum.

Second Draft
Here is why:
If you are townie you CANNOT pass a 1/4th NK. It means that the Scum get a NK for free. During Day 1 drafting Plague first is the best bet because it is much more likely for Plague to strike a hit in the early game than in the end game. However, by the second draft there will already be some Apothacaries around, significantly limiting the likelihood of a Plague on Night 5/6 (which is the earliest a plague will hit from the second draft. Due to the delay on Plague, Rat is even better than it in the second draft. (In the first Draft Plague was better than Rat though)

You don't understand plagues. A plague in Draft #2, kills the player on Day 5.

Rat takes second, and some people might wonder why its ahead of Doctor. On the second draft Rat is such a powerful card and directly counters Doctor and Sanc. If you choose Doctor over Rat, and you pass the Rat to a scum, you're making a bad choice. The scum will just use the Rat to bypass the Doctor card you took. The scum cannot use the doctor card, its useless for them, but you giving them a Rat card could stop your doctor or someone elses Sanc.

A static pick list is going to screw the town horribly. Best picks will depend on what you have already seen and played. If you have played protection cards in the past, then mimic jumps WAY up in the list. If you used a Double on Night 2, protection cards jump WAY up in priority. Rat is a nice defensive draft, but at this point, it is likely that scum have already used at least one rat and are likely to draft a second if they have not already done so. Mimic's allow them additional Rats without it being obvious.

The two safety cards are next, and are by far the best town cards in the game. If you pull one of these and don't need to draft defensively and also can pull a double or mimic you're golden. And Ideal draft would be a Double/Mimic, Sand/Doc, and a .25NK/Rat to discard.

Apoth is next. It is sort of the little safety card that could. If you have it, use it, either on yourself or a townie as you see fit.

Apothecary is still big. If you haven't seen one yet, chances are you will be the one who needs it most. This should be a FIRST PICK if there have been ANY plagues and if any players had mimics in Draft #1 (assuming you did not already use an Apothecary).

Double/Mimic should only be drawn depending on your other drafts and should never be your first draft. Mimic beats double because it could technically be a good first draft if you've already used a doc, sanc, or apoth. Otherwise its a wasted card. Again, Double is the same way, but you need to draft one of those three cards for it to be useful, a much harder job.

Your placement is too low, but you are correct that the value depends on what you have used previously. Double is better if you have NOT used your protection cards yet. Grab the double for night 4 to double your protections on night 5. This is not a first pick.

If there was a plague, mimic goes up due to defensive draft potential.

1/2 cop is last for multiple reasons. One, scum have no use for this card, so its not a bad card to send to them. Two, because you need two of them, you need to understand that its OK to pass this card. If you can draft a 1/2 Cop with your last pick, and play it (with a good ditch card, like Rat), it could set you up for a good third draft.

This is the other card that you have a completely screwed up impression of. Half the players should top draft this, half the players should leave this alone. It may be worthwhile to establish cop passing orders after mass claiming. It should be obvious though. If you were passed a 1/2 Cop last time around, this time is a no brainer. First pick and use it. Scum have no way to know that you drew it, so this is your best bet for successful use. If you know the guy immediately after you had a first pick Cop, this is also a good card to pass to him. At worst, he is scum and is forced to pick Cop as his second pick, leaving him with his choice of first pick and whatever junk you pass in Pick #3.

If he was lying about taking a Cop in Draft #1, he may be stuck with 2 cops and whatever junk you pass him for Pick #3

.

Third Draft:
You'll notice several cards have changed.

1/4 NK and Rat are still by and far the best early drafts for town for purely defensive purposes.

Doc/Sanc move up a spot. Personally I feel Sanc starts to be stronger for townies late game than Doc, but to each his own.

1/2 Cop makes a jump, but you should only draft this if you've already drafted a 1/2 Cop and used it. A late game cop isn't bad, but generally protections are still better (since its difficult to trust a late game cop).

Mimic gains strength in the late game, especially if you've played a Doc or Sanc. If you have, draw a Mimic as if it was a Doc or Sanc at this point.

Apoth drops below Cop mainly because by this point plague is not a strong card, thus its counter isn't very strong either. Its not a bad draw if you're forced into it, but I doubt I'd take it.

Double is virtually useless at this point. Seeing as the earliest you'll be able to double a card is Night six from the third draft.

Plague is terribad for everyone. Even if you drew the plague and used it Night 5, it wouldn't take effect until Night 7. The game most likely will be over by then, and if it isn't, it will end in a town loss day 7 anyway.

Not much comment on these, they're based on flawed reasoning. Apply similar changes from above.

Note that Kinetic is presenting a false understanding of plague that is a bit subtle but makes Plague appear benign. Plague kills people during the day, so no voting, no posting, and it lowers the lynch threshold. It does not wait until the Night phase that he claims. It is still arguably the worst card for scum on Draft #3, but it may be a playable card for townies since scum is unlikely to waste early night actions playing apothecaries (if you have nothing better to do, then it doesn't hurt to *test* a fellow "townie" who claims to have used an apothecary on himself).

[Kast]

***Post 6/6***
@Zwet,ABR,Ace,Kinetic 110-112,121,123-
Ok. Do you have a point to sharing your cards, or was this just a whim?

@Kinetic,ABR,Ace 113,115-120,122,124-
Kinetic misunderstands plagues. But I think there is nothing wrong with using it as a vig. His misunderstanding is irrelevant to the argument about townies using plague cards as vigs. This is a huge argument against partial claiming vigs, as it gives scum warnings to use apothecary cards. Without the warning, we can possibly vig some scum, OR we can force scum to draft apothecaries for personal use (rather than defensive drafting them).

I strongly disagree with telling OTHER townies to use apothecaries on your own plague targets. This opens the door to scum getting townies to waste apothecaries.

@KidIcarus, 127-
Nothing wrong with asking players to be active.

What is so great about a doctor card on Draft #1?

@Ace, 130-
Post 88, is BS piled on craplogic, but wrapped with a pretty bow. I don't know that this means he is scum though.
Post 108, (or the plague claiming rather) is incomprehensible to me. How does this make him scum?
Post 116-120, there is nothing inherently wrong with Kinetic's approach to the Plague card as a vig. I agree with some of his justifications and if I had a plague in my first 3 cards, I would have picked that top choice with intent to use it on my most suspicious suspect.
Post 122, Kinetic's style seems to be to start building with logic, then smash his construct and throw the pieces at his target. If he's lucky, the break will leave some sharp/jagged edges to really do some damage. Then add insults to the injury (or add them anyway even if there is no injury).

@Kinetic, 131-
-Apothecary is great for townies. Plagues are deadly.
-Cops are awesome, see my other posts.
-Double plague is great for scum. Double Rat is also great (essentially a guaranteed kill)
-Mimic is only great if they have already played the card. Plague, mimic is much better than Double Plague.

-Double is not necessarily the worst card. It is great with apothecary; you can really stop those plagues and save the town. Double doctor is awesome, you have much better chances to prevent the kill, and if you have a strong target to protect (ie. known cop about to give a result), you can guarantee that the Rat doesn't kill him.

-Not exactly true about no chance to be caught. If we do mass card claims, then lying about your plague card would result in you being caught in Draft #3 because you would be unable to pass the plague card AND it would clearly be the worst card to hang on to.

*Compulsive need to answer every post is making me crazy...*

@Ortolan 136-
Agreed that he should not claim his target.

Agreed that Rat should not be played if at all possible.

Techinically, townies could use the 1/4 NK.

You are wrong about sactuary protecting against plague.

@Zwet, 141-
You are allowed to use Double on Night 1, then Plague on Night 2. This would let you choose two players to plague who would die as soon as Day 4 began.

This seems a bit extreme. I don't really trust your judgement.

You could also play the Plague Night 1 and just try to kill the scummiest player.

However, some points in favor of using Double then Plague is that you have another Day and Night to evalulate people and form your opinions of affiliation AND you give your targets a chance to apothecary themselves by announcing on Day 3. If they are scum, they will be forced to waste a draft to gain Apothecary, and Night playing it. If they are townies, they want to play Apothecary anyway to protect from the scum Plagues.

The other way sets you up for some strong Night 3 plays (limited to protection).

[Kast]

@1/4 NK Cards-
I don't want this lost if the rest of my posts are ignored/dismissed.

We should 1/4 NK claim. If Ace, ABR, and KidIcarus are the only players who drew 1/4 NK cards in Draft #1, then we can enforce that all players, except for Kast and Charter, pass all future 1/4 NK cards. We should determined (randomly or by some agreement), one player out of {Charter, Kast, KidIcarus, Kinetic} who will be our designated two 1/4 NK card player. Charter and Kast must pass their 1/4 NK cards so that the chosen player receives two 1/4 NK cards.

This limits us to AT MOST 1 bonus NK. If there is one bonus NK, we will know for certain that one player out of {Charter, Kast, KidIcarus, Kinetic} MUST be scum (the chosen player who received two 1/4 NK cards), OR we will catch one scum player in a direct lie after Draft #3.

Double passing seems better suited for accountability and to prevent scum from killing the player they immediately pass to. It also doesn't interfere with picking protection cards or other utility cards.

A death of any one of {Charter, Kast, KidIcarus, Kinetic} prior to Night 2 allows us to ensure zero extra NKs OR definite capture of the lying scum.

@Kinetic-
Hypocrite. 84, 86, and 88 were walls of text built with craplogic.

Also, you are strongly misleading. I didn't attempt to kill you, if you bother to read my posts you'll see I think your behavior is more indicative of sloppiness and/or stupidity than scumminess.

[Kast]

@All the tl;dr people-
I bolded, blued, and extracted summary points right at the start.

Feel free to read those.

[Kast]

@Ace-
Most of the post content in my recent posts was NOT making cases against Kinetic (or Charter). Showing that something makes no sense is not the same as showing that it indicates a player is scum.

My posts hit on three subjects:
-Defending against the bullshit attack from Kinetic (and to a lesser extent Charter)
-Showing flaws with Kinetic's *plan* for the town. I really don't want any townies to blindly follow or accept Kinetic's picking order list. I *PARTICULARLY* don't want the town to adopt his policy on NK cards because it is EXTREMELY anti-town.
-Share my reactions to the game so far.

To the best of my knowledge, I have made a case against KidIcarus who has been actively lurking. Arguably, I also made a weak meta based case against Charter.

@Charter-
-That clearly is not the farthest reach anyone has made in this game. OMGUS does not strictly have to be a vote in response to a vote. Kinetic agreed with tajo shortly after his vote that he does not think my posts indicate I am scum, he just doesn't like me.

Ace can legitimately interpret this as "Kinetic thinks Kast sucks">Kinetic OMGUS voted for Kast.

-I didn't call you scum because I don't think your bullshit strongly indicates that you are scum. It isn't beating around the bush. I assure you, that once I think you or anyone else is pretty strongly scum, I will vote and present my beliefs accordingly.

-I will ask more questions and such later; at the moment, most players seem shell-shocked by my novella, and I am willing to give some time for digestion.

[Kast]

@Budja,Charter, 174,183-
From context, Ace is not calling his OWN vote an OMGUS vote. He is calling Kinetic's vote for Kast (me) an OMGUS vote.

@Budja-
I can understand that you think the reaction sounds "faked", and thinking Ace is scummy for it. It is inaccurate to call that a scum slip (unless you are using the term "scum slip" so broadly that it refers to EVERYTHING that is scummy).

@Zwet-
I don't think everyone is ignoring you. I think the active players all saw your card claim. I think most of those same players probably saw your questions about those cards.

Your questions and implication that you picked without knowing what they do probably scares some players.

In that light, I would like to know why you chose to pick those cards.

Since you commented on liking Kinetic's analysis, I also want to hear your thoughts on NK claiming and Kinetic's NK strategy vs. Kast's NK strategy (I want to hear this from everyone, but gotta start somewhere...why not with the guy who feels neglected?).

[Kast]

@Zwet-
I am assuming from the order you listed your cards, that Pick#1 you drafted Plague, Pick#2 you drafted Rat, and you were passed the Double. Is this correct?

If it is correct, did you realize you would have to play at least one of Plague or Rat?

If you were passed a mimic card instead of the double card, would you mimic the plague? What major differences do you see between doubling a plague, or mimicking a plague?

@All-
Same question can be asked to everyone else who has or considered drafting plague cards for use as a vigilante. It seems inconsistent to agree in principle with townies using plague as vigilante powers, but being against it if it means a double kill. Strictly speaking, Double+Plague is not really a double kill, it is more similar to a time delay on an already time delayed kill.

I also think in general that it is not as necessary for townies planning to vig with plague to use their card on Night 1 (unless they feel they are likely to be a target). My guess is that scum are likely to leave townies alive to use plague cards. It also seems anti-town to encourage using plagues early on prior to giving townies chances to draft and use apothecaries AND reducing the "vig"'s ability to determine solid targets.

Also, if necessary, Double+Plague could be double targeted on the same player, effectively resulting in just a single kill if the "vig" (in this case Zwet), is pretty sure of one player being scum, but very unsure about other players.

I guess the case against Zwet seems more objection to Zwet being a vigilante AT ALL? It seems like a pretty weak case.

@Mod-

-What happens if a player enters Night 3 with a double effect, but chooses to play a card that cannot be used with double? Is the player allowed to play that card?

-Is a player allowed to play a mimic card and choose not to mimic anything? What if they have no legal mimic card targets?

[Kast]

@ABR-
Is your desire to lynch Zwet based on:
(1) a card he has passed to you?
(2) some other in game reason?
(3) some reason unrelated to the game?
(4) arbitrary with no reasons?

@Ortolan-
Please provide a link to said game.

[Kast]

@KidIcarus-

where in the world do you find that I didn't support a mass-claim? In my first post I said that there was no point spelling out everything behind it, and right after that I said that I supported one (clarifying my stance on the subject, because I didn't give an opinion in my first post).

Not exactly true. You said there was no point in spelling everything out (which I did not do anyway). You said you had been ready to support, the past tense implying that you no longer support it.

Agree with Zwet above that scum probably wouldn't lie. I also didn't see the point of spelling out everything behind the mass-claim (I was getting ready to claim too D:).

It is an ambiguous implication and could be argued as weak word choice. Your next statement clarifies that it is intended in the manner in which I read it (or you are really bad at maintaining a consistent line of thought).

FOS: Kast

for helping his scumbuddies avoid a mass-claim.

You are quite clear that my post makes the mass claim become undesirable for the town. Taking your whole post in context, you are buddying with Charter and parroting his belief that we should not proceed with mass-claiming anymore as a result of my post.

Seeing how he prevented them from outing themselves, they are probably newer players.

FOS: Newbies

.

This is pure speculation and may be setup for a future attack on players who may be 'easier' targets (

this is also speculation

).

The contrapositive to this weakly argues that veteran players as relatively less likely to be scum.

You also beg the question by assuming both that my post has prevented scum from revealing themselves, and at an even more basic level that it is capable of doing that. Neither of which has been shown.

[Kast]

I wrote a medium length post to answer KidIcarus, but in deference to the widespread disdain for lengthy posts, I'll keep the reply short (longer form available on request).

-Assumptions and inferences are not interchangeable. Your statement avoids addressing my point against your assumptions.

-I said some things scum could do but not what they should do.

If they tell the truth, we may be able to identify them later.
If they tell a lie, we may be able to identify them later.

Either situation results in the same thing; both of which are bad for scum, and both of which help the town.

[Kast]

@Mod/all-

I know we're not supposed to talk about on-going games, but is it ok to reference games that are ongoing but which I am already dead and the player I comment about in that game is also dead?

I ask because in a recent game someone brought up the same argument as Rishi (that a single player posting a lot prevents other players from being active). To be fair, Rishi has not pushed that as a reason to suspect me (just to hate me ), but I don't want to let that slide and later give him freedom to push a case against me (or any other prolific poster) based on that early statement.

@ABR-
Regardless of whether Zwet actually plays well or not, I think it is a mistake to lynch a bad player (unknown affiliation) over suspected scum. This may reflect a difference in lynch priorities, but I hold lynching suspected scum as my top priority factor, followed by lynching to gain information. Lynching to punish behavior or enforce metanorms, by themselves, don't compare with the other factors.

While you haven't specifically stated that you prefer to lynch Zwet over some suspected scum player, you don't seem very interested in looking for any scum or considering whether Zwet is actually scum.

If you make it a policy to always lynch Zwet in any game that you play with him, you are setting yourself up for many mislynches. Statistically, there is a much greater chance that Zwet is a townie than that he is scum.

Your argument is almost entirely emotional appeal, but if those are genuine emotions, I suggest that a better alternative is to avoid playing games which Zwet is participating in (or request replacement if it happens unnoticed). Overall, I think your policy is pretty anti-town, but actually I don't think it is scummy because I can easily see any player (regardless of affiliation) taking that attitude after being burned.

[Kast]

Hmm, while I don't agree with your decision about Zwet and needing to lynch him; you are correct. I misunderstood/misstated your reason for pushing for his lynch. Your clarification is consistent with your behavior so far (ie. you only decided to push Zwet's lynch AFTER he claimed to have plague). Thanks for the clarification.

Can you link to any prior games with Zwet that demonstrate his misuse of vigilante or other townie power roles?

[Kast]

@ABR-
Haha, I'm reading through the second game and just checked back and saw the many more. Very interesting reads. So far in the second game, it looks like a lot of parallels with this game (except Natirasha instead of Zwet...), but this quote jumped out as a big difference:

Natirasha should not be lynched for metareasons, or as a policy lynch. (At least, I’m not arguing that.) He should be lynched for his actions within this game. Which are 100% antitown, and which he stated explicitly and implicitly that he has no intention of trying to alter.

As yet, Zwet has not demonstrated any anti-town behavior. He may have engaged in such behavior in the past, but I think it is premature to punish him right now.

Anyway, back to reading those other games with more added to the list...

@Ace-
I take my time and when I think a player is significantly more likely to be scum, I'll place my vote accordingly (or if I feel the town is best served by one player being lynched over all others). As you've seen, that was quite successful in the game we were both in. I don't like being rushed, and there is really no value in rushing to lynch one player without reason.

But since you are pushing, I will share that KidIcarus is the player I am most suspicious of at the moment. He is not suspicious enough that I want to vote for him right now, nor do we appear to be so close to a deadline or so starved for conversation and content that a vote on him is required. I have asked him some questions and raised some points. He has responded and promised more to come. Right now I like his behavior.

Aside from KidIcarus, I guess I would like Charter to post more, as he told me in my other previous game on MS that the best thing townies should do with him is make him keep posting and not let him get away with disappearing.

The other players I have expressed opinions on, but are less suspicious.

Kinetic has argued that I am pushing for his lynch, but I have not done so. This is not because I am afraid of committing to a lynch, but rather because his craplogic so far does not really indicate scumminess.

I don't feel that ABR's attitude towards Zwet is scummy. I disagree with it and think it is a far from optimal way to handle a player with an anti-town history. If Zwet screws around in this game or indicates that he is going to screw around, then that is a different story.

I don't think Zwet's behavior so far indicates that he is scum, or that he is being careless or rash.

I think Rishi's post may be a bit suspicious, in that it sets up for future false cases; but is not inherently suspicious.

I think Ace is being a bit rash with some posts, but that fits well with the "paranoid townie" behavior that he exhibited in the previous game that I played with him.

Ortolan and Budja haven't said anything that makes me suspicious.

I don't have a strong impression of anyone else.

[Kast]

@ABR-
I read a bit more of some of the games and read your linked post in each. It seems like people objected to Zwet's posting and

claiming (or manner in which he handled claiming)

, but not necessarily his night choices themselves. In each case, he exhibited behavior that could arguably be called anti-town. I don't think he has exhibited the same behavior so far in this game.

@Kinetic-

Kinetic has argued that I am pushing for his lynch, but I have not done so.

I did?

TL;DR, Kast just tried to kill me with a Wall of Text.

Vote:Kast

Diescumdie.

I'll admit, I assumed that {claiming Kast tried to kill you}={claiming Kast tried to lynch you}. I think this is a fair assumption, given that the only mechanism for killing players right now is the lynch.

@Ortolan-
-I support 1/2 cop claims for either now or day#3. Reasons for doing it now are it locks in all players to the claim instead of giving scum time to kill players and hide information. Creating some targets now also marginally raises the chance of a successful protection against NKs or plagues (amount it increases that chance depends primarily on how risk averse scum are).

This follows similar reasoning for why it is a breaking strategy for cop players to claim cop in an open role game when they know there is a doctor but the doctor is still hidden.

-I still don't see how what I posted could significantly help any potential scum buddies. I agree there is a possibility; but this is in the same sense that there is a "possibility" that posting anything could help a potential scum buddy. I disagree that it is viable.

-158 was a response to Kinetic's post where he claimed that a plague used on Night 1 would not take effect until Night 3. This was a misunderstanding on his part (could be either genuine or intentional). Regardless of the intent behind his misunderstanding, it presents plague as less dangerous than it is.

Mod clarified that plague deaths happen in the Day phase. We will be able to tell if a player died as a result of a plague card.

@My thoughts regarding 1/4 NK. Hopefully this is more clear-
Kinetic's plan-All players hold on to all 1/4 NK cards from now on.
Kast's plan-All players pass 1/4 NK cards from now on. Town picks one of {Charter, Kast, KidIcarus, Kinetic} as the "Chosen One" who gains two 1/4 NK cards. Charter and Kast pass their 1/4 NK cards to ensure that the Chosen One gains two 1/4 NK cards.

-If we follow Kinetic's plan AND if at least one of Charter, Kast, or Kinetic is mafia, THEN we guarantee EITHER no bonus NK OR guarantee that at least one of Charter, Kast, or Kinetic is mafia. (61.8%)
-If we follow Kinetic's plan AND none of Charter, Kast, or Kinetic is mafia, THEN we guarantee no bonus nightkills, but learn nothing about the mafia. (38.2%)

-If we follow Kast's plan AND the Chosen One is not scum, THEN we guarantee EITHER no bonus nightkills, OR guarantee catching one scum player. (91.67%)
-If we follow Kast's plan AND the Chosen One is scum, THEN we guarantee EITHER no bonus nightkills, OR guarantee catching the Chosen One who is scum. (8.33%)

[Kast]

@Ortolan-
I am unclear of the value of claiming Rat cards in isolation.

@All-
I am assuming that active players have already claimed about NK cards. I'd be happy to hear some feedback on my proposal for NKs since we gain a very tangible benefit. I expect that scum are thrilled to let it slide under the table and be forgotten, but since only one player has even commented on it, I guess maybe even townies are having problems understanding it?

[Kast]

@KI-
You promised a response to explain your assumptions that I questioned you about. Please deliver on that promise.

@Charter-
You also promised a post (content unspecified). Please deliver.

[Kast]

@Ortolan-
Actually fair point. I agree that I don't really see much harm in claiming Rat cards. I don't think the benefit is large, but it does seem like potential (low chance) benefit with practically no risk.

My second pick card was a Rat (picked over a Mimic). The pick mostly reveals my first pick card (or at least strongly narrows it down based on my publicly shared beliefs so far). If anyone thinks I should share it, I am willing to do so.

My main issue with it is you're forcing townies to gather more than they're fair share of 1/4th NK cards instead of other cards which may be more beneficial to the town.

In my plan (every townie is responsible for their own 1/4 NK card) we may not catch a scum on virtue of an extra NK being used, however we guarantee that an extra NK will NOT happen.

There are 4 possible states:
-{Charter, Kast, Kinetic} contains zero scum (38.18%)
-{Charter, Kast, Kinetic} contains one scum (49.09%)
-{Charter, Kast, Kinetic} contains two scum (12.27%)
-{Charter, Kast, Kinetic} contains three scum (0.45%)
If we follow your plan, then three of those states guarantee that scum will have an extra NK. (61.82%)
In the one state where scum do not gain an extra NK, your plan forces 3 townies to gather more than their fair share of NK cards.

Compare to my plan, scum can optionally gain an extra NK in most cases, but we guarantee capture of that scum. I am willing to take this 1-for-1 trade (and potentially 0-for-1), over a 60% chance that scum gain a 1-for-0 with the town.

In my plan, AT MOST 1 townie gathers more than his fair share of NK cards, and that 1 townie can be selected randomly or voted on by the town.

Your plan could work from a theoretical standpoint if every player had already grabbed their own 1/4 NK. We know this is not the case.

Your plan also means that any scum who have already taken an NK card but lied and claimed to have not done so, will be able to get away freely with that lie.

I prefer the plan that gives the town useful information and has the greater chance of preventing an NK.

In your plan you're forcing what may be 4 townies to collect a card which may not be useful to them or the town, and pass cards which might (doctors, apoths, sancs, etc), because if they pass a 1/4 NK that was passed to them it would go against your plan.

Correction, I favor double passing over single passing; this is what Ortolan commented on.

Also, to be clear, your plan forces up to 9 townies to take cards that are not useful to them with up to 3 of them being forced to take 2 useless cards. My plan also forces up to 9 townies to take cards that are not useful to them, but only 1 of them will have 2 useless cards.

Your plan requires townies to pass useful cards (doctors, apoths, sancs, etc), whereas mine does not. Yours forces them to pass up on these cards on their FIRST pick.

Mine removes the option of picking the NK from the second pick, and guarantees that the third pick card is unplayable.

From a townie perspective, I believe it is better to keep your own picking options open and limit those of players whose affiliation is unknown to you.

But maybe you just didn't understand my plan as proposed...(actually, based on your post, it sounds like you did not understand it).

[Kast]

The limitations to card picking for both plans averages out, although in Kinetic's plan, the death of the player who has drawn an NK is less bad, and in my plan, the death of players who have not drawn NKs becomes less bad. Given that we only have 3 claimed NKs out of an expected 4, this also creates a marginal benefit for my plan.

[Kast]

@CTD-
I use OOC tags for anything directed at the mod. It's very different formatting from how he has posted messages. If the mod would like me to change, I will do so.

@Mod-

You posted that you were prodding KidIcarus, and then again that you are replacing Slicey. Rishi and Charter both posted. KidIcarus has not. Can we safely infer that KidIcarus received/replied to your prod?

@KidIcarus-
If you're still following this game, please address the points you promised.

If you got your prod but are intentionally not posting, I will be very comfortable voting for you.

@Rishi-
Hope you get better soon. If your condition keeps you from being able to play, you may want to seek replacement instead of pushing yourself through pages of text (health>game).

[Kast]

MAIN THOUGHTS:
-Reread Ace and Budja.
-I can understand other players seeing Ace as suspicious, but I think his play is consistent with meta as a townie.
-Budja does not appear to be buddying. He may be trying to stir trouble without stepping on toes.
-Charter has a reasonable point about Budja, but also did not adequately address the point that Rishi raised.
-I don't think we are in much danger of no lynch; we have one week and only need 4 votes.
-I am okay with lynching any of KidIcarus, Budja, and Charter. KidIcarus has preference until he posts or if we hear he is being replaced. I don't like how he promised to answer and said he would be able to do so, but then disappeared when I started relaxing pressure but prior to delivering on his promise. I think there are legitimate points against Budja and Charter.
-I think I need to do a re-read on ABR in context, some small things jumped out at me while reading Ace and Budja (mostly things that I hadn't realized he was the one who posted).

VOTE: KidIcarus

@Mod-

You posted that ties at deadline result in first come, first served. Does this mean that if one player reaches 4 votes, then another player reaches 5 votes, but then drops back to 4 votes, the first player will still be lynched?

@CTD-
I posted thoughts on most players already, but I'll look again at AM and Budja in isolation, then context for anything that jumps out. If this takes too long, I'll post this now and finish later or tomorrow.

I will add that I have played one game in which Ace played a vanilla townie (and also replaced a roleblocker). He was pretty careless and flip-flopped with his vote in both cases.

I am currently in another unfinished game with Budja, but have not played any complete games with that give me any meta-read.

AM:

6- I don't understand what "^this" means. It seems like declaration of intent to plague Zwet or possibly ABR. Is this correct?
8- Questioning and badgering Kinetic seems a bit like trying to buddy with me (I admit I may have bias in my analysis). Also, you just expressed a reason why you would use a plague card. It is a bit weird that you can't apply your own reason/thought process to Kinetic-townie doing the same thing.

AM's beliefs about vigs makes him sound like a newbie. It is a terrible idea for vigs to announce themselves prior to killing and almost always just as bad to announce their intended target. I think I missed when ABR agreed with this bad strategy/belief.

15,20,30 (others)-I think Ace is reading all of my posts, but I don't think he is understanding everything that I have posted. It also sounds like he is looking for me to "solve" the game. He did this in our other game as well.
26-I think this is an anti-town request to make. I think it is consistent with AM's previously stated (and also anti-town) belief regarding vigilantes.
29-He said almost the exact same thing on Day 1 of our previous game. The town followed it up by lynching my top suspect who turned out to be scum. Ace then began Day 2 by calling for my lynch with primary reason that Kast is clearly the most pro-town player.

I think Ace is looking for me to provide a solid/decent case to wagon. I could see both town and scum Ace doing this.

43-I don't think you completely understand what a policy lynch is. Lynching Zwet based on his past meta and/or for behavior that does not indicate that he is scum would be policy lynching. Policy lynches should never take priority over lynching suspected scum. Policy lynches are more acceptable on Day 1 because there is less concrete evidence to indicate that any player is more likely to be scum.

Zwet is right to call you out for this.

30 Revisited- This thought is aimed at CTD.

I don't get the impression that you claimed at all. He is clearly not advocating Zwet's lynch; he is asking ABR to look elsewhere. The easiest suspicious read I can get from this would be that Ace may be trying to convince his scumbuddy and provide a way for ABR to release pressure on what looks like a stalled Zwet wagon.

Overall, I don't think he has done or said anything extremely suspicious. I could see him as either scum or a newbie townie. Based on meta, I know he (at least sometimes) plays like a newbie when town.

The biggest and most concrete point against him that I can see is his statement that he might use his plague card against obvious scum, but also his belief that any townies intending to use plague should claim beforehand and name their target.

I think townies who think another player is obvious scum should use their plague as soon as they can. If they do not see any obvious scum, it would be better to wait until Night 2 to use their plague cards. In either case, they should not announce their target or even their desire to use a plague card, until after it has been done and then only if they see something that drastically changes their mind.

Budja:

5- Once again, I admit bias, but I agree that it is a good point that I raised (although it is being used out of context).
Charter-To be clear, you object to this because he is using my words instead of directly stating that same point in his own words? In the event that Kinetic had a strong rebuttal to that thought (he didn't), using my words relieves Budja of any responsibility for that post. It also lets him appear to be contributing, when he is actually just parroting other players. Is this an accurate representation of your objection?

This is possible. I don't see a reason to suspect this is any more likely than Budja legitimately believing that my quote was a valid point.

6-I don't understand the "This." Please explain.
11-Already addressed the OMGUS issue. Ace is clearly calling Kinetic's vote for Kast a pure OMGUS vote and voting because he thinks OMGUS voting is a behavior inherently worthy of being voted for.
You use the term scumslip here. If you felt that Ace's reaction sounded faked, that would not be a scumslip. It would also not be compatible with claiming agreement with Zwet's post.

It is possible that Budja was looking for an easy mislynch target. This doesn't really look like effective distancing.

13-I don't think telling Zwet to use Plague, then Double is the most responsible way to use the cards. If he is scum, we can't count on him to be honest with us. If he is a townie, we can count on him to be honest, and it would probably be better to give him a day to improve his guess about who is scum and who is town.

Pushing him to use the plague on Night 1 seems more likely to result in an extra townie death than necessary. Budja is not the only player who is pushing for this option. Other players who did this should also be watched.

17-You (and you alone) should rely on your gut feeling. Humans are pretty amazing sometimes, and often our gut feelings aren't as baseless as we think, but rather are a result of things we may have realized subconsciously. Day 1 in particular is a good day to rely on gut feeling, since we have little to no objective information.

This whole post sounds like an attempt to avoid stepping on any toes.

Overall- I have a much weaker read on Budja after my re-read. Initially, I had an impression that he was asking questions and trying to arrive at conclusions without making poor assumptions. I don't agree with one main point (I don't think there is evidence of buddying with Ace or that ), but it does seem that he may have been trying to avoid stepping on any toes while also instigating others.

@Charter, 306-

His explaination made sense and any hope of massclaim being good was ruined by that point so I dropped it.

This explanation doesn't fly. Your hope of a massclaim being good was that we could find players claiming cards that Ace, Kinetic, and Zwet have claimed. Your stated reason why that hope is gone is that my post made it so that scum would lie and not claim those cards anymore. Those cards have been claimed. The thought that my post would stop those cards from being claimed has demonstrated to be false.

If you recognize that any of Ace, Kinetic, or Zwet's reasons for picking those "scummy" cards is legitimate, then you should also admit that the concept of identifying scum by seeing who claimed those cards was already flawed. If you believe that absent this possibility, a mass claim is not a good idea AND if you failed to consider this response to a mass claim prior to pushing one, then it shows that my discussion was extremely pro-town and prevented us from engaging in a flawed plan that would actually benefit scum.

Note, that I don't actually think a mass card claim would overall hurt the town (it would probably be mostly neutral and marginally positive).

@ZEEnon-
That sounds like a serious vote for Charter. Please explain.

[Kast]

@Budja-
If Zwet is scum, we can't control or verify his card usage.
If Zwet is a townie, and we expect that he will listen to player suggestions, then it is just as viable to suggest that he play Double then Plague as it is to ask him to play Plague then Double. Double then plague is not an inherently bad choice. Both plagues could be targetted to the same player if he is uncertain of two suspicious players. If he is fairly certain that two players are scum, then it would be his duty as a townie to target each of them.

Your arguments against Zwet using Rat are irrelevant and distract from my point. I have made my thoughts on Rat clear, and I have already stated that Zwet could Double+Plague and double target a single player.

[Kast]

@CTD-
Next time be more clear; instead of asking "Kast, got any opinion about AceMarkman or Budja?", you should have asked, "Kast, got any opinion about AceMarkman or Budja

but only say the parts that agree with me

?"

@CTD/Charter-
I don't see the buddying. You guys aren't considering context and only reading posts isolation. If I ask you, "you think Ortolan is scum right?" or "why do you think Kinetic is scum", and you respond that you don't think either of them is scum, that is not buddying. Each of your examples of "buddying" look the same.

A post that says, "I don't think Player X is scum" is not necessarily buddying. Discerning whether such a post is actually buddying is often subjective; in Budja's case, each comment was clearly in response to something someone else asked or said.

@Budja-
You avoided actually addressing my point about 11. You claimed to agree with Zwet about Ace appearing suspicious, but you later clarify that your reason is not actually the same as Zwet's reason. You drop the issue after a general consensus is reached (or you feel that way) that Ace's post in question is not a legitimate reason to suspect him.

Regardless of whether you NOW feel like Ace could be an easy mislynch but aren't voting him, AT THE TIME it definitely could be that you were testing the waters and preparing to wagon Ace.

[Kast]

Well, I went back and looked at context, Budja just comes off worse and worse. In 11, I saw nothing leading up to that, except for yet another wishy washy post (post 7). Ace's "Oh shit" wasn't a scumtell. It wasn't scummy at all. The fact that after Budja clarifes the mechanic, and then 'agrees' with Zwet seemed pretty bad too.

I agree that 11 is suspicious. That is why I raised that as a suspicious point.

Suspicious =/= buddying. I don't see how you can claim that post 11 is an example of buddying with Ace.

I have no idea what context you could be talking about for 16. I see it exactly how I described it. I'm not saying that giving opinions willfully or when asked is wrong. I'm saying the opinions he did give came from scum. They weren't opinions at all, just statements to blend in.

Again, yes he does appear to be trying to blend in. No disagreement there.

I disagree with you about the point on buddying. Showing that he is trying to blend in with other players is not the same as showing that he is buddying with anyone. I don't see it, and none of your examples of buddying support that claim.

For 16, it is clearly related to 15 where Budja answers Ortolan's direct question about Ace. He completes a thought and follows suit with what others are doing (sharing their thoughts about Ace). The content of his thought sounds very much like trying to avoid ruffling any feathers, but does not seem like buddying.

There are legitimate points against Budja. You don't need to invent fake ones. I think you may be suffering from confirmation bias about the buddying.

Also, Budja's vote for ABR (which seemed to come only after discussion of how he left his RVS vote on for like 14 pages arose) is entirely useless and could have come several pages earlier. No one is going to lynch ABR for being useless when there are actively scummy people that need it. It's just a safe place to lay down a vote, because the reason is valid, but it won't serve any purpose.

Agreed. I don't believe that ABR has been actively scummy (or at least not to the same degree as KidIcarus, Budja, or Charter).

@Kinetic-
I don't like how you (and a few other players) take statements and make them absolutes when they aren't.

You have used some craplogic, and I called you out for that. You have some valid points, and I agreed with those.

I question how you can like your vote when you admitted that you think I am a townie. Was that admission just BS to agree with populartajo?

@Zwet/Ace-
Your dialogue is reminiscent of Zwet's dialogue with his scum buddy Empking in our previous game.

Does anyone (ABR?) have experience with Zwet as scum and holding long two person dialogues? I didn't really notice that in the games ABR linked previously where Zwet was a townie.

[Kast]

@Charter-
-To be clear, the only point that you have raised against Budja that I disagree with and think is a false point, is the claim that Budja is buddying with Ace. If you want to call his general "avoiding stepping on toes" posting style to be buddying with the town, I disagree with your word choice, but I agree that he is exhibiting that behavior.

-Also to be clear, your post regarding 350 means you don't want ANYONE except for Budja to comment on 350 anymore until Budja has done so?

-I find you suspicious for two points.
First, after calling me suspicious and trying to push my lynch, I responded then you said you don't want to argue with me and just disappeared. You came back and said started pursuing other people with little explanation. Your recent posts may be ambiguously clarifying that you changed your mind regarding the initial suspicion of me and mass claiming. I'm not sure. I would like that clarified (except I don't know if you will since you say you don't want to discuss that anymore).

Second, the point that Rishi raised. You abandoned the position that players who claim to have picked "scummy" cards are scummy. You abandoned this position without really discussing or providing any reasons. You just kinda disappeared from the game and when you came back, it was like a whole new Charter with a completely different perspective. Again, you have kinda said you changed your mind, but didn't really give details on that.

-I did provide my top three, and I am voting.

KidIcarus first, then I'd be equally happy with either Budja or Charter. If KidIcarus is replaced, I will have to re-evaluate. I also realize that a KidIcarus lynch is possibly not feasible. If necessary, I will change my vote as we approach deadline to secure one of my other preferred lynches.

@Rishi-
You aren't the only player who expressed negative feelings towards me posting a lot. I wanted to nip that in the bud and not let scum jump on those feelings and push it to a mislynch. The game is over now. Empking pushed that same line of thought and tried to use it to attack me. That game was filled with a lot more active players who did not share the same negative reaction to long posts (in that game they believed that sharing your thoughts is a pro-town thing).

@Ortolan-
Charter has an NK (#3)
Kast has an NK (#3)
Kinetic has an NK (#2)

My understanding/thought is that nobody else has NK cards or wants to (or cares to) share if they do.

-Please clarify. Do you think ABR's anti-town behavior is indicative of alignment?

-If we follow a strategy of townies only or preferentially playing plagues on N1, then scum are free to not play any apothecaries from Draft #2 and #3. This frees them for more night uses of Rat, Plague, (or double/mimic for Rat/Plague), or NK.

It is unlikely that even after two drafts that all scum will be apothecaried. It is more likely that 2 of the three scum will be apothecaried than that 3 of 3 will be. Even then, I think the main concern is targeting. I think townies will have a much better idea of who is scum after information from 2 days of discussion, 2 lynches, and 1 NK, than after 1 day of discussion and 1 lynch.

@Ace-
I think I missed responding to this, but the "Chosen One" of my NK plan should be chosen randomly ideally, or voted on by the town if not chosen randomly. If any of Charter, Kast, KidIcarus, or Kinetic dies before Draft #2, there is no need for a "Chosen One", and we can ensure that every player gets exactly one NK card.

[Kast]

@Zwet-
Were you a townie in those clashes?

I most likely will not be checking in again until after Easter.

Budja, please respond to all questions and allegations before you go V/LA.

UNVOTE, VOTE:Budja

I still want KidIcarus to answer further, but in retrospect it does seem like that vote is less effective than one on Budja.

[Kast]

Sorry, been busy at work and forgot about the game after the holiday weekend. Hope everyone had a good Easter.

I'll try to keep this short. I'm not addressing everything, just things that stand out to me on a quick catch up skim/read.

Actually, I have more if anyone would like more in-depth, but for now just posting the summary.

Nvm, I'm just going to make the longer/explanation parts in small font. Magnify it if you're interested. Sorry no summary right now. Maybe tomorrow.

Also, I mostly address Ort in this post, but I think that's because I find him the most town-seeming player and the most rational player who is looking at everything instead of tunneling on specifics.

@Ortolan-
-My main "point" against KidIcarus is NOT lurking. The point against him is that his few posts are contentless "I agree with X". He does not explain why he agrees even when one agreement directly contradicts his previous post/position. I raised this and he denied it; I linked to the originals and he conceded his inconsistency. We continued dialogue and he promised more. This was good (I liked his willingness to engage in dialogue) so I felt a vote was unnecessary. When the mod said he had been prodded but did not say he was looking for a replacement, I asked a clarification and hedged with a vote on KidIcarus. Despite other players making token mentions of also looking at KidIcarus, nobody has actually done so, and my single vote was ineffective. Mod clarified, and has since followed up with a second prod and replaced.

-Disagree with your conclusions about plague usage and I think your proposal, if enforced, sets us up for the dangers I raised about plague claims (dangers which you also raised).

Adopting a "worst case" where scum first-pick apothecary, then chances of 0/1/2/3 apothecaries at end of Draft 2 are 3.7%/22.2%/44.4%/29.6%.

If scum did not pick Apoth in Draft 1, the chances directly reverse to 29.6%/44.4%/22.2%/3.7%.

If we assume that one scum passed on Apoth in Draft 1 (if able), then draft 2 chances become 14.8%/44.4%/37.0%/3.7%

I find third situation most probable.

I agree that scum probably would not prioritize apoth in Draft 1. Apoth was probablybelow plague, NK, and rat. If you maintain consistency in the belief that scum did not pick prioritize apothecaries in draft 1, then it is unlikely that all three scum will be apothecaried by Draft 2.

Ort's proposed plague limitations mean scum can stop (or not waste time starting to) prioritizing apoth and grabbing plague/rat/NK as desired in Draft 2.

*Adding mimics raises the chances of scum fully protecting themselves and teammates, but is much harder to calculate since mimics are much more subjective in picking order and probably depend on what other players passing mimics.

*I assume that the chances of a townie passing scum an apothecary are lower than the chances of scum passing townies an apothecary and these dynamics at most wash out and probably make it more likely that scum have less than the expected number of Apoths.

-What was your point about AM&Kast analysis? The overall tone and conclusion sounds like you think AM is scum, and if he is scum, then you think I was defending my scum buddy. Your individual evidence was hastily gathered and half of your points about Kast&AM are actually about Kast&not-AM or not-Kast&AM.

appears ambivalent about Budja, whom charter is attacking, but also appeals to Rishi's attack on charter. He is happy to lynch either one of Budja and charter who are arguing against one another, but not AM.

Atm, I am voting Budja and quite willing to lynch Budja. Your claim that I am ambivalent about Budja contradicts yourself in the next line where you admit that I am happy to lynch Budja.

-You are a bit hypocritical. At the time of your post, you explicitly named 4/12 players as "suspicious", and your longest argument/case is admittedly a weak one against a 5th player who is not among your top 4. In contrast I had 3 clearly named people who I was suspicious of and happy to lynch with reasons stated for all three (as well as reasons why I don't feel the same about other players).

-I briefly mentioned Ace's meta previously, but tried not to directly invoke it until the game I was in with him finished. After it finished, I started using that more heavily (for both AM and Zwet).

-I want to caution against drawing false positive conclusions about rat usage. Anyone who passed a rat AND was not passed a rat is cleared of being a rat user, but we do not know if scum first picked rat (entirely possible), and we don't want to let scum drive mislynches on false positive rat identification.

-KidIcarus passed an NK to Kinetic and was not passed any NKs from me. DGB should not have any NK cards. I think I'll repost your list in passing order instead of claiming order so we can see things more clearly.

-*Stealing a page from Ort's book* EVERYONE PLEASE COMMENT ON MY NK DISTRIBUTION PLAN. IF YOU AGREE WITH IT, PLEASE SHARE YOUR PREFERRED METHOD OF PICKING A "CHOSEN" PLAYER (RANDOM/VOTE/OTHER?).

@AM, 393-
AM's case against Charter is weak. Charter clearly *thought* (or claimed to think) that my post messed up his foolproof plan. That itself is not really scummy. Apparently he realized that the benefits of his plan were not actually there to begin with after Kinetic+others gave reasons for claiming "obvious" scum cards.

I think it would have been far more pro-town for him to explain and admit this when he realized it; but his claimed position itself is consistent with his behavior.

@Charter, 397-
My post is clearly your reason for initially changing your mind. Your addressing AM with this is fine. I do want to clarify that my post did not actually legitimately reduce the value of a mass card claim. You have since admitted that you were mistaken about your plans ability to catch scum.

This is so wrong it pains me. The very fact that you make the argument like this, assumes I am town, which means you are scum (because you assume I'm town, but are still voting me). How is me having (what I Thought was) a gamebreaking plan, but not disclosing it make me scummy? If I was scum, wouldn't I have just kept my mouth shut and not said anything? You are assuming that since I had one, but didn't disclose it upfront, that I have to be scum. This is ridiculous and not how massclaims on day one work at all. You don't explain how you catch scum through massclaim, then claim.

You are correct that some "game breaking" plans require the town to take risks (greater risk balances out the game-breakingness). However, your specific argument against AM is flawed. When considering that you are scum, it means that your game-breaking proposal that you are keeping secret is not actually game breaking (or rather it is probably game breaking for scum).

However, often a "game-breaking" plan that truly gives the town an unquestionable advantage without significant risk also is able to be explained. Being able to explain the plan and get the entire town to follow them is usually part of what makes them game-breaking. Your plan was not one of these; there was significant risk, and explaining it did not affect the outcome.

@DGB-
Interesting assessments. Do you care to elaborate on any of them, or are they each assumed to be obvious? Your system itself seems to give breaks to lurkers/low-content posters.

Also, prior to your announcement as a replacement, I already asked ABR to consider replacing instead of screwing the town by his out-of-game grudge against Zwet. I assumed his comment was directed at that.

Your assessment of my posts clearly marks a difference in opinion between yourself and KidIcarus. Still, could you clarify whether you feel my posts had any significant effect on the value of a mass card claim for the town.

@Charter-
I am happy with my vote on Budja, and atm I prefer a Budja lynch over a Charter lynch. I am content with either.

Since you are well beyond the deadline requirement, I see absolutely no reason for me to move my vote. There is no reason to end discussion prematurely, particularly when new players just came in.

@Mod-

Thanks for the extension and replacements.

[Kast]

@Rishi-
Can't please everyone. Small text is an attempt to compromise since there are no collapsible spoiler boxes here. I tried summaries previously and those were either ignored, or (in ort's case) looked at without the context of the explanation/detail following the summary.

You can read my post ignoring the small text, and if you want more clarification on anything, then read the small text.

@DGB-
I think the claim that Budja has been avoiding committing to positions that will upset people/raise his profile is pretty accurate. For me, he was extremely well under my radar for most of the game. This is not scummy by itself, but is a reason I want to watch him some more.

11 rubs me wrong. In it, he completely evades the direct, obvious, and contextual meaning of AM's post so that he can question/suspect AM (but then drops this with nary a word). He also clarifies that he did not actually agree with Zwet's comment, but had a completely different reason for calling AM scummy over the "slip". I find this very suspicious and looks like he was just saying he agreed with Zwet without actually meaning it.

12 attempts to evade this discrepancy between his claim to agree with Zwet, and actually giving a completely different reason.

24 uses straw men to argue against my suggestion that Zwet first Double, then Plague. He also chooses to go with an ineffective policy vote right before going V/LA.

-I think Charter was pretty clearly implying that he thinks Zwet+DGB will vote together with scum and are effectively traitors. 3 mafia+Zwet+DGB = 5 mafia. 5/12 means the town is in LYLO. Charter, feel free to correct me if I misunderstood that. I think it is pretty much craplogic, but then, I think he wasn't intending that to be rational and more an expression of frustration.

@Charter-
It only takes 4 votes to lynch. I can understand your desire to get people to vote for Budja or AM so that you are not the top lynch candidate. I can't understand your desire to end the day with 5 days still to go and replacements in and on their way in.

@Ort- Further point for plaguing mid game instead of immediately.
Out of these two options, I prefer the second one:
-Random player killed early in the game
-Kill attempt made on suspected scum in mid game

Also, if town successfully targets scum but scum apoth themselves/each other, we may be able to positively identify the scum as a non-apoth player. The chances of this are better than the chances of IDing a player who used a rat.

@AM-
Charter clearly does not want to lynch himself, regardless of affiliation. The next reasonable choices from his PoV are AM or Budja.

You two are tunneling on each other and seeing everything with HUGE confirmation bias.

[Kast]

To be clear, I don't think ZEEnon or Kinetic have provided good/valid reasons for their votes. I would like them to do so. They both appear to be lurking/inactive right now. I don't think pressure on either of them is liable to change this.

I want to see Budja place a meaningful vote.

I would also like Ortolan to update his position. Please restate the reasons for preferring AM over Budja.

@Charter-
Overall, I am fine with lynching you, although I think Budja is a bit more likely to be scum than you. I think it is entirely possible that you are both scum. For specific players and their arguments:

-I think Rishi has a valid point against you.
-I can understand AM as a townie voting for you with the haphazard case he is pushing. I have chimed in on points that I thought were terrible (AM has posted a lot, and I haven't touched on everything).
-ZEEnon does not have a stated reason for voting you.
-I actually can't tell if Zwet's vote on you is serious. I do think his "!!! Scumclaim?" reason is BS.
-DGB voted you then stopped; I can understand DGB voting you, though I'd like to know the reasons for stopping (for now it seems a response to something you said in your post). I'd also like to know if DGB's unvote means she no longer considers you suspicious, or just that AM is more suspicious (or something else?). Right now, it is ambiguous.

-I just finished a game with AM, and he is playing extremely similarly to his play in that game. While he is using a lot of poor arguments and has pushed positions that I feel are anti-town, all of it seems consistent with my meta understanding of him, and absent that is just as easily explained by him being a newer townie player as him being scum. I don't think he is scum.

I also think that your recent exchanges with him don't contain nearly as much suspicious material as either of you are claiming, and I think strongly demonstrate confirmation bias in each of you towards each other.

-If we lynch you now and enter night prior to finding a replacement, then ABR's cards will be selected/passed randomly. This is EXTREMELY anti-town, MUCH more so than having our Day 1 lynch determined by only 5 or 6 players instead of 7.

If you are scum, I am willing to take the risk of not joining your bandwagon and appearing to be a possible scumbuddy. If you are a townie, then it would be a bad idea for me to vote for you. That reasoning applies to the present case.

If we approach deadline and it looks like I have to vote for you to secure one of my preferred lynches (ie. everyone unvotes Budja and all but 3 unvote you), I will do so. I will likewise change my vote to best serve the current situation.

-I am mildly paranoid that your last post is a scum attempt to set me up so that if you are lynched, you will flip scum and one of your buddies (or even a townie) can jump out and claim that you were directing your scum buddy.

@DGB-
-Please explain the change in vote. AM does have a lot of scumpoints in your list, but does this reflect a relative, small change between Charter and AM? Does this reflect an absolution of suspicion against Charter? Does this reflect a large increase in suspicion of AM (and if so please explain reasons)?

-One odd point about your list; CTD and Kast have more townpoints and less scumpoints than Ortolan, but are both higher on the list. Please explain.

NK DISTRIBUTION PLAN

ALL PLAYERS OTHER THAN CHARTER/KAST/DGB/KINETIC WILL PASS FUTURE NK CARDS TWICE. OUT OF CHARTER/KAST/DGB/KINETIC WE CHOOSE ONE PLAYER AND FOLLOW THIS PASSING SCHEDULE:

CHOOSE CHARTER

-CHARTER KEEPS HIS CARD
-KAST PASSES TO DGB
-KINETIC PASSES TWICE

CHOOSE KAST

-CHARTER PASSES TO DGB
-KAST KEEPS HIS CARD
-KINETIC PASSES TWICE
OR
-CHARTER PASSES TO KAST
-KAST PASSES TO DGB
-KINETIC PASSES TWICE

CHOOSE DGB

-CHARTER PASSES TO DGB
-KAST PASSES TO DGB
-KINETIC PASSES TWICE

CHOOSE KINETIC

-CHARTER PASSES TO DGB
-KAST PASSES TO KINETIC
-KINETIC PASSES TWICE

THIS PLAN GUARANTEES CAPTURE OF SCUM IF THEY ATTEMPT TO GAIN A BONUS NK AND LIMITS THEM TO AT MOST ONE BONUS NK.

[Kast]

Just scanned things, I may not get a chance to check in tomorrow since things are absolutely nuts at work. If I don't, I'll definitely check in on Monday morning.

-First, I like my vote where it is. I am especially suspicious of Budja's recent posts; he throws an almost random vote on a semi-lurking player with no traction. 541 is ridiculous. If the vote on Rishi is serious and intends to get Rishi lynched, then where is the case or evidence or arguments to get that done? If it's to pressure Rishi into contributing, sorry, but that's not going to be at all effective. You could at least ask Rishi to discuss something with the vote. I don't really see my vote changing unless I need to do so to secure a lynch come Monday.

-DGB seemed reasonable at first. Some disagreements, but on the whole sensible and seemed to be trying to share thoughts and get others to do the same. Recent posts, DGB seems to have gone crazy and isn't giving much explanation.

It's hard seeing DGB as a replacement of KidIcarus. I would like people (including DGB) to re-read KidIcarus, particularly http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 78#1569578, 1, and 7. He does a complete 180 twice in two posts, he denies doing so, and he tries to wagon using Zwet as an authority/excuse (when Zwet wasn't saying what he pretended that Zwet was saying). None of this involves explanations, and most of this involves tying himself to someone else's post. Posts in between are pretty much no-content active lurking.

After I start pressuring him he responds, but once I relax the pressure he disappears. Then never comes back.

I didn't want to force DGB to explain KidIcarus, because if that is a townie, KidIcarus is probably the only person who could explain it.

But I do want others to post thoughts on it (I think Ort is the only one who actually commented, but only commented about the lurking and not about the rest).

-Ort, you completely ignored my post =(. Also, I don't like how you've been saying you are suspicious of Budja, but the votes don't come and now it seems like you're abandoning and claiming you just disagreed with him but didn't think him scum. My understanding of you was that Budja and AM are both most likely scum (AM more so, but Budja number 2).

I disagree with DGB's conclusion that Ort's reluctance to lynch Budja indicates that Budja is a townie. Assuming that DGB's argument for Ort-scum being reluctant to lynch Budja-town are valid, Ort-scum would ALSO not want to lynch Budja-scum. I think that if Ort is scum, then the latter is the more likely reason for not wanting to lynch.

-I have liked Charter's recent posts a lot more than what he was posting in early game (his response when I pointed out the problem with ending the day early struck me as VERY sincere). His arguments with AM still seem mired in confirmation bias. I am still okay with Charter's lynch (and prefer it to no lynch), but he is significantly below Budja at this point.

I don't like that his defense against the legitimate points brought against him has been practically non-existent; "I changed my mind" or "I don't want to argue." It is also a bit annoying that he is willing to spend time on AM's ridiculous arguments but not on the legitimate ones.

-I still think AM is probable town. I agree that his reasoning and arguments need a lot of work, but I don't think they are indicative of scum alignment. His behavior is extremely similar to my previous game with him. Given that I don't think he is scum, I would only really consider lynching him if he was being extremely anti-town AND there were no players who actually do appear to be scum.

Lynching should be done to kill suspected scum as the major priority, with information after, and policy last. If AM is just a townie with some poor play (which is what I think is the case), neither of the top two factors are served by his lynch.

-I disagree with CTD on a bunch of things, but I like that he is giving reasons and committing himself to his beliefs (and being consistent with them).

-Where is Kinetic? He's been active in the other game that I'm playing with him.

Also, I think only Charter and AM (and maybe Ort?) have commented on this. Either a guaranteed denial of one NK, OR guaranteed capture of at least one scum, OR BOTH. Comment please. I strongly believe that scum want to keep ignoring this. I don't see ANY townie motivation for doing the same. I know you can't all be scum, but jeez...

NK DISTRIBUTION PLAN

ALL PLAYERS OTHER THAN CHARTER/KAST/DGB/KINETIC WILL PASS FUTURE NK CARDS TWICE. OUT OF CHARTER/KAST/DGB/KINETIC WE CHOOSE ONE PLAYER AND FOLLOW THIS PASSING SCHEDULE:

CHOOSE CHARTER
-CHARTER KEEPS HIS CARD
-KAST PASSES TO DGB
-KINETIC PASSES TWICE
CHOOSE KAST
-CHARTER PASSES TO DGB
-KAST KEEPS HIS CARD
-KINETIC PASSES TWICE
OR
-CHARTER PASSES TO KAST
-KAST PASSES TO DGB
-KINETIC PASSES TWICE
CHOOSE DGB
-CHARTER PASSES TO DGB
-KAST PASSES TO DGB
-KINETIC PASSES TWICE
CHOOSE KINETIC
-CHARTER PASSES TO DGB
-KAST PASSES TO KINETIC
-KINETIC PASSES TWICE

THIS PLAN GUARANTEES CAPTURE OF SCUM IF THEY ATTEMPT TO GAIN A BONUS NK AND LIMITS THEM TO AT MOST ONE BONUS NK.

[Kast]

Checking in, I'll be gone for the weekend, and back on Monday. Hope everyone has a good weekend!

Welcome ACFan. One thing that jumped at me when I saw your post, there is a discrepancy between what you claim and what ABR claimed.

The term that jumps out at me is 'scumslip'. Do you have an explanation for this?

[Kast]

@DGB-
I'm usually way too busy over the weekends to post/check. I did say this in my last post, so I think that prod was kinda unnecessary.

Responding in the order that I remember as I read through:

@CTD-
In KI's first post, he says he would have been in support of a mass claim, but that he no longer supports it and suspects me for making it no longer a viable option. It's essentially an "I agree with Kinetic+Charter" post, without actually committing himself to any reasons and leaving things potentially ambiguous which potentially lets him claim being pro or anti claim depending where the prevailing townie attitude blows.

He tries to follow through on that with his next post, where he claims he is pro-claim and thinks we should continue with it. No explanation for why he stopped thinking that I ruined the effectiveness of claiming.

He later confirms that he has not abandoned the idea that my posts ruin the benefits of a mass card claim for town (but then he disappeared before I could ask him how he reconciles this continued belief with support for a mass card claim).

@DGB-
If Kinetic was telling the truth, then I know two of your three cards. Charter should be able to figure out your third card. Nobody, except for possible scumbuddies, can know your first card.

@AM-
Zwet claimed Rat, Plague, and Double; not Rat, Plague, and Mimic. Slip or mistake?

People, please be very careful when you are naming cards. If we have townies messing up with claiming the cards that they passed or were passed, and we excuse them for messing up, we allow scum to use the same excuse to avoid one of our objective methods of catching their lies.

@Charter-
I agree that it feels like people are trying to defend Budja or at least pull attention away from him. I don't follow how pulling attention to DGB indicates that DGB and Budja are scum together; on a surface level it would indicate the opposite, and even digging a few levels deeper, it's easier to believe it indicates the opposite as well.

If Budja flips scum, I think Ort deserves more scrutiny, as he really seems to be the primary drive in pulling pressure away from Budja while at the same time claiming to suspect Budja.

If Budja flips scum, it will strongly clear Charter in my eyes, since he had many opportunities to jumped to a different and target, and Budja's lynch was far from a solid runner up for quite some time.

I can see a third or fourth level reason for DGB pulling pressure from Budja and both being scum; if DGB has terrible cards for scum and Budja has good cards for scum. If we assume Kinetic was telling the truth, then Budja must have a mimic and one of mimic or apothecary. Ortolan should know whether the second pick was either mimic or apothecary.

For the sake of clarity, I'm going to reveal that DGB also received a mimic in her third card (Charter should already know this). This means that her hand strength relative to Budja's is strongly determined by the first card, and barring that has to be at least equal and ~11/12 chance of being better based on the second card which is probably something other than a mimic (I'm not actually sharing solid information on whether it is a mimic or not). Based on this, I find it unlikely that DGB is scum trying to save a buddy who has better cards.

@Catching scum in concrete lies-
I was assuming that everyone else will try to follow card claims and check whether people who are claiming match up with what you have passed. Based on the replacements and some players general lack of attention to details, I realize this assumption is probably flawed.

You can catch players up to two before you and up to two after you in picking order. This is particularly true for players who have claimed all three of their cards, but also works for players based on the Rat/NK claims.

Kinetic

I can verify that Kinetic's claim fits my Pick#1.
DGB can verify whether Kinetic was passed NK/Mimic in Pick#2 and Rat in Pick#3.
Budja already confirmed Kinetic's claimed passes.

Zwet

Rishi can confirm that Zwet must have one of the two cards that he passed in Pick#1.
ZeeNON (or his replacement?) can confirm Zwet's cards from Pick #2 and Pick #3.
AM can confirm that Zwet did not pass the cards he claimed to pick.

Players who claimed no NK and no Rat

If you passed both a Rat and an NK in your Pick#1, and the player two down the list from you has claimed no Rat or no NK, then they are wrong and most likely lying.

[Kast]

For the sake of clarity, I'm going to reveal that DGB also received a mimic in her third card (Charter should already know this). This means that her hand strength relative to Budja's is strongly determined by the first card, and barring that has to be at least equal and ~11/12 chance of being better based on the second card which is probably something other than a mimic (I'm not actually sharing solid information on whether it is a mimic or not). Based on this, I find it unlikely that DGB is scum trying to save a buddy who has better cards.

Actually this is a mistake, I read my table wrong and assumed that Budja's second pick was also a mimic. If Budja's second pick was an apothecary, then I feel it is better for scum than DGB's second pick. This will depend on Ort's answer.

ORT- Did Budja pick an apothecary or a mimic in his pick#2?

[Kast]

@Ort-
At every turn, you seem unhappy with a Budja lynch. I don't see how you can at all reasonably claim that this indicates *I* am on a scum team with Budja. At best, you are OMGUS suspecting me for pointing out your behavior.

Kinetic claimed to pass those cards to Budja and Budja confirmed them. If you were passed a card that is not Mimic and not Apothecary, then Kinetic and Budja were lying together. Lying about something that is easily caught seems extremely unlikely, but share if that is the case.

Given that you are the one pushing the DGB/Budja scum theory, I find it extremely suspicious that you don't want to confirm something that objectively helps determine whether the theory is probable or not at very low information risk to the town.

If you think Budja is scum, then he already knows your card, so no harm is done in sharing it (equalizes information for the town with no information gain for scum). If you think he is a townie, then scum already know that one of Budja/Ort has the Apoth and the other has the Mimic from Kinetic. Low information gain for scum, and solid information to help the town evaluate your Budja/DGB theory.

[Kast]

Btw- ZEEnon claimed Rat/NK, nothing about plague. It is a bit odd that you mix up the two since you were the main proponent for Rat claims and were against Plague claims.

[Kast]

@Mod-

Is that correct that ACFan is being replaced?
Can we get an update on Kinetic?

@DGB/AM-
Zwet claims to have defensively drafted. That implies to me that he is claiming to have picked the Plague and/or the Rat and was probably passed the double.

One of his three cards was passed and cannot reasonably be used to indicate his alignment.

ZEEnon would be the best player to verify Zwet, but as he is MIA, it would be good if Rishi can at least confirm whether he passed one of those three cards (ie. if Rishi claims to have passed Cop and Sanc, then we know one of Rishi/Zwet is lying).

Also possible if Rishi confirms, we may show that Zwet was actually passed the Rat or Plague, which, I assume, would greatly reduce the reason both of you have expressed suspicion of him.

Also, all of these recent points, of catching scum in lies or narrowing down and helping determine alignment or alignment pairs are the actual benefits we would have gained through a universal mass card claim.

Some potentially damning stuff, but mostly things that can help guide our scumhunting. Scum learn some, but with all our partial claims, it is quite possible that they know all of the cards in play and ~2/3 of what was picked by each player (this goes down if Zwet or Kinetic are scum).

[Kast]

@AM, 667-
-I already raised this point for Charter; we do not need to rush this game day to an end. Securing a lynch is good enough. Mod still needs to find replacement(s) for ZEEnon and ACFan. Ending today means increasing the chance that replacements will not be available and 1-2 players will be randomly passing cards. This completely robs us of information gained from those player(s) choices and could end up giving scum exactly the cards they want/need.

-You haven't answered why you said Zwet picked a Mimic, Plague, and Rat; Zwet actually claimed Double, Plague, and Rat. Please explain this discrepancy.

@Ort-

@Ort-
I don't see how you can at all reasonably claim that this indicates *I* am on a scum team with Budja.

Reread the quote, it was directed at DGB, not at you.

I re-read. I don't see any possible way you can read it and conclude that it does not refer to me.

Possible DGB and Kast are scum with Budja.

-I think it is fair and accurate to say you have pushed the DGB+Budja scum theory. You are correct that it was not you (it was CTD) who first pushed that, but you have supported it. You have repeatedly claimed to suspect Budja without actually acting on that claim.

@Budja-
To sum, your claims are no Rat, no NK, and a Doctor in Pick #1, Mimic in Pick #2, and Mimic in Pick #3. Your passed cards have been confirmed as non-contradictory.

If we believe your picks, then you are apparently a very altruistic townie. Can you share any reasons for picking Mimic over Apothecary in Pick #2? If you feel it is not harmful, can you share reasons for picking Doctor in Pick #1 (Ort will probably be the only player who can really evaluate that pick vs any other choices you have).

@NK/Rat claims-
1/1 for both
1/0 for NK only
0/1 for Rat only
0/0 for none
? for unclaimed

AM 0/1
ACF 0/0
Cha 1/?
Kas 1/1
DGB 0/?
Kin 1/1
Bud 0/0
Ort 0/0
CTD 0/0
Ris ?/1
ZEE 1/1
Zwe 0/1

Some of those were not actually claimed, but I have derived through process of elimination based on other claims.

There is an unexpectedly high number of rat cards in circulation. It seems unlikely that either townies OR scum would lie about having a Rat card.

With 4 claimed NK cards, my plan alters slightly. The exact nature of how it alters depends on whether ZEEnon's NK card came from Rishi, CTD, or ZEEnon himself.

Rishi, please confirm whether you passed an NK card to ZEEnon, and if you did, then was it your NK card or was it CTD's NK card?

Lynching Budja will not affect my plan.

[Kast]

@Ort-
DGB (and others) pulled pressure away from Budja and onto DGB instead. That does NOT indicate scum partners to me at all. Your point would be valid if DGB was pulling pressure away from Budja and putting it on someone else. If DGB and Budja are both scum, then the most valid reason I can see for DGB to pull pressure from Budja to DGB is if Budja has much better cards.

Also, your argument about Kast/DGB scumteam is completely independent of Budja's affiliation. Tying the two together is a fallacious attempt to build support for it.

@DGB-
CTD is right. Budja is probably lying about his first card. If Budja is scum, we'll never be able to find out (until the game is over). I don't think it is a very pro-town move to pick a mimic over an apothecary.

@AM-
I'll re-check my spreadsheet later. Could you point out where you claimed no NK?

Good catch about the passing. We still have to watch out for random card usage. ZEEnon claimed Rat AND NK. ending the day sooner means a potential townie using a rat on a random player.

It's still not something we want to increase the chances of happening.

[Kast]

@DGB-
Apothecary can self target. For a townie it is GUARANTEED to protect a townie AND it is a permanent effect. Doctor only targets other players, AND can be counteracted by rats. Of the two killing mechanisms in the game, apothecary is by far a more effective protection.

@AM-
Completely my mistake on listing you with 1 Rat. You directly claimed no Rat. I can't find any direct claim of no NK from you, however you did claim Plague first round and have claimed the cards which Zwet passed, which indicates that you cannot have an NK.

[Kast]

@DGB-
Apothecary makes you permanently immune to plague.

Plague cannot be stopped by doctor or sanctuary.

There is a very high chance that at least one scum has a plague card. In addition, we have multiple people claiming plague cards with intent to use them as vigilantes (hardly an unexpected behavior).

It is likely that there will be an equal, if not greater, number of deaths as a result of plague as from regular kill(s).

[Kast]

@DGB-
Night 1 OR Night 2 are both fine. Either night will protect you from all plague cards.

If you have double and you think another player is extremely pro-town, it may be worthwhile to double then apothecary. Similar for mimic, except in that case it would be better to apothecary first so you can mimic second.

Aside from that, it's really your judgment whether you think it is better to play whatever other card you have on Night 1 or Night 2, and just play apothecaries on the other night (this is general and should not be assumed to imply that DGB has or does not have an apothecary).

[Kast]

Applying that back to Budja, his claim to pick doctor then mimic implies that he thought it would be better to have a second night of protecting someone other than himself than it would be to make himself plague immune.

While it is possible that he could just really trust his ability to guess likely mafia nightkill targets, I find it more plausible that he did not worry about Apothecary because he is scum. That would mean he is lying about his first card and it is probably Plague or Rat.

[Kast]

Hey all, hope you enjoyed your weekends.

Quick read through and thoughts.

I agree with Charter that Ort's behavior regarding Budja is probably the most suspicious and scummy thing right now.
-Primarily, I dislike how Ort kept agreeing with points that Budja is suspicious and constantly named him in his top 2(or3) suspects, but then failed to actually vote or pressure Budja.
--Charter has pointed out that Ort pushed to get people other than Budja lynched; this in and of itself is not suspicious, my problem with it is that WHILE he was pushing those other people, he also kept claiming that Budja is in his top suspects.
-I don't like how Ort (or Rishi) placed vote 6 and 7 on Budja only after it was clear that Budja was getting lynched regardless of their votes,

However, he does raise a valid point about potential Rats. If it is true that Ort doctored CTD (or if you are a townie who used a doctor on CTD), then we know that a Rat was used. This means that our two remaining mafia cannot BOTH be players who passed and were never passed Rat cards. I'll check my spreadsheet later to see if there is anyone two players who fit that description, if so, we know that at least one of the two cannot be scum (again, this is predicated on Ort being a townie OR another player using a doctor on CTD).

One problem is that ZEEnon's replacement may not have picked his card to play and it may have just been random.

@MOD-

Can you confirm whether ZEEnon's card for last night was selected randomly?

@DGB-
The player before Ort and the player after Ort are both dead. Ort's Pick #3 has already been claimed and confirmed. Rishi can only confirm one card received from Ort.

Doctor would be a normal town card to use and CTD is a reasonable target choice for a doctor last night (seeing as he got killed, then yes definitely a reasonable choice). I don't think Ort really needs to provide a reason for choosing to use a doctor card.

However, since Budja and CTD are dead, Ort is also free to lie about his cards from Pick #1 and Pick #2.

@Kinetic-
-You've danced around this with Charter, but why would you target CTD? You said you suspect there is/was bussing going on, but in that case, there are 6 other players who could have been bussing. Why CTD? It seems...a suboptimal choice at best.

-Why would you choose to use a plague right away instead of waiting until Night 2? Clearly you were mistaken about CTD; what made you so confident that he was scum that it was worth trying to kill him?

-You are using a straw man against Charter. His point, if you are scum, is not that scum Kinetic used a plague on the same scum NK target. His point, if you are scum, is that you used the NK on CTD and you are lying about using plague on CTD.

It is WiFoM to claim that you are a townie since scum would have no reason to claim using plague on CTD.

-Please explain your comment from Day 1 to populartajo that you agree with him that Kast is probably a townie, but also that you are happy to leave your vote on Kast?

@100% arguments-
I think everyone realizes that nobody can know 100% affiliations unless they are scum. It is hyperbole, and perhaps an attempt to sway people to your convictions. I propose that people just stop using that term unless they are really 100% certain of something since it isn't convincing anyone and it lets people get away with arguing against that term and while appearing to legitimately defend themselves (but so far the arguments against using the term 100% haven't been addressing all of the valid points).

@Kinetic-
-Why did you claim to have targetted CTD with your plague? I don't see a strong motivation for either scum OR town to do so. I don't recall anyone calling for you to claim your night actions; if you are a townie, then you have just let scum know that they don't have to worry about being plagued by you. If you were attempting to "trick" scum, just FYI, I absolutely would not believe it if we entered Day 3 and a townie died to plague and you suddenly reversed your position and claimed you were attempting to trick scum (that would probably lead to your lynch).

-Since we can only lynch one person, I think it is okay to wait until Day 3 and see if there are any plague victims. Come day 3, it is possible that if there are no plague victims, we can find out if Kinetic did not use his plague on a player who does not have apothecary OR is not CTD on Night 1. This "check" is not extremely telling, but then again, I think Ort is more suspicious than Kinetic anyway.

@Zwet-
Why did you choose to double instead of plaguing?

@Ace-
One of Zwet's three cards was passed to him. If it were the plague or the rat, then his picks aren't really that suspicious at all.

Even if it were the double, I can easily see a townie picking Plague as first pick (you did the same didn't you?), then being offered a choice between a defensively drafted Rat or a mimic, and picking the defensive draft.

Kinetic claimed almost that same scenario actually (although I guess you were suspicious of him for it too).

However, it may be good to get a confirmation on which order Zwet picked his cards.

@Kinetic-
Read Budja in context not isolation. Much of the reason for suspecting Budja was because of the context.

@Ort-
I don't see us gaining much from a mass night action claim. It would let scum have a strong idea of who was protected and who might no longer have protections/who us unlikely to be protected.

Scum aren't going to claim using a Rat on CTD. I'm not sure how you think we will figure out that they are lying. At least 5 players had a rat card, so it doesn't exactly narrow down our possibilities (that's not including players who may have lied and actually have a rat).

It also seems devastating if any player has 2 Cop cards and plans to use the second tonight.

I assume you meant Kinetic is obv-scum NOT Kast is obv-scum for plaguing?

@DGB, 768-
Lol, good advice (the not getting upset since scum won't say that).

@Ace-
Why is Zwet so suspicious just based on his card choices? It seems to me that Zwet is not really in the spotlight for today.

@ACFan-
Thanks for continuing the game. I am most suspicious of Kinetic and Ort as well, HOWEVER, it seems too...easy...that we find all three scum by Day 2. I definitely think at least one scum is among Ort and Kinetic (Ort more likely).

@Kinetic, 768-
It is possible that Charter (or Kast, or anyone on Budja's wagon) was bussing. However, I don't get that impression about Charter at all. He had opportunities to get on a different wagon, and Budja was far from a sure lynch for most of Day 1. I doubt that Budja's lynch would have happened without Charter's support.

I find it far less likely that Charter choose to bus his scumbuddy than that Charter legitimately believed Budja was scum and lynched him.

I'll grant that it's not proven, definitely not 100%. But I think Charter is probably the closest to a confirmed townie for me (based on his posts, I think it's safe to say he feels the same about me).

Lynching me today before I can prove you wrong would be short sighted when there is a good chance where this can be disproved.

I must have missed something. How are you going to prove this?

@DGB-
Ort is welcome to claim whatever he chooses, but I don't think that has much bearing on any points against him.

[Kast]

Oops, meant to vote last post.

VOTE: Ort

@Kinetic-

I am not strawmanning him, I'm pointing out that my choice makes no sense as scum.

The point is that if you are scum, then you obviously did not use a plague on CTD, and your claim to do so is a lie.

Feel free to continue telling Charter it makes no sense for Kinetic as scum to use plague on CTD. He isn't arguing that point. Arguing against that point is arguing against a straw man.

-It is wifom. There is no clear townie motivation and no clear scum motivation for you claiming to have plagued CTD. Saying that scum wouldn't have any motivation to do that and therefore implying that you are a townie is building a case out of wifom.

-My question that you quoted is not a repeat of the previous. I am asking why you CLAIMED your night action. This is separate from why you PERFORMED your night action. What motivation does Kinetic the townie have for telling everyone that he used a plague on a dead player?

@Ace-
If Kinetic has been protected by an apothecary then we are in one of these cases:
-Kinetic lied about his cards and therefore probably scum.
-Kinetic has a teammate who used an apothecary on him.
-Random townie felt Kinetic was such a strong townie that he decided to apothecary Kinetic AND Kinetic knew that Random townie felt this way and had an apothecary.

Third option is unlikely to the point of not worth considering.

@Ortolan-
I will note that CTD did name DGB as his top suspect for Budja's scum buddy. I think it is a mistake to assume CTD dying means CTD's top suspect is scum. That would be a very foolish assumption.

I am watching DGB, and I agree that DGB is not playing like a clear townie (in particular, I did not like how DGB's vote kept flying around near the end of Day 1 with little explanation). But I definitely think your actions are more scummy.

-The primary difference between your play and CTD's play is that CTD actually voted in a manner that indicated he was trying to lynch scum. You held a similar position to CTD, and went further and called Charter a probable townie. But when it looked like Charter might be lynched, instead of taking action to lynch your number 2 scum and avoid the lynch of your number 1 townie, you tried to pull people away from your number 2 scum's wagon and onto other players who were not anywhere near being lynched.

-The problem I see with your vote is not that it was the 6th vote, but that you were so unwilling to place a vote on Budja at any point when it might have mattered, but as soon as it no longer mattered, you placed your vote. If you were making a point of voting for your most suspicious person (DGB?) and kept your vote there at end of day, that would make a bit more sense. But instead, you choose to move to Budja after it no longer mattered. What changed that made it worthwhile to place your vote on Budja?

@Ace-
I think you're misreading Ort. He is either suggesting that I am scumbuddies with DGB (hence DGB never voting Kast), or chastising me for not seeing that DGB was trying to buddy with me (I'm not clear which he's aiming for).

[Kast]

@Ort-
If you are telling me that DGB is buddying with me; I can see that and I agree it is possible. I'm not sure that it's townie or scum trying to buddy with me. I'll try to not let that affect me.

[Kast]

@Zwet-
You didn't answer why you decided to Double then Plague instead of Plague then Double.

[Kast]

Lol...that's kinda scary how he said that...and I guess I walked into that one...

Do you have any other reasons?

[Kast]

@Looker-
Welcome to the game and thanks for replacing in!

Can you confirm that Zwet's second card could be Double, and that his third card was Rat?

@Ace-
To confirm, Zwet picked a Plague instead of Sanctuary or Apothecary. This is similar to your claimed pick and Kinetic's claimed pick. Each of you has claimed to have picked a Plague over at least one pro-town card (Sanc, Apoth, Both).

His second pick was a choice between Double and Mimic. I don't see either one being particularly scummy; if anything I would say Double is less scummy since it can be used Night 2 to help with future nights (this is an extremely marginal use and I think it better to use the Plague on Night 2).

Getting passed a Rat as his third card does not make him scummy.

[Kast]

PREVIEW EDIT-
*Zwet's sudden vote is extremely scummy. Ort is at L-1. The day barely started and Looker hasn't even posted anything. I think we still have more to talk about before anyone ends this.*

@Ace-
I've been tossing this around, still not completely sure if this is the right way to handle this but here goes:

We should only have 3 plagues in circulation (unless someone is lying).

If you did NOT use your plague card on Night 1, I think you should say so (NOT who you targetted, unless you are having some MAJOR changes of opinion...which you'd need to have a really good reason for).

Come Day 3, if we see ANY plague deaths, we know we are in one of two situations. Either one of the three plague owners lied about using their plague OR someone lied and has a plague card but didn't claim it (could be anyone who did not pass a plague card). Potentially, we could narrow that on Night #3 and help us catch guaranteed scum on Day 4.

Unfortunately, without lynching scum and one successful doctor OR two successful doctor protections, going to Draft #3 would mean a town loss.

ALSO NOTE:
Given that we lynched scum, the chance of a bonus NK is practically zero. There is no longer any need to enforce passing NKs (though it doesn't hurt to continue to monitor and/or pass them).

[Kast]

Oh...guess the day hasn't barely started...feels like that for me...

Still, I think it is too soon to end the day now so please nobody else place a vote on Ort without discussing with the town first.

In fact.

UNVOTE

I fully intend to revote for Ort, but for now this is a buffer against "accidents".

[Kast]

If you were to hammer in response to a warning against it without giving Ort a chance to say something AND without letting our replacement post something; you would be either really stupid town, or opportunistic (and possibly stupid) scum.

You didn't so it's moot.

You also don't seem so keen for the Ort lynch anyway. Please clarify your position as soon as you can.

[Kast]

@Ace-
Had Kast hammered, he would be breaking the rules of the game ;D

[Kast]

@Ort-
-If you flip town, I will watch DGB. If you flip scum, I will also be watching DGB. FYI, I haven't stopped watching DGB.

-Just because another player might be buddying with you, does not necessarily mean they are scum. DGB has made posts that may be considered attempts to buddy with me. I haven't seen any of them as particularly indicative of alignment.

-AM, ACFan, Charter, and DGB are all "lined up to lynch Kinetic". I acknowledge that there are some points to look at about Kinetic, but I also acknowledge that some of the things raised against him are not legitimate.

-You repeatedly made posts that defended Charter and/or attacked the players who attacked Charter. Not necessarily indicative that you think he is a townie; you did leave it a bit ambiguous. Then you explicitly stated that you think Charter is a townie and have been thinking the same for some period of time. If you want to argue that you never called him your number one townie, that's fine, I'll grant it. That argument doesn't address your inconsistency. A player who you believed was a townie was the top lynch choice, and instead of voting for another player who you called your number 2 or 3 lynch choice, you tried to get people to stop voting for the player you thought was scummy and instead vote for players with no wagon.

In your actual final vote post, you claimed a reason which makes sense with your stated beliefs, but serves as a stark contrast against your voting history which previously did not sit well with your stated beliefs (well..everything except your one isolated post where you claim Budja might not be scum).

-I see two differences between you and DGB. First, your vote history is scummy, while hers is suspicious and possibly anti-town, but not necessarily scummy. Second, you seem like a much more rational player, so I think I expect better behavior out of you (definitely don't like your inconsistency).

-I don't like how you are trying to put words in my mouth and claim that I find DGB completely unsuspicious. I simply find you, by far, the scummiest player currently.

FYI, I think DGB and Kinetic both have some valid points against them.

I don't like Zwet's recent vote for you.

I don't like how AM was pushing so much pressure on Zwet that I think was undeserved and may have been an attempt to avoid voting for Ort (not sure if this means you are buddies or if it means he is scum and knows you are town). AM could just really suspect Zwet.

I think Looker and Rishi need to post more.

I would like to hear more in depth from AC Fan, but I don't have anything negative about him so far.

I think Charter is probably a townie.

[Kast]

@Ort-
Also, not sure why you claim I will hammer. I unvoted to put you at L-2. If I revoted it would not be a hammer.

This is not the first time you have made a mistake about my voting (you called me out for not voting KidIcarus when I was voting him, and for not voting Budja when I was voting him).

Btw. Another thing I disliked (which was probably the first thing I found suspicious about you), was when you claimed I was buddying and defending Budja, when actually I was voting for him and explicitly stated that I was suspicious of him with reasons clearly provided.

[Kast]

@Looker-
Waiting for some thoughts from you.

Also, could you let us know if ZEEnon's choice was randomized?

@ACFan and Rishi-
Post something. The game is afoot. You've got to have some thoughts to share.

[Kast]

@Zwet-
Do you have a reason why you placed your vote on Ort and put him at L-1?

Seeing as there is little to no danger of Ort getting turbo-lynched now, I'll replace my vote. I still want to hear from the people named above.

VOTE: Ort

[Kast]

UNVOTE

@Zwet-
WTH? Need to read posts since Zwet voted, but going to unvote to be on the safe side.

[Kast]

Ok, nvm, Zwet's being stupid and DGB's overreacted to the non-hammer lynch.

DGB's reaction might have made some sense if we were close to a lynch.

We're at L-2 (Ace is correct). There was an official votecount just a few posts above Zwet's re-vote.

VOTE: Ort

[Kast]

@Ace-
To clarify, if DGB genuinely thought that Zwet had hammered, then I could see those reactions from a townie.

I can understand some confusion about the vote count (I'll admit that I had to check to make sure nobody else voted and whether we were at L-1 or L-2).

However, we were pretty safe from an actual lynch; I stated this explicitly in my vote post.

@Zwet-
Please provide reasons with your future votes and explain what you are trying to achieve by whipping your vote around.

Previously, when ABR was still in the game and pushing for your lynch, I said I didn't think you were exhibiting anti-town behavior. Your recent votes are a departure from that.

Your careless voting now is reminiscent of your careless hammer of your scumbuddy in our last game.

@Charter-
-Kinetic-I don't think Kinetic's card choices themselves are a strong indication of his affiliation. He defensively drafted a plague which I think is a pretty pro-town move. Drafting an NK after already having a plague is worth watching him, but it is another defensive draft, and plague is a playable card.

Your speculation that Kinetic may have played a rat on Night 1 and plans to use a plague on Night 2 is plausible, but is still speculation.

@Kinetic-
However, charter's speculation strikes at the heart of one of my outstanding questions to you; why did you choose to CLAIM your night 1 action? Nobody was pressing you to claim whether you used a plague (or anything else for that matter). I'd like to hear a reason for why you thought it would help the town to make that unprompted claim.

Charter has proposed a reason why Kinetic as scum would want to make that claim (hides your real night actions, sets up to "prove" that you did not plague any players other than CTD on Night 1).

@Charter
-Zwet-I think it is better to lynch suspected scum rather than lynching stupid townies. But, I don't think it is safe to assume we will correctly lynch two scum today AND tomorrow before Zwet's potential plagues come into effect. I also think there is a decent chance that if Zwet tries to plague a townie, the townie will might be safe from plague (or draw an apothecary Night #3).

It sounds more like you think Zwet's voting was anti-town (I agree), and you think he will misuse his doubled plagues on townies (regardless of his affiliation?). If I'm reading your post wrong, let me know.

[Kast]

@Zwet-
You shouldn't name your plague targets.

Also, don't expect us to blindly believe your named targets (well...go ahead and expect that if you want, but don't be upset if you find out otherwise).

[Kast]

@Charter-
I think Ort's aim in claiming his night action is to follow up on his insistence that everyone claim Rat yesterday.

I expected such a claim from Ort-scum, although I was mostly watching to see if he would try to create false positive identification of scum based on players who have claimed Rat cards.

It looks like he didn't. He merely claimed that he used a doctor and that there must have been at least one Rat card used.

I'm not really clear on the aim of Ort-town in claiming, and I think I may have tunneled a bit on Ort-scum and missed looking at this point.

@Ort-
Do you have a reason for claiming your night action when you did?

@Rats-
To the best of my knowledge, there are no publicly confirmed players who cannot have a Rat card.

ACE-First pick claimed Plague but unconfirmed.
ACF-First pick unclaimed and unconfirmed.
CHA-First and second picks unclaimed and unconfirmed.
KAS-First pick unclaimed and unconfirmed. Claimed a Rat.
DGB-First pick unclaimed and unconfirmed.
KIN-First pick claimed Plague but unconfirmed. Claimed a Rat.
BUD-First pick claimed Doctor but unconfirmed. Scum
ORT-First and Second picks unclaimed and unconfirmed.
CTD-All picks unclaimed and unconfirmed.
RIS-All picks unclaimed and unconfirmed. Claimed a Rat.
LOO-All picks unclaimed and unconfirmed. Claimed a Rat.
ZWE-First pick claimed Plague but unconfirmed. Claimed a Rat.

@Zwet and Ace-
I think discussing Zwet's night choices any further is only distracting the town. I think it's fair to say that nobody trusts Zwet will actually do what he says or implies. Scum might play a wifom game if they have one apothecary between them, but they have a 50% chance and giving them more information to analyze can only help that.

@Charter-
You are welcome to speculate. I think it is fallacious to say "Kinetic is probably scum because he could be doing X". Your speculation itself isn't a bad thing. I just think that by itself it says nothing about Kinetic's affiliation. Combined with Kinetic claiming his night action unprompted, it provides an explanation for why he would make a claim which is otherwise incomprehensible (still waiting for an explanation on that).

[Kast]

Hmm. I'm not sure if DGB actually claimed any of her picks, but since I passed them to her, I know that the second and third are not Rats.

[Kast]

@Kinetic-
To be clear, your reason for

USING

the plague on Night 1 is that you felt scum would be immune to plague on any future night?

To be clear, your reason for using the plague on

CTD

is that you felt the Budja lynch must have at least one scum, and you felt CTD was the most likely scum out of the seven players on the wagon.

Also to be clear, your reason for

CLAIMING

your night action is that you were afraid that people would be suspicious if you claimed on Day 3.

Is all of that correct?

[Kast]

I initially made CTD a conditional target and intended to go back, look over the thread, and maybe change it, but stuff came up and since I disappeared it was taken as my target.

Wait...I don't think I follow this part exactly.

Does this mean you told PJ to use your Plague card against CTD unless you told him otherwise (and then you were gone so you never told him otherwise)?

If that is a correct understanding of what you posted, at what point in time did you decide on CTD as your target?

What made you decide on him as a target?

[Kast]

@Kinetic-
-If you picked CTD as your target at the beginning of the night, why were you surprised?

The reason I asked you to clarify timing on that is because you had not done so before and your post reads ambiguously on the timing with an implication that some events happened between picking your target and claiming your target that changed your opinion about CTD.

-To clarify then, your primary reason for claiming is that you said you would claim after your plague target died. Your next reason is that you thought it was interesting that CTD was killed.

I want to note that your primary reason doesn't exactly fit with what you promised. You promised to claim your plague kill. This was clearly not your plague kill (unless you have magically fast acting plagues). It may have been your plague target. The reasoning behind claiming a plague kill, does apply equally to this case (although that does not necessarily make it a scummy thing).

Your secondary reason does not explain why you would want to claim your plague target.

-Do you still adhere to your belief that one player on Budja's lynch must be scum bussing Budja? How does CTD's death affect this?

@Rishi-
It's been mentioned, but you completely avoided commenting on Ort or Kinetic.

There haven't been that many posts; 6-7 pages in 5 days? The majority are discussion about Ort.

If that's the first of more posts to come, then fine. If not, consider making it that.

@DGB-
Please provide more content to your votes than simply the vote itself. As it is, your voting is just as irresponsible and anti-town as Zwet. I am assuming that your vote implies agreement with everything that Rishi posted.

Do you think Zwet is likely to kill townies with his plagues regardless of his affiliation?

He has threatened to plague you. Is this affecting your desire to lynch him?

@Ort-
It's hard to believe you can't understand the problem with PLAYER A proposing that everyone lynch PLAYER B if PLAYER A flips town. PLAYER A could genuinely believe that PLAYER B is scum, but he could still be mistaken. Other players can't tell if PLAYER A is actually a townie until after the lynch; until then it is a mistake to assume that the offer to be lynched indicates sincerity on the PLAYER A's part.

If we lynch DGB today and DGB flips TOWN, do you think it would be fair to lynch you in retaliation?

How about if Ace, Charter, or Kast is lynched and flips town; would it be reasonable to lynch you after that (one of the three of us has to be a townie)?

I think you are a reasonable/rational player; it is hard to reconcile your interactions with DGB and my opinion of you as a player.

Also, if we lynch you and you flip scum; are we supposed to assume that DGB is a townie?

@Looker-
I want to hear more from you.

[Kast]

I think you are a reasonable/rational player; it is hard to reconcile your interactions with DGB and my opinion of you as a player.

Hmm, this sounds like there are multiple interactions that I can't reconcile. That is a mistake. There is one interaction that I can't reconcile, and it is the desire to lynch-trade Ort-for-DGB. My impression of Ort is that he is a smart enough and rational enough player to realize that other players should not commit themselves to that course of action.

To clarify, if we lynch Ort and Ort flips town, I know that I will be more suspicious of DGB. It does NOT mean I will auto-lynch DGB. If the evidence points to DGB as scum over any other player, then I will push for DGB's lynch. If the evidence points somewhere else, then I will go there.

Hope that clears things.

@DGB-
I wasn't asking you to clarify if you had an Apothecary; good that you didn't clarify. I also want to clarify that my question to DGB was not meant to imply anything about the cards that I passed to her (I guess people other than myself and DGB may try to second guess this...have fun =P).

I don't think it is a good idea to try to lynch Zwet unless we actually believe he is scum.

I wouldn't put any stock in any targets that Zwet claims. If he is scum, he will be targetting townies. If he is a townie, his targets will probably be close to random.

There were very few apothecaries claimed in the first draft. Everyone who did not draw an apothecary yet, has a 50% chance to draw it in Draft #2. I assume that most players who see an apothecary who have not seen one yet, will choose to draw it in Draft #2.

This gives us a 50% or better for players who have not drawn apothecaries yet to draw them. Out of the players who did draw apothecaries in Draft #1; I still think it is likely that most townies would prioritize Apothecaries highly and scum probably did not do so. I think it is likely that townies picked apoths and scum probably passed them.

I am comfortable with those odds.

[Kast]

@DGB-
For my edification, please include at least a comment referring to your previous opinion with your future votes.

It doesn't do the town any favors if we let you put out a vote ambiguously.

[Kast]

@Ace-
Yes. He claims to have defensive drafted a plague in preference. Kinetic did the same. I think that both are reasonable choices (I would have done the same in their position).

Budja passed an apothecary in favor of a mimic. I don't think that is a very pro-town move (perhaps if he had claimed an apothecary as his pick#1, it would have made sense since the mimic is more versatile).

[Kast]

It's actually a request not a question.

Instead of posting:

VOTE: Player XYZ

Please try to include at least a short comment with your vote:

I agree with what Player ABC just said.

VOTE: Player XYZ

or

Player XYZ has not changed anything since my previous opinion.

VOTE: Player XYZ

And even better, post a reason(s) with the vote:

I agree with what Player ABC just said because:
-Reason 1
-Reason 2
...
-Reason N

VOTE: Player XYZ

And if you don't understand what edify means...you are welcome to edify me anytime

[Kast]

@Kinetic-
-Surprise-
You picked a player to plague. That player turned out to be a townie. It isn't clear or obvious why that surprised you or why you would need to double check that.

Are you claiming that you were so confident of your plague target choice that it was surprising to see that you were mistaken?
Are you claiming that you forgot who your target was?

I'm not sure what other ways your situation could produce surprise; the whole reason I'm asking is because YOU are the one who said you were surprised.

-Motivation for claiming-
In 876 you did not provide a reason why your decision to claim helps the town. Try to understand, this is not an attack, this is an attempt to clarify and understand.

If you are a townie, I hope you'll cooperate to help the town as a whole understand what you thinking and why you made the decisions that you did. We don't have all the information that you have available to you; what is "obvious" to you is not necessarily "obvious" to everyone else.

Simply saying you did something

because you did it

is NOT providing those reasons or helping the town understand you.

-Claiming plague kills-
There are probably multiple reasons for claiming plague kills, but I think the main one is to reduce confusion and help the town understand what is going on and the next one is to commit yourself to a claimed action and allow the town to evaluate your claimed action.

I think the former is clearly a pro-town reason; it really helps the town to understand where deaths are coming from and to keep people accountable for their actions.

The latter is a lot more selfish; but can be pro-town if the player is a townie, and anti-town if the player is scum.

Your primary reason for claiming (and the one reason you have given which arguably helps town) seems to fit more into the selfish category. If you are a townie, then yes it could help us evaluate your motivations for plaguing (which I'd hope a townie has pro-town motivations).

FYI, you did not say you would claim your plague

target

after it dies. You said you would claim your plague

kill

the day after it happens (except you said Day 4 instead of Day 3).

Right now, I would really like less defensiveness and more explanation to help us determine whether your motivations for (1) targetting CTD, and (2) claiming your night action make sense for a townie.

Tbh, even if your motivations don't fully make sense, I think Ort is more suspicious than you based on his voting history and would prefer lynching Ort. Since you have a large number of players who are actively suspicious of you because of your decision to claim and the content of your claim, I think it is in your best interests to be less defensive and be more helpful in letting other players understand you.

-CTD probable bus?-
What reasoning led you to your decision that CTD was the most likely bus? Timing? Specific posts? Something Budja posted?

You said you thought there was one and only one scum on Budja's wagon. If you still believe that, then we have 6 surviving players who were on Budja's wagon, and 3 players other than yourself who were NOT on Budja's wagon (and thus contain the remaining scum).

Do you have any evidence to strongly help you narrow down 1 out of the 6 players voting for Budja and more than the 1 out of 3 players not voting for Budja? (Btw, I don't subscribe to that belief; I think it is quite probable that at least one scum was on Budja's wagon, and it could easily be 2 scum on his wagon).

[Kast]

@Looker-
Does that mean you have finished reading the thread?

Please share thoughts on why you feel DGB is scum.

Please share thoughts on why you feel Ort is either not scum or significantly less suspicious than DGB.

Please share thoughts on why you feel Zwet is either not scum or significantly less suspicious than DGB.

What parts of the reasons posted for suspecting Ort/Zwet do you disagree with and why?

If you do not disagree with any of them, what makes you prefer a DGB lynch over both Ort and Zwet?

[Kast]

...? No one's ever suspected her before. She throws out a little bit of logic to appear town and lets y'all scoot about formulating suspicions of other players. She's free of pressure.

IF that were true; if we ignore actual post and vote history, and pretend that nobody has suspected DGB so far this game; how does that implicate DGB as scum?

Assuming what you said is true, that puts us in this situation:
There are only two scum remaining. If DGB is one of them, then DGB's partner is one of the other 9 players. If we discount you, then there are 8 townies who have been failing to suspect DGB.

If we consider that DGB is a townie, then there are 2 scum players out of the 9, and discounting you, that leaves 7 townies who have been failing to suspect DGB.

I don't follow how you determined that one of those situations is more likely than the other.

[Kast]

Okay. If you genuinely are curious about the cases against Ort and against Zwet, this is what I think the main points against each are (I may miss some, and I don't subscribe to all of them).

Ort:
-Said he was suspicious of Budja but did not follow up with a vote.
-Tried to pull people away from Budja and onto AM at first, then DGB second.
-Said he thought Charter was a townie yesterday but did not vote to keep Charter alive (since then has changed his mind about Charter's affiliation).
-Proposed letting himself die to guarantee the lynch of another player.

Zwet:
-He has a doubled plague and plans to use it.
-Votes erratically with little or no reason.
-Possibly scummy card choices.
-Lurked at end of Day 1.

I guess I'll include what I see for Kinetic and DGB as well:

Kinetic:
-Claimed his night action with little or suspicious reason.
-Claimed to have used plague against a player who most of us thought was more likely town than scum.
-Possibly scummy card choices.

DGB:
-Erratic voting, sometimes with little or no reason.
-Defended Budja.
-Top suspect of our only confirmed townie.

This isn't going into details on possible pairings between any of these 4 with other players...that would be insane/nuts.

[Kast]

@Ort-
I really don't like self votes that aren't a hammer or a vote that puts you into the lynching threshold (okay, actually yours did put you into lynch threshold so maybe not so bad...).

But it feels like you are giving up on the game (maybe you are?). We aren't actually doing badly, even if you are actually a townie and we mislynch you, we correctly lynched scum on Day 1 which is HUGE.

Also, I don't think that you were a sure lynch...Charter explicitly stated that he was wavering and wanted to hear your case on DGB. ACFan stated he prefers a Kinetic lynch to yours. Kinetic and Looker don't seem interested in lynching you either.

-Post 943-
-You're arguing a technicality. Your vote was only placed after Budja's lynch was a foregone conclusion. During the time that you called Budja your number 2 scum target, you chose to not vote for him. When you had the choice to vote for your number 2 target and secure a lynch of that target over an alternate of either no lynch or lynch of someone you felt was town, you chose to vote for someone who was nowhere near lynching (this was the situation for much of Day 1).

-Pulling votes AWAY from a CONFIRMED scum IS scummy. It is even MORE SO when you were saying that the confirmed scum was one of your top lynch choices. At the time, it was not scummy. Now that Budja is confirmed, it IS very scummy.

-Charter was in danger of being lynched for much of Day 1. During that time, instead of voting for Budja, you asked the players who were voting for Budja to switch votes to players who had even less chance of being lynched. This reduced Charter's chances of surviving, and increased Budja's chances of surviving. I think that is definitely scummy.

-If you are a townie, then you don't know DGB's affiliation. Telling us that you strongly suspect DGB is fine. If you die and flip town, we will recognize that there are townies who legitimately believe that DGB is scum. That does NOT mean they are correct (they may be they may be mistaken). I think you're a good enough player to recognize that. I find it suspicious that you keep pushing it anyway and can't seem to understand why other players can't blindly agree to that. Related but to a lesser degree, it isn't good to let yourself be lynched.

-I missed that thing about you claiming your night action. I don't think it's actually indicative of you being scum. I can see you as town claiming that to expose that a rat was used. I don't think we gain much from it, but it doesn't hurt us much either.

-I split your behavior with Budja into two points because I see them as independent points. The first shows an inconsistency between your stated beliefs and your actions. The second shows active defense of a confirmed scum. The second is akin to DGB defending Budja. DGB, however, was consistent in saying that Budja is a townie.

-DGB-
I forgot that, you can add it as another point against DGB.
-DGB may have been fishing for Ort's cards.

...you guys are posting too fast I can't keep up =D

[Kast]

@Ort-
Kinetic isn't the person above you. Budja was and he is dead now and we know he is scum.

@DGB/Charter-
It is pointless asking Ort for his cards. Budja was before Ort, CTD was after Ort. It is now pretty much impossible for us to verify Ort's cards.

If Ort is scum, then all the cards that Budja named previously, could be lies and Ort *verifying* them could be lies as well.

[Kast]

@Ort claiming his cards-
I don't think it helps us to make him claim.

HOWEVER, I don't think this hurts to share since it is public knowledge already. IF Ort is a townie, then we know that his last card was an Apothecary. His second card had to be one of double or mimic (based on what Budja claimed to pass him).

He has claimed doctor, which has to be his first pick card.

Doctor, mimic (or double), and Apothecary.

If those are his cards, then he WOULD have probably used doctor first. It makes sense since scum would be most likely to use plagues in night 1 and so if scum were limited on rats, then the rats were more likely to come out on night 2 than night 1.

If anything, Ort's cards are plausible and consistent town.

[Kast]

@DGB-
End of Day 1, Ort was calling me YOUR scumbuddy. It wouldn't fit if he claimed to doctor me.

He also STRONGLY felt you were scum. CTD was your biggest detractor (other than Ort); I think CTD makes sense as his choice if he is a townie.

[Kast]

@Ort-

Re: charter, no-one was going to quicklynch him. I would not defer my vote to a suboptimal target unless it was deadline. Playing otherwise is actually likely to have very bad consequences (imagine me trying to explain why I switched votes to someone who I suspect less than someone else, before deadline).

Charter was in lynch threshold with Budja as the runner up for almost half the day. You didn't need to jump on before deadline; you had plenty of time. I seriously doubt that anyone could reasonably call you suspicious for voting your NUMBER TWO suspect. Even less so if the alternative is lynching someone you think is a townie.

[Kast]

@Ort-
To be fair, yes, if we independently look at either of the points I listed regarding Budja, they *could* be consistent with Ort as a townie.

I DON'T agree that it is consistent with the desire to vote AM or DGB instead of voting Budja and raising Budja above Charter.

[Kast]

@Ort-
When considering the point that you were pulling support from Budja to AM and then to DGB; I see it more in terms of:
Choosing between lynching the 60% or no lynch with a vote on the 100%; you stuck with the no lynch option and actually pursued a course that makes no lynch even more likely.

I don't think you could really be 100% sure of any scum anyway (unless you are scum).

[Kast]

@Rishi, Charter-
Just looked back and Zwet did make some comments on Budja, but very brief ones.
-Ace speculated that Charter could be bussing Budja, and Zwet denied that possibility.
-After CTD joined Charter and Kast in voting for Budja, Zwet voted for Charter. This vote secured the lynch threshold on Charter (which was on and off prior to that) and kept Charter as the vote leader.
-Zwet consulted with Budja's opinion on ABR.
-Zwet called Budja scummy for flip-flopping his vote. He refers to this point again later.

I couldn't really say if this says anything about Zwet's alignment.

@Ort-
This post by Charter illustrates the crux of why I think your vote history is the scummiest thing to date. Neither of your top two lynch candidates were even at lynch threshold, so either no lynch or lynch of someone other than your top choices was likely. CTD moved to Budja and instead of you voting according to your stated beliefs, you maintained your position.

You later replaced Ace with DGB, but claimed to still hold Budja as a 2nd/3rd option.

I can see a townie stubbornly holding on to their top lynch candidate even when that is not a feasible choice. If they are doing so while the outcome is a probable town lynch or no lynch and the alternative is lynch of number two candidate, it is still possible, but less likely. In either case, I think it is pretty anti-town behavior.

In the case where the player seems to be a good/rational player, I think it is more likely a result of the player being scum. Your actions are entirely consistent with scum.

@AM/Budja defending each other-
I know I wasn't a big proponent of this idea, but it seemed like there was a lot of suspicion that AM must be Budja's scum buddy, and now it all disappeared.

Did something happen that made all the people who suspected AM of being Budja's scumbuddy change their minds?

It seems like people decided Budja was the scummier of the two, then after lynching him, all suspicion of AM just evaporated. From this I loosely suspect that scum were attempting to create a false pairing between Budja and AM, but have now dropped that idea since it didn't take root (potentially also because an AM lynch can no longer provide "town points" for Budja).

[Kast]

@Kinetic-
I haven't voted you. I'm not planning to do so. Ort is my top suspect right now.

You're a bit paranoid, but if you take the time to read what my posts actually say instead of assuming that anything posted about you is an attack, I think your choices are a bit suspicious, but not particularly damning or scummy.

However, between you and Zwet, I don't see anything about Zwet that actively indicates that he is or could be scum. His actions have been random at times and his reckless voting is pretty anti-town, but that is not easily explained by affiliation. Since his vote is mostly going towards Ort atm, I don't believe that his anti-town behavior is currently hurting the town.

I don't know who his plague choices are, but I think they will be pretty random. I think that if it targets a townie, the chance that the townie is plague immune is higher than if the chance that the target is plague immune if he targets scum.

@ACFan-
Thanks. I am slightly concerned since multiple people saying that Charter and I are townies increases the chances that one of us will be killed by scum (the exact amount it does so depends on how well *confirmed* scum thinks we are). I am slightly less concerned since this is a protection heavy game, so there is definitely a chance that one or both of us get protected tonight.

@Looker-
You really have nothing else to contribute? I think ABR's description of Zwet applies well to you: useless. Take a stance. I'm getting an extremely strong "N00B" read from Looker, and it's not a good one. You seem scared to take a position and tell people what you think. Don't let us rush you, but also when you have said things, you just run away if someone asks a question about it.

@All-
Yeah...I think the game is kinda dying now. Everyone has posted, even if Looker is refraining from committing himself to anything.

One HUGE thing that I think everyone keeps overlooking/ignoring (though I really can't imagine why), we SUCCESSFULLY lynched scum on day 1. We're in VERY good shape right now. If you are a townie, there is no need to be so negative/doomed/apathetic. I can see scum being upset and apathetic if they think they're about to lose, but I don't see it at all reasonable for townies to be feeling that way.

[Kast]

@Charter&ACFan-
I don't think that is realistically going to happen. Looks like we're probably just heading to deadline.

@Looker-
You said you'd prefer a replacement; is that serious? You also made a comment about Ort not voting, but you yourself are also not voting. If you want out of this game, tell the mod. If not, place a vote.

[Kast]

@Charter-
-If Looker is being replaced, then I agree with your thought. I think we should definitely let whoever replaces have as much time as possible for reading and figuring out night choice.

But given that he posted again after his comment about replacement, and since PJ isn't saying anything about replacing Looker, I'm guessing that won't be happening.

-I don't follow on Kinetic or Zwet being replaced or benefiting from an extra few daytime days to make night choices. Kinetic's has proven himself good at lurking until he gets a prod then posting frequently enough to not be replaced, I see nothing to indicate that this will change. Zwet is less active atm, but he is still posting (and more frequently then several others).

I think Zwet's card usage will probably be random no matter whether he has to submit choices now or at the end of the week.

If Kinetic is a townie, then he only has one option for his nightchoice now (NK). If he is scum, then it doesn't really help to give him more time to plan out his plague kill.

@PJ-

Are you looking for a replacement for Looker since he said he would prefer to be replaced from this game?

And actually to be clear, I don't find ACFan or Charter suspicious for not hammering Ort. Ort is among their stated suspicious players, so I can see them being okay with his lynch but preferring Kinetic's lynch if that becomes viable.

[Kast]

@Ort 1019 case on Budja-
-I don't share your meta about Zwet and DGB interactions. It looks like DGB votes carelessly and at times erratically. I can understand anyone voting for Zwet's reckless behavior and out of fear of his plagues. I don't agree that those are strongly indicative of Zwet being scum.

-Yes, DGB needs attention for strongly defending Budja. But regardless of affiliation, a player who says they were wrong after strongly defended someone who flipped scum seems normal and expected.

-Agreed that DGB's defense of Budja was a bit incomprehensible, and mostly emotional appeal. Doesn't seem out of character with the rest of her play so far.

-I can see the point about you taking votes from Budja. It doesn't require the observer to personally think Budja is scummy. The problem is that you publicly claimed that Budja was your number 2 and were acting in a manner to bring the town away from a lynch of your number 2 and towards lynch of someone who you thought was a townie or possibly no lynch. At the time, it raised conditional suspicion of you, and after Budja's flip, it is suspicious.

-Agreed that that point shouldn't be a town-point for Budja. It does look like DGB abandoned that list pretty quickly. It looks like she made some judgments on replacing into the game, and as she actually became involved, those judgments were abandoned in favor of new posts and the impressions from those posts. If DGB were still maintaining that her initial list and read were accurate, I would find it extremely suspicious.

@Ort's Self-Vote-
If the options are townie gets lynched then Ort gets lynched putting us in LYLO OR Ort gets lynched putting us 1 shy of LYLO; what's to stop scum from lynching a townie after you are gone and putting us in LYLO?

In general, I would think a townie is better at preventing a mislynch while alive than while dead; but the implication seems to be that your death now will allow us to successfully lynch scum? Although your death tomorrow would not do the same?

[Kast]

I'll reserve judgment until we actually see Ort flip. My last game we narrowed down our potential cop by half the players after scum faked anger at being lynched.

@Ort-
Any final thoughts that might help the town in the event that you are town?

I assume you want us to watch DGB. I think your next suspect atm is Ace?

Do you have any thoughts on the players you haven't been commenting on (aside from how terrible we all are)?

[Kast]

Hey all,

Reading to catch up but may have to wait until tonight to actually post.

I spent most of my free time catching up to a different game (sorry, but that one is a bit more interesting than this one).

[Kast]

@Ort = Townie-
This tells us that he genuinely believed that DGB is 100% scum. Also, we know that scum used a Rat. This makes passing Mimic cards much more dangerous.

Sorry Ort, but I still maintain that your voting behavior regarding Budja was scummy.

@ACF-
-Why did you claim your night action? Particularly, why did you claim an APOTHECARY target?

AM had either a Sanc or Apoth. If he is scum and if he passed the Apoth to you, then you have just let him know that your Apothecary will not be stopping any plagues.

-Why did you use an Apothecary on someone other than yourself? You are your only confirmed townie. Keeping yourself alive comes first and foremost.

Scum also can more safely decide to plague you if they draw a plague now.

-Why did you choose to hammer? Ort's lynch was clearly going to happen regardless of your vote.

@Zwet-
Don't claim your plague victims. Don't even narrow them down. If you do, you just help scum determine who to play Apothecaries on. By stating that you didn't plague Player X and Player Y, if both of those players are not scum, then scum know that there is a much greater chance that they have been plagued and will need to grab an Apothecary tonight.

@Kinetic-
-Why are you convinced that DGB is not scum?

-We learned that Ort was a townie who genuinely suspected DGB. We learned that Charter was a townie who ended the day wanting to plague DGB and Rishi.

It's not hard proof that DGB is scum, but there is at least legitimate reasons which would entice townies into believing that DGB is scum.

@AceM-
Why do you say Kinetic is scummy here?
1078-
Explain (2) and why it indicates ACF is scum.

@Rishi-
-That doesn't follow. Scum may easily have used plagues on Apothecaried townies, Ort, OR may have used plagues on Night 2 (as Zwet has claimed).

-I'm tracking what people have claimed, although it's incomplete and may have errors.

If people think it would help, I don't mind sharing my list. The information is all public knowledge so scum already have it if they want it.

@ACF-
-Charter did end the day saying Kinetic is scummy, but we can't assume that means Kinetic is scum for similar reasons why DGB was not auto-lynched just because CTD thought she was scum.

-I agree that Looker is scummier out of Zwet and Looker.

@Looker-
Welcome back. Now play.

@AceM-
-ACF has been after Kinetic since most of D2. That's clearly not OMGUS. His suspicion of you is probably at least partially OMGUS.
-Kinetic doesn't have a wagon. But I agree that it doesn't make sense to vote AceM while calling Kinetic the more scummy one.
-I don't see how you call ACF's post "Woe is Town". He wasn't happy that his apothecary is useless, but that is far from doomsaying the town.

@Looker-
Please stop active lurking. If you don't want to play, then get a replacement. You're not being funny, you're just being stupid.

@DGB-
Are you still around? Post something.

@Overall-
I don't really see a case against ACF. Using an apothecary on Charter as well as claiming to have used an apothecary is suboptimal play, but is less suspicious than Charter using a plague on CTD as well as claiming to have used a plague on CTD. I think that one is a pretty clear comparison.

Aside from that, I want to hear from DGB.

[Kast]

@Looker-
If you aren't interested in playing the game, ask for a replacement instead of wasting our time.

[Kast]

Been pretty busy and will probably continue to be pretty busy.

Atm, I'm not giving this game as much attention as I did before.

My surface reads are that ACF made a stupid-town mistake with his claim of apothecary. I think mostly the same for Kinetic's plague victim and announcing the use of his plague. Both claims feel a bit more like town-mistakes than scum ploys. In particular, Kinetic's decision to make an unconventional play and try plaguing someone who at least two confirmed townies strongly felt was pro-town fits with his decision and pressure on the town to defensive draft instead of drafting for utility.

Atm, I am most suspicious of DGB, who has been completely absent from the game thus far. Post something please.

@Mod-

Another request for a prod on DGB.

Ace and Zwet are slipping mostly under my radar. I don't think Ace has posted anything out of character for his behavior as a townie. His increased activity so far this day is extremely reminiscent of behavior in other games I've played and read with him.

I think Zwet isn't being quite as random as normal, perhaps attempting to lay low (and perhaps playing around his plague targets). We should be extra careful of any player who Zwet tries to lynch, since Zwet scum+mislynch+NK+2Plagues pretty much loses the game.

I want to hear from Looker's replacement.

Also, I'm thinking about just revealing my notes on cards.

Rishi is still not contributing much. Earlier in the game Rishi promised more activity in future days. While there is a bit more, it's not much of an improvement. I want to hear more content from Rishi, specifically thoughts about different players.

[Kast]

Hey DGB, welcome back and hope your vacation went well.

I requested the prod because you weren't here and I didn't remember the V/LA (still don't remember that you posted it but apparently someone does).

-Any thoughts on the Ort lynch?

-Any thoughts on Charter?

-Any thoughts on ACFan's claim?

-Any thoughts on Looker?

-Would you be opposed if I shared my notes on cards (particularly, do you have objections if I share the cards that I passed to you)?

@Non-DGB, non-Rishi-
Do you guys feel it would help if I share my notes on what cards everyone has/passed?

It is all based on actual claims to date + my cards and card info.

@Zwet-
I didn't say I think you are scum. I said I think you are flying under my radar. I added that we should be wary of who you propose as lynch targets or who you vote for. That actually applies if you are town as well, since scum can try to figure out who you plagued and try to avoid NKing those people (and determine if they need to draft or use apothecaries).

@Ort town-
One more thing about Ort town. It means he did use a doctor. At least one Rat must have been played on CTD. All of us except for DGB, Ace, and ACFan have claimed to have a Rat. Any of those three could be lying with no way to determine the truth (Ace is the only one who could potentially prove himself if he used his Plague).

@Ace-
After I post my notes, if you used your plague on Night 1, but your target did not die today AND did not have access to an Apothecary card, that is worth mentioning since it practically means someone protected your target (probably his scumbuddy).

[Kast]

@Looker-
Please stop posting if you already asked for replacement.

@All-
Enjoy your weekends!

I'll probably check in again later then out til Monday.

[Kast]

@Kinetic-
If we were one day back, I would completely agree with your argument for waiting on a Zwet lynch.

However, I think it loses some steam now because if Zwet is scum, then we are already practically in Lylo. There are 8 players alive now 6/2 T/M. If Zwet is scum, then we lose if his targets don't get apothecaries:
-Mislynch: 5/2
-NK: 4/2
-Plagues: 2/2

People should try to lynch whoever they feel is the most likely to be scum, even if that person is Zwet.

@AceM-
Kinetic claimed to have used his plague already. Zwet claimed to have doubled his plague. You are the only living player who has claimed a plague but not claimed use of that plague or victims.

@Zwet-
Good point on Rishi disappearing. Rishi claimed to be more active in mid to late game, but is currently showing similar activity levels to the beginning.

@Notes-
I'll post tomorrow.

[Kast]

@Kinetic-
That makes sense for the case where Zwet is scum (and for anyone who strongly believes he is scum). But if Zwet is a townie, then there is that chance that he targeted scum and so it is better to not reveal and limit scum's ability to apothecary the right target.

I think that if the town as a whole is convinced that Zwet is scum and decides to lynch him, then it would be appropriate to force him to reveal his targets. I don't think we should start with forcing him to reveal.

@My notes on who has what cards:
A=Apothecary
C=1/2 Cop
D=Doctor
2=Double
M=Mimic
N=1/4 NK
P=Plague
R=Rat
S=Sanctuary

PLAYER-Card 1(passed)/Card 2(passed)/Card 3-Note?
ACE-P(NS)/AorS(SorA)/M-

All cards claimed to a degree that ACF can confirm

ACF-?(N?)/S(N)/AorS-

Card derived from ACE and CHA claims. Claimed no NK or Rat

CHA-?(RM)/?(N)/N-

Confirmed townie. Claimed NK and no Rat

KAS-?(DR)/R(M)/N-

I am thinking about revealing my Card 1. I think it will make me a high priority night kill target, BUT I think I probably am already a high priority night kill target

DGB-?(NM)/D(R)/M-

No claim about Rat

KIN-P(MA)/N(M)/R-

All claimed early and unprompted

BUD-D(2M)/M(A)/M-

Scum, so the claimed D might be a lie. The rest is confirmed by Ort and Kinetic.

ORT-D(??)/2orM(2orM)/A-

Confirmed townie. Confirmed Budja's passed cards.

CTD-?(??)/?(?)/2orM-

Confirmed townie. No Rat or NK.

RIS-?(R?)/?(?)/?-

Claimed Rat and no NK. This must be either the second or third pick, but is unconfirmable.

LOO-?(2M)/?(R)/?-

Claimed NK and Rat

ZWE-P(AS)/2(M)/R-

Passes confirmed by ACE

[Kast]

@Kinetic-
To be clear, I'm not actually all that suspicious of Zwet, so I'm not all that keen on him revealing his targets. If he is town, even if he didn't target scum, knowing his targets means scum can avoid wasting their night kill.

Atm, I am most interested in Looker's player spot and Rishi (in that order).

I would like to hear from that player spot once a replacement is found. It is unfortunate that the original player in that spot is not here to justify card choices, but atm there is an information deficiency from those two that reflects their lurking/low content behavior.

Rishi still has yet to deliver on the promise of more activity in the later game. We could be in Lylo right now, so I'm pretty sure this counts as the late game.

[Kast]

Looker is being replaced...although dunno if the mod is having any progress with finding a replacement.

But yeah, definitely prod Rishi.

[Kast]

Okay, this game is slowing down a lot.

I think I'd be most happy with lynching Looker's player slot, but I don't want to lynch until a replacement comes in.

@Something to discuss-
I think I'm already probably the top NK target tonight (unless perhaps I'm plagued and scum think I'll be dying anyway).

I have and played a 1/2 Cop card on N1.

This claim is a bit of a gamble, but I think it helps us overall.

If people are okay with it, we can go ahead with the partial Cop claim that Ort and I were discussing on D1.

Based on my notes, I find it unlikely that other players have 1/2 Cops or the ability to complete their 1/2 Cop to a full cop.
-DGB may have had one as Card 1, but I cannot pass one to her.
-AceM and Zwet both full claimed and claimed to have no 1/2 Cops yet.
-No clue about Looker or Rishi.

If this is the case, then I propose that AceM or ACFan pass 1/2 Cop card(s) to me tonight. I will use the card which completes my other 1/2 Cop and can investigate one target.

Pro:
-If you have not used a 1/2 Cop already, then you will be unlikely to ever get a chance to use it. We lose if we arrive at Night 5.
-Scum are probably already planning to kill me.
-Scum are practically forced to make their NK on me tonight.
-50% odds that AceM draws a 1/2 Cop, and that raises to 75% chance that at least one of AceM or ACFan draws a 1/2 Cop card (assuming ACFan did not get one already).

Con:
-I become a huge scum target and if scum successfully NK me, we wasted the 1/2 Cop cards.
-Townies are almost forced to protect me with doctors.
-I may already be walking dead with a plague about to explode on me.
-Nobody might draw 1/2 Cops tonight.

[Kast]

I think I'm already probably the top NK target tonight (unless perhaps I'm plagued and scum think I'll be dying anyway).

This kind of WIFOM is the worst. It prevents town from lynching kast because he thinks he will be the night kill and prevents us from lynching him if he is.

For the former part, I'd be more inclined to agree with your assessment if I were an actual lynch candidate. I don't really see that at the moment.

For the latter part, what is wrong with preventing the town from lynching the player who scum try to night kill?

If this is the case, then I propose that AceM or ACFan pass 1/2 Cop card(s) to me tonight. I will use the card which completes my other 1/2 Cop and can investigate one target.

Which would prevent either of us from getting a cop investigation. This would be a great scum move.

You have claimed to not have a 1/2 Cop card. Unless you draft two 1/2 Cop cards and use them on Night 3 and Night 4, then you will be unable to get a cop investigation anyway.

The whole point of my claiming at all is because it is unlikely that the town will have cop investigations available on Day 4 or Day 5 (and if we haven't won by Day 5, then we lose).

The chance that both of you draw 1/2 Cop cards is 25%. The chance that at least one of you does is 75%.

[Kast]

@DGB-
False dilemma. Some other options (not an exclusive list):
-You could be scum and could be lying about using protective cards.
-Scum may not have had Rat's last round and decided to hit a target they didn't think would be protected.
-I could be a townie with completely off the mark suspicions and scum don't care if I live.
-Scum don't care about my cards.

Anyway, I didn't specify, but the point of my claim was to discuss whether AceM and ACFan agree that it would be good to pass me a 1/2 cop card tonight.

I guess AceM is a no on that front.

[Kast]

Hope you all had good weekends.

Hmm, deadline is coming up and we don't have anyone in lynch threshold.

I am disappointed that after a few suspicious posts and then completely lurking the rest of the game, the Slicey/ZEEnon/Looker player slot is not getting a replacement and looks like it will just get away clean.

Out of Zwet or ACFan, I'd prefer lynching Zwet.

Atm, I'm seeing both ACFan and Kinetic as townies who made bad decisions about claiming, but I think they both made those choices in good faith.

VOTE: Zwet

Whoever we end up lynching, I think it is best if we wait until deadline to have the best chance of a replacement for Looker.

[Kast]

@Zwet, 1211-
If you agree with Kinetic's statement that ACFan is scum, then vote for him.

[Kast]

@Zwet-
It's more that I find ACFan more pro-town than you. That plus nobody is posting and with 2 votes on each of you, it looks like we are either going to deadline without hitting lynch threshold, or going to deadline with a tie. In that case, I would prefer having a say in which one of you is lynched (and I'd prefer Zwet lynch over ACFan lynch).

I can see a townie legitimately suspecting AceM or Kinetic.

I've played a few games with AceM now, so I think the reckless voting and some of his earlier plays that are somewhat suspicious are pretty consistent with his normal play as a townie. But without that meta, I would probably suspect AceM as well (probably would have suspected him from much earlier).

Kinetic has made some questionable plays; claiming to have plagued CTD and making that unprompted claim. We know that Charter is a confirmed townie and he believed Kinetic was scum. I can see townies legitimately suspecting Charter as well. I think his actions are probably more motivated by his *different* way of playing and are probably townie misplays.

Overall, I don't think ACFan has said or done anything particularly scummy or anti-town. He has provided reasonable thoughts so far and been active and contributing to the town.

I think you have been pretty random (as per your normal play). If it does come down to your lynch, I would prefer that we determine that sooner than later so you have time to claim if you feel that claiming will help the town and prevent your lynch (quite possibly you don't feel that way).

My top preference atm is actually Looker, but I don't believe there is support for a Looker lynch.

[Kast]

Since it wasn't clear, I don't think your random play is pro-town. I don't think you have been really contributing to the town. You have been active and posting, but often with little to no reason behind your posts; when you do have reason, it is likely to be a complete abandonment of your previous position with no explanation for why you think differently.

I believe that kind of play is anti-town as it makes it harder for townies to read you and makes it easier for scum to sow confusion.

[Kast]

UNVOTE

Welcome PookyTheMagicalBear!

I'd like you to confirm your predecessor's card claims.

Also, confirm whether the cards passed to Zwet are indeed the ones you passed.

Your player slot passed a double and a mimic for the first round, and a rat in the second round.

Also, do you have any thoughts to share with us, or any insight into Looker's behavior?

VOTE: PTMB

[Kast]

Yes, deadline is approaching, but that's not a serious concern since we have one player at lynch threshold.

I would prefer if everyone switch votes to PTMB until he posts his card picks from D1 and some thoughts on each player.

The player slot has been lurking heavily and failed to contribute anything to this game except for claiming a Rat and NK. Looker also died as scum in an ongoing game, and his behavior there was practically identical to his behavior in this game.

@Zwet-
What do you find scummy about ACFan?

The only thing I've seen is that he claimed to have apothecaried Charter. Not an ideal townie play, but not exactly a scum-tell.

[Kast]

@DGB-
Are you saying that I am scumbuddies with Zwet for putting him into lynch threshold then taking him out?

[Kast]

I think Pooky needs votes to incite him to post quickly.

Based on player's stated positions, I strongly doubted that anyone would have been okay with voting Looker's player spot without a player there. Votes to pressure the player spot to post would be completely meaningless, and the only point to voting would be if you were certain of his scumminess over and above any other player or anything that might be said by any other player.

Now that there is a player who can respond to votes, I would like to see votes follow and hear content from the lurker-spot.

If there is absolutely no movement, I will return to Zwet because I would prefer Zwet lynch over ACFan lynch as stated previously. Given that ACFan should prefer Zwet's lynch over his own regardless of alignment, there should be no problem with securing a Zwet lynch.

So, if nobody has any intent to move their votes, then Zwet should consider whether claiming will help the town believe him (if not it is probably better to just clam up and not give scum a chance).

[Kast]

@ACFan-
I'm not calling to lynch Pooky right this instant. That defeats the whole purpose of getting a replacement.

I want Pooky to post.

[Kast]

@PTMB-
-Thanks. I'd like to hear what your player slot picked instead of those passed cards. The player spot already claimed 2/3 cards but I was hoping to hear the order and see if there were any inconsistencies.

-But we got an inconsistency anyway:

a

1 shot sanctuary

on the second night.

3. Rat

One of PTMB or Zwet is lying.

I'm okay with keeping my vote on PTMB.

[Kast]

At this point, I hope to see some votes transition to either Zwet or PTMB, depending on which you personally find more scummy.

PTMB please answer what card was picked instead of a Sanctuary and what card was picked instead of Double or Mimic.

[Kast]

@DGB-
I don't really see any obvious benefit for either one as a liar.

I think it's a bit more likely that a new replacement may not have realized the possibility of being immediately caught lying, whereas Zwet was around for all of that discussion previously.

Also, nothing against PTMB, but I find that player spot more suspicious than Zwet.

I guess there is a possibility they are scumbuddies setting themselves up so that one gets lynched and the other gets a practically free pass (or potentially they are scumbuddies together and Zwet has been lying about his cards but his new buddy was just honest).

@Rishi-
Can you confirm if Rat and/or Sanctuary were among the cards that you passed to Slicey/ZEEnon/Looker/PTMB.

[Kast]

Ugh...

UNVOTE

There goes that catch.

I still prefer a PTMB lynch over other players, but I'd rather not lynch for a mod error.

This also means that PTMB's player slot probably picked the NK since Zwet got the Rat.

Second pick NK isn't necessarily a bad thing but it's not a playable card, but I'd like to hear his other pick.

[Kast]

@Zwet-
-Is the name of your gambit "bussing"?

-I still don't see a real case against ACFan. Kinetic has added that ACFan never goes against the prevailing town opinion; and on top of that is the unnecessary, unprompted, claimed usage of Apothecary on Charter.

For the former, he was pushing a Kinetic lynch most of the previous day, despite the Ort lynch being by far more accepted.

For the latter, his choice to use Apothecary on another player makes more sense if he also used Apothecary on himself.

@PTMB-
-You have not answered what your initial pick card was. Please confirm if your second pick card was indeed a NK (seems like it would have to be by process of elimination).

-Since when does being clueless indicate affiliation? If by "acting" you mean to imply that you are generating cues based on the tone; then your criticism of DGB is extremely hypocritical.

To be more direct though, do you believe there is anything wrong with looking for cues about a player's affiliation from the tone of their posts?

[Kast]

@Zwet-
I'm most suspicious of PTMB's player spot atm. I don't like that he isn't answering about his card picks.

VOTE: PTMB

@Rishi-
Regardless of your vote, we are not going to have a no lynch. We only need 3 to lynch and there are 4 on ACFan.

Unless people who are voting ACFan change their votes, then that will be an inevitable lynch.

[Kast]

PTMB is only viable if someone on the ACFan wagon is willing to move.

Otherwise it will at best reach a tie and ties are "first come, first served".

It doesn't look like things are going to change.

[Kast]

@PTMB-
Maybe you just don't understand how the game works.

Your cards from Draft #1 are all gone. You got to use 2 and now the last is trashed. We already know that you have both a 1/4 NK card and a Rat card. From Rishi's, Zwet's, and mod information, we can deduce that you picked the 1/4 NK card as your second pick.

Claiming will help us to better understand how your player slot chose to play. It gives us some concrete information about a player slot that has been dominated by silence, absence, and ridiculous, off-topic ramblings.

It also gives us the chance to catch you in a lie or force you to limit yourself to "townie" card picks.

We could also potentially have caught you in a lie by having Rishi verify your final card, but we can actually turn that around.

@Rishi-
What was the final card that you passed to PTMB?

@Kinetic-
I think that is a fair assessment.

The only thing I would chance is that if ACFan is scum, I think it is more likely that his partner is trying to start a counter wagon than that his partner is bussing.

The change of a single person away from ACFan would probably be sufficient to secure a lynch on another player.

If ACFan is scum, then I would suspect all players currently on his wagon are town.

[Kast]

@PTMB-
Specifically, if Rishi passed you a Rat, then I will be much less suspicious of you. I didn't want to state that out directly, but then again I also didn't want another player to verify your picking order; rather I would have preferred if you claimed without realizing that someone could hold you accountable to your claim.

[Kast]

Anyone voting for pooky is taking scummy advantage of the mod error.

If we assume this is valid, the logical extension is that the mod error created a valid and objective reason for all players to vote for PTMB. This would mean that anyone who did not vote for PTMB prior to the mod error being revealed is probably PTMB's scum buddy.

It isn't actually valid.

@DGB-
If you decided to hammer ACFan in response to my post, and ACFan flipped scum, I would not think that clears you as a townie.

[Kast]

@Kinetic-
If he flips scum, then I could easily understand you suspecting me.

If he flips town, I would think that says more about Kinetic and AceM than Zwet and PTMB, since Zwet and PTMB appear to be the next most plausible lynches, so voting ACFan serves their self-preservation regardless of affiliation.

However, it would not say anything definitive and I would still strongly suspect PTMB at that point.

[Kast]

@Rishi-
That might have been nice sharing sooner...

Rat, NK, Mimic?

The two picked cards are both non-playable cards, although I suppose it is better than Rat, Rat.

@PTMB-
Please confirm Rishi's post.

Also, what cards did your player slot play on each night?

[Kast]

Thanks and GG all.

@CTD-
We were worried about you, but thankfully you were cautious enough about voicing any thoughts that we were the only ones who picked up you might be a threat.

@Kinetic-
I think you misplayed by plaguing CTD and claiming it. That killed your townie credibility so much that even people who didn't suspect you also didn't trust you. We could mostly ignore you or turn you into a lynch if needed.

You were completely off about discussing the merits of a claim helping scum. We did consider claims before the day began. I shared my thoughts same as I would have as a townie. Claiming would probably have been overall neutral.

As it was, we were able to figure out almost all of everyone's cards very early on (the exception being CTD but we killed him so it didn't matter).

@Ort-
You tunneled on DGB which made it a lot easier. But I was worried about you so I tried to lay seeds then get others to jump at them.

@Charter-
I think joining for the Budja bus got you to practically completely trust me.

@Slicey-
I didn't notice you slowing the game at all so no worries.