Mini 804 - The Resistance - Mod Abandoned

[PsychoSniper]

/confirm

[PsychoSniper]

Also, the longer the day goes on, the more the scum can try to daytalk- which is an immensely powerful tool for them if we don't spot it.

Do you mean in thread or by PM? This is important.

Rishi stated in the first post that spy can't communicate outside this thread.

So yeah, I agree with Fishy. Daytalk in the thread is the only way for scum to communicate, and there's nothing concrete for town to discuss until we see the results of the first porposal, so short day benefits town today.

Is the 48hr time limit mandatory? Or can it end prematurely?

So does this mean the less talk from town (just for Day 1), the better?

[PsychoSniper]

Meh, IMO this

is

different from a normal Mafia. I'd equate it more to the Dethy Mafia. It's a logic puzzle, where each night result gives us an extra piece of puzzle to work with. Right now we have zero pieces of puzzle, there's nothing to work with. The only way this differs from a Dethy is that ther's more than 1 scum, and they have a plan to collaborate set up false clues if we give them he chance to communicate.

I maintain that Day 1 talk accomplish little to nothing in this game. Throwing suspicions around means nothing right now. For one thing, without the voting system scum has no reason to feel any pressure about defending themseves. THAT makes it much different from a normal game. After we get some of the puzzle,

then

there's much to talk about. That was the point I was emphasizing on, and I saw no better way to do that than reiterating the no-outside-communication rule.

[PsychoSniper]

Why's everyone talking about voting against the proposal? The rules clearly states (and capitalized for good measure) that proposals, once made, can't be retracted. Any chance of voting we might have had was lost once Fishy stated his proposal in bold.

Also, wouldn't the logical strategy be to leave the scummier players in the plan to gain more information? If more people are suspicious of Crazy, that's a logical place to start, he should be left in.

It's already been brought up earlier that scum would probably want exactly one scum within those who get the plan, because having more than one scum in the plan makes it more difficult for them to coordinate their action, since neither can be sure if the other would want to sabotage. Right now, I'm suspecting that we may already have more than 1 scum in the trio, and some of those who want Crazy out may be scum trying to get one of their buddy out to achieve the one optimal number for them.

[PsychoSniper]

You're right, I misread part of the rules too, my bad.

But I still believe it makes more sense to keep some scummier-looking players in the proposal. Unless we have reason to suspect both ABR and NN as well, I see no reason to cahnge the random setup.

[PsychoSniper]

.....my opinion hasn't changed from last I stated. I see no harm in random assignment on Day 1. I don't think a fast Day 1 is a bad thing. So I accepted.

I'm far more interested about those to rejected it, all of them. Do you object to this random assignment because you already have the specific "candidates" you want in mind? Or is it just because you object to any particular person getting the plan.

[PsychoSniper]

How about Fishy, Veerus and Psycho?

That's...actually acceptable, with my bet on Psycho being the scum if we get a sabotage act.

But, I'd like to see what other people say.

Good job, you've just told you're fellow scum that "Hey, if you get grouped with Psycho, feel free to sabotage, because we'll just blame it on him!"

This post is a

far

better example of possible scum communication than anything Crazy has posted so far.

Seriously, stop giving scum hints of what to do, intentional or not!

[PsychoSniper]

Honestly, the BEST way to proceed is to have NO DISCUSSION, and group THREE SPIES TOGETHER.

Best case scenario they all sabotage and we have three CONFIRMED SPIES.

HOWEVER, if they can COORDINATE who is sabotaging and who isn't, then we are SCREWED.

DISCUSSION HURTS THE TOWN.

This post pretty much sums up what I (still) think, at least for Day 1, although I'm not sure if ABR means this for Day 1 only or in general.

[PsychoSniper]

Honestly, the BEST way to proceed is to have NO DISCUSSION, and group THREE SPIES TOGETHER.

Best case scenario they all sabotage and we have three CONFIRMED SPIES.

HOWEVER, if they can COORDINATE who is sabotaging and who isn't, then we are SCREWED.

DISCUSSION HURTS THE TOWN. FL AND NABAKOV --> EXTREMELY SUSPICIOUS.

As I said earlier, that is indeed the best outcome but realistically it is almost entirely impossible. You need to get 3 scum on the plans to begin with, WHICH IS EVEN LESS LIKELY THAN GETTING THREE TOWN, then they need to all be stupid and sabotage.

Optimal play if they are all on the plans is for all not to sabotage then they end up with no saboteurs they all get confirmed town which leads to subsequent chaos.

Ummm.....if there are 3 scums in the group and by some miracle or ultra-clever undetected communication they

all

l choose not to sabotage, it's still

good

for town. That means they lose a base, and we don't. Yes, that also means we don't know they're scum....but all we have to do is to choose them

again

on the second day (and why wouldn't we if, according to you, they'll be seen as confirmed town). They have to show their hands sooner or later, they can't afford to keep faking like this, or they'll lose. All it means is we gain an extra day to experiment with while being one base ahead, so your point makes no sense.

And why are you revealing what you consider to be "optimal scum play" for them to see? If you think you know what's best for scum, wouldn't it make sense for you to not bring it up just in case the scum hadn't thought of it themselves?

[PsychoSniper]

I vote random

[PsychoSniper]

Psycho, you're forgetting that we would have an extra set of plans to distribute every time in that scenario.

Okay, I missed out this sentence yesterday and only saw this in my reread, but I don't understand what this is supposed to mean. I'm assuming this is in response to what I said about the 3-scum-not-sabotaging scenario. Are you saying that if we destroy a scum base we get an

extra

(two) plans the following day? I'm pretty sure that isn't the case (I read the rules again after this to make sure I didn't leave out anything there again). Can you explain what you mean by that and exactly how it contradicts what I said prior to that?

[PsychoSniper]

Here's what I think:

If we're going to go with what FL is suggesting (voting for our 3 candidates), I think we need to just put forth our votes

without

specifying whether we're going for townie or scummy ticket, or whom we suspect, at least not yet.

My reasoning is, if say for example, most people agree with this combination:

"I vote X, Y, and Z. I believe X & Y are scum, and I'm going for a scummy ticket."

If Z is, in fact, the scum, nothing is going to stop him sabotaging since he knows he's not going to get most of the suspicion for that when there are 2 others under suspicion in the group.

Whomever we put in the group, we

don't

want them to know if they're suspected by over half the town and under heavy scrutiny. That was one of my reasons for not wanting detalied discussions about whom each person suspect until later. I equated this game with the Dethy Mafia for a reason. I think in a game like this, the discussion has to be centred around the

results

, not the empty sepculation before it.

If we don't reveal what "ticket" we're going for, the scum, if nominated, won't know whether they're getting the spot because they're being trusted or suspected. That makes it harder for them to decide whether they should sabotage. Whatever our motivation for voting whom we vote for can wait till

after

we see the results.

[PsychoSniper]

I think the scum knowing what we are thinking is a small price to pay for discussion and scumhunting, likely leading to better results.

Your strategy is going to lead to a mixture of suspected and non-suspected players. This is more likely to be a mix of scum and townie (hopefully)- which isn't the sort of ticket we want.

I don't really see what kind of "better" results it'll lead to. I think giving scum too much info about what we think will allow them to manipulate the result into what they want us to see. Letting a scum knows he's heavily suspected gives him advanced warning to fake his move and not sabotage. Letting a scum knows that he's being teamed with townies under suspicion provides him with good scapegoats.

And there's very likely to be a mixture of scum and townie at the end in any case. I highly doubt we have any chance of getting a pure 3-town or 3-scum group right now. Considering there are 4 scum out of 9, literally every single townie will have to agree upon a certain group for that to happen, or the Proposal will likely get voted out/rejected by scum anyway.

Do we even have a consensus on what

is

"the sort of ticket we want" yet?

Mod: My internet access will be limited for the next few days. I might not be able to post again until (latest) Saturday.

[PsychoSniper]

So yeah, I agree with Fishy. Daytalk in the thread is the only way for scum to communicate, and there's nothing concrete for town to discuss until we see the results of the first porposal, so short day benefits town today.

Daytalk paranoia- daytalk is something to look out for, but as long as we do that it can't happen without immense risks for the scum

Seems a bit odd that you're making a case on me for agreeing with you in the beginning. You may have changed your mind on that subject, but I haven't. Yeah, I've been told enough times that it's paranoia in this game, but I still think it's a justified one. And like I said, I was also concerned that letting the scum know too much of what we think will give them hints on how to make their moves. It's not just about scum communicating, but also about how much scum learns (more than us) from

our

(town) communication. And being able to communicate their intentions through this "discussion". A townie may talk about who he suspects because he truly suspects him, but a scum may talk about whom he suspects to hint to his buddies that "hey, good scapegoat here", or something in that vein.

Also, wouldn't the logical strategy be to leave the scummier players in the plan to gain more information? If more people are suspicious of Crazy, that's a logical place to start, he should be left in.

At the time, Crazy was being suspected of breadcrumbing. Having a breadcrumbe in the plans is a terrible idea. I don't like the phrasing, "if more people are suspicious of Crazy"- it displays an unwillingness to commit to a position himself. If Pyscho thinks Crazy is suspect, then he should say so- if not, the argument is invalid.

Yes, you're right, I

was

unwilling to commit a stand. At the time I

didn't

really think Crazy was supicious, and even if I

was

suspicious, I'll admit I don't think I would have said so, because.....well, you already know my position on town naming all their suspects by now.

I also did not like the reason for various players saying "I'm voting against this because I want Crazy out of it.", which was what about 3-4 players have stated. I didn't think anyone was trying to get an all-town group at the time, it was already established how unlikely it was to happen. I raised the question because I was confused by where most of them stood. It seemed to me like most of them agreed it made sense to have scum in the group....but they didn't like the proposal because they think a scum was in it.

But I still believe it makes more sense to keep some scummier-looking players in the proposal. Unless we have reason to suspect both ABR and NN as well, I see no reason to cahnge the random setup.

This makes no sense- as Psycho had already acknowledged, we don't want a 1-scum proposal. If ABR and NN don't look bad, that was a reason to vote down my proposal.

Yes, that post was really badly made by me. To be honest, I just wanted the random proposal to go through. My post wasn't at all well thought-out because at the time I wasn't really concerned about speculating how many scum there was in the group. I was just eager for the day to move on and reveal if there are any sabotages so that we have actual facts to work on. I was trying (badly) to convince the town to go on with the random proposal without dragging the day on.

This is not exactly a brilliant case. But all in all, Psycho fits well with the idea that scum were in favour of the random proposal.

If he is scum, I would expect exactly one of the people on my ticket to be scum- and conversely, if there is one scum on there Pyscho is a likely candidate

.

Can you explain the bolded part to me again? I'm kind of lost here.

And yes, I do want the random proposal, for the simple reason that it was random and give scum no chance to collaborate. I still do want it random, if it wasn't already outvoted by the town.

[PsychoSniper]

actually that doesn't seem like such a bad idea to me if we get everyone to give a list of who exactly they think is most likely to be town/scum at this point in time. Any dodginess in the lists may well be apparent.

If you don't mind, I'd like to wait for at least 1-2 more players to speak on my idea before I make the list. Like I said, I still don't think it's good for town to tell everyone exactly who they are suspicious of (and making a town list is pretty much the equivilant of that). Obviously, my idea isn't going to work at all if majority of the town disagree with it, but it seems like not everyone has commented on it yet. If most of the town prefer to list out their suspects, I suppose there's really no point in me hiding mine, since 1 player's influence on the porposal is minimal.

Right now, I'll say that there're only about 2 players I actually suspect, and I don't have a particularly strong read on most of the others.

[PsychoSniper]

Yes, you're right, I

was

unwilling to commit a stand. At the time I

didn't

really think Crazy was supicious, and even if I

was

suspicious, I'll admit I don't think I would have said so, because.....well, you already know my position on town naming all their suspects by now.

The thing is, you said that having Crazy on the proposal was sensible because people thought him scummy. That's not a reason to have Crazy on the proposal- the reason should be that

you

thought he was scummy.

I already explained that in my last post (immediately following the segement quoted here). My intention was purely to keep the random proposal going. I made a bad argument in an attempt to convince those who did not want a random proposal to accept it. I myself was not concerned about having a "town ticket" or a "scum ticket" then. I just wanted the Day to end with the non-biased random group. It was too early for me to have formed suspicion on anyone at the time.

I can see how that action can seem scummy. On hindsight, I know it wasn't the smartest thing to do. I can only say it was an honest mistake.

[PsychoSniper]

Well, there's probably no point in me keeping my "ticket" secret anymore, since more than half the town has made their intention clear.

At this point I will say: I prefer to go for 3 townies in the group, and I don't like the current proposal.

And now to answer ortolan's question of town list a few pages back:

My peception of who the Rebels are at the moment:

Fishy
ABR
ortolan
veerus

[PsychoSniper]

I agree, however, that what ort said should not have been said. In this case, I'm fairly sure it was an alignment-neutral slip, but in general such things are not good.

If FL wasn't the proposer, it would be enough to scrap the proposal.

How exactly would FL being the proposer make it more favourable in light of the slip/breadcrumb?

[PsychoSniper]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I still don't see that favours going forth with the proposal.

If FL is scum herself, then ortolan's remark is unlikely to be a scum breadcrumb anyway, since why would he paint his own scumbuddy in this light? And in this case FL probably has a good excuse to perform the sabotage herself and then act as one who was framed thanks to ortolan's "breadcrumb". No one would be sure if she's the scum or the convenient scapegoat thanks to ortolan's post. And yes, since FL is unlikely to have proposed more than one scum in the group, there'll be no need for her to collaborate with any other scumbuddies in the group to leave the sabotaging to her.

If FL isn't scum, then any scum in the group (if there's one) has a scapegoat in FL.

Either way, ortolan's remark creates another good reason not to have FL being the receiver for a plan at all today, whether it was a scum breadcrumb or a legit town-slip. I would say it's a good reason to scrap the proposal, whether she proposed it or not.

[PsychoSniper]

If FL is scum, ortolan's remark is almost irrelevant, as you express.

It's not irrelevent. It's something that can be

painted

as a breadcrumb. A convenient scum tool even if the one who made it may not be a scum.