I found this a
I'd be grateful if as many folk as possible target me tonight .
Marginally better than arbitrary voting; assuming both ways give us the same chance of leading to a scumwagon, this gives a greater chance of eventually lynchingMathcam wrote:Until I see something particularly scummy, it seems sensible to figure out which of the roles are significantly more harmful if they are in the hands of scum than they are beneficial if they're in the hands of pro-town players.
Nah, he's pretty cool.david wrote:FOS Zindarasfor acting like you want the game to start and then not posting when it does-
Even if you are pro-town you will no doubt come accross scum so I hope your not easily manipulated.
Obviously a lot of people will be hesitant to target me tonight (:() but I don't think you need to be. If youdavidangelsummers wrote:Is their any role that people would definitely not like me to protect tonight?
I do.JDodge wrote:Oman wrote:I'm treating Eden as a standard busdriver that doesn't effect mafia kills or SK kills. Its considerably underpowered for a busdriver, but I still like the role.
I'd like to ask people, please work off the assumption that I'm town here (as I'm looking for advice). Do you feel that my usage of my power tonight would be a benefit or a detriment to the town?I don't like either post.Oman wrote:I'll clarify the above: say I could make Linderman (Doc) protect myself?
Unvote, vote: Oman
bah! Ew! No closing bracket! (I've shown where it was meant to go). IAdele wrote:If so, then that could be played very strongly to the town's advantage, especially when certain other abilities are brought into the mix. If there's any chance of reaching a scenario where a chain's made up and any death fingers the killer, that'd be quite nice, really (though potentially self-defeating)
If Linderman protected me one night, could he and I thereafter protect each other?Seol wrote:Be more specific please.Adele wrote:Seol, could Lindy and I hypothetically become a Circle Of Awesome Protectedness? (To whom it may concern: if I don't get a reply in the next 5 mins I might just phone and ask him, so don't be surprised if I know the answer before he posts it ).
v.vOman wrote:Ouch. I know the moogle looks girly, but lets make an effort.Adele wrote:Yeah, god forbid she understands how her role works,
/agree in theory, but there's no such thing as confirmation here, only accusation. I mean, there's no cop that can investigate me and say "Yup, she's clean". So it reads to me just like you want me to be subject to higher-than-average suspicion and scrutiny.Oman wrote:Adele is a key person to dicover the alignment of.
Yep, that makes sense - for you. A lot of people, though, have nonharmful powers. If I could watch and track and protect, then IOman wrote:Adele, if you're town I want to target you ASAP. If you're scum, my role in your hands could be very not good.
This seems more like a rant than a list of questions that TSQ burningly wants to hear the answer to.TheStatusQuo wrote:Really? So you dont think Mathcams system is worth discussing? Why not? Also, I wonder what you could have possibly noticed that you do not feel like sharing. Isn't it generally in the towns best interests to share all information that they have? I mean, in general the only thing I don't like to bring up are breadcrumbing and stuff like that, but thats not exactly RELEVANT in this game, is it?
If you're looking to catch me out, remember that I'm a self-watcher, so I'd know that Claude was watching me, and know not to lie.davidangelsummers wrote:Adele: I would want to know exactly which powers she is getting and why. I think it would be helpful for judging her and her targeters alignments.
Why do you want to know who's visiting him? I don't get that.DAS wrote:Mathcam: His role is dangerous in mafia hands the longer we go on the more dangerous it becomes. Even if he is town then I would like to know who was visiting him. If he is not their when you get their, we could have our SK
Not necessarily true. If the scum knows the plan, they can plan around it - the most egregious example I can think of is the doc (who I support randomising their choice), but cops too - say the tracker says who he's going to track, and that person's a member of the mafia. He's unlikely to be the guy to perform the kill then, isn't he?Thestatusquo wrote:The thing is...Directing is only bad in a closed setup
QFTmathcam wrote:I agree. While nothing jumps out about the plan as being particularly dangerous, the more choreographed the plan is, the easier it is for the mafia to know how to circumvent it -- especially since this plan takes at least a couple of game days before we see any results out of it.
Hands up everyone who plans to blindly trust me because of an ability I absorb from someone? Seriously. Slippery slope argument.Oman wrote:Shaft.ed - It is a bad idea to give scum investigative powers. Why? because we'll TRUST her. And trusting scum is not a good move.
QFT. Nolynch FTL.TSQ wrote:In my opinion...No lynching is just silly.
eh, they'll live. If a question's out there, why not throw in your twopennorth? They can't exactly claim it's a "private conversation" - you're giving your opinion, which is yourshaft.ed wrote:I notice you have a problem with people "answering questions for you." I tend to do this all the time because I am on the board too much and enjoy being involved in conversation. I admit I did it on one occasion in this game with a question directed to you and clearly stated while I was posting that I did not intend to speak for you. I now realize that it is a bad play and you have demonstrated to me that certain players are very paranoid about it. So I will not be answering anyone else's questions in any of my games from now on. Thank you for the advice on this topic.
I agree with TSQ, in that the post referred to here (#299) does seem a bit "Oman is wrong, Oman is wrong, Oman is wrong, let's kill Oman".Thestatusquo re shafted wrote:Additionally, he seems to be testing the waters here, in his last post. To me, the last post almost screamsI'll admit that a lot of this is influenced by the fact that I don't think the case against oman is very strong. But I think the case against shaft.ed is there regardless of it you think Oman is scum or not. (could be aggressive bussing)My brain wrote:Am I going to be able to misslynch this guy, or should I move on to someone else.
And therefore independent of your alignment. He might be voting for you because your role with a 2/3 chance of town, 1/3 chance of evil, works out as being damaging to the town on average - this may be valid, there may be roles that the town'd be better off not having in the mix but is of value if you're assured the role is on your team (which you, when you picked the role, were assured). People are therefore likely to have a different view on the benignity of their roles than others will.Oman wrote:shaft.ed is voting me based on my role, mostly, which is interesting, as I chose it before i got my alignment.
QFT,ETIJJDodge wrote:shaft.ed isn't voting you solely on your role. Read his most recent post.
PLUS a person with investigations may have to present investigative results and face the choice between giving the town useful (reliable) information or (this is the really sweet part) false information, running the (very real) risk of getting found out (it's almost like they're presenting an investigation result on themself).shaft.ed wrote:CKD, what you're also missing is that we have two scum groups here who are interested in destroying the other. Thus even scum aligned investigative roles may serve the town's interest if they can nail down the other scum group.
Oh, no. I'm not that person, am I?shaft.ed wrote:Adele:Not posting a whole lot and seems very reluctant to take a side on issues. Most posts seem to be "I see both sides of this." While not a scum tell, the lack of any meaningful attacks seems troubling.
I will indeed play towards my WC. I am upset that you have "no problem" with me lying, but if that's the attitude of a significant minority of players - or even a majority - then I'm going to need to adjust my play.Thestatusquo wrote:As long as you're still playing to your win condition I have no problem with you lying. The way you worded it made me think that you were so fed up with us not adopting LAL that you were going to just lie to punish us, and that is something I can not allow in this game. If this is all a huge misunderstanding, then I apologize. Just, please reassure me you plan on playing towards your win condition in this game, and I will unvote.
Making a certain tactic that a scum may wellshaft.ed wrote:TSQ(do you prefer Shea btw?) I see your point, but if we agree as a town ahead of tiem that we will lynch anyone who lies, this makes it quite obvious that lying is clearly not a pro-town play as it will get you lynched if you are a lying townie. You're arguing whether or not lying can be a pro-town play in and of itself, we're arguing that it's in the town's best interest to set up a LAL policy. They are not the same. By setting up LAL we will cut back on a lot of confusion and we will also make it clear that scum caught fabricating Night Actions cannot talk their way out of it. I think in this set up the town has less to lose by forgoing lying then they have to gain by making it a viable town strategy. Therefore I think adopting LAL is in our best interest.
That's awful.zoneace wrote:ugh, shea, you are so pointless, im not even gonna waste my vote on you. you have nothing to add to the game, you're just an annoyance is best ignored i see. You still havent explained how you would have anything protown to lie about. Why do you keep setting up a defense for your future lies? Honestly, your presence in this game is without anything point. We don't need you. but its not even worth it to lynch you.
If the slowness of the wagon is a factor, consider the holidays - lots of threads, including this one, have slowed over christmas. If it's just gut then... I personally don't see it, and con only trust it to the extent of other peoples' testimonies - are you guys sure enough to tie your innocence to ZAs, or would you prefer me (personally) to judge on less qualitative matters? This is a weird matter - I normally wouldn't consider accepting testimony, but this strength of consensus is unusual.curiouskarmadog wrote:gutOman wrote:What makes you so sure?CKD wrote: I am pretty sure our scum (in this game) are quietly sitting back
I don’t think that ZA is our scum. His bandwagon is picking up steam (slowly) and I am just not buying it. I don’t think shea is scum either at this point. I dont agree with a no lynch and don’t know why ZA is pushing it. I have only been in one game with ZA that I knew his alignment (scum) and I had that pegged from Day 1. This doesn’t have that feel to it. Of course, people change styles and this is a different set up, but I am not getting the scum vibe off ZA.
See, what I find remarkable is, after someone asks me to explain, and I do, and you acknowledge it - you still yell at me for asking for something I wasn't asking for!Oman wrote:Adele, thats a really bad idea where you assume innocence or guilt in a one to one like "if he's innocent you are if he's guilty you are". I know you were intending to do something less "bald" but anything more than "If CKD is scum/town I'll eat my hat" is a stupid "bet" to make.
I've had an ish with Oman since, like, for yonks. It reached the tipping point due to his intractability.shaft.ed wrote:Adele this information in regards to Oman is all pretty old news. How come it becomes interesting once Fonz brings it up?
Care to describe this plan?Oman wrote:I've developed a plan for tonight that will give us a large ammount of information (actually its more tomorrow morning).
Adele wrote:/agree in theory, but there's no such thing as confirmation here, only accusation. I mean, there's no cop that can investigate me and say "Yup, she's clean". So it reads to me just like you want me to be subject to higher-than-average suspicion and scrutiny.Oman wrote:Adele is a key person to dicover the alignment of.
I don't like this:Adele wrote:Hands up everyone who plans to blindly trust me because of an ability I absorb from someone? Seriously. Slippery slope argument.Oman wrote:Shaft.ed - It is a bad idea to give scum investigative powers. Why? because we'll TRUST her. And trusting scum is not a good move.
Oman wrote:What makes you so sure?CKD wrote:I am pretty sure our scum (in this game) are quietly sitting back
Adele wrote:See, what I find remarkable is, after someone asks me to explain, and I do, and you acknowledge it - you still yell at me for asking for something I wasn't asking for!Oman wrote:Adele, thats a really bad idea where you assume innocence or guilt in a one to one like "if he's innocent you are if he's guilty you are". I know you were intending to do something less "bald" but anything more than "If CKD is scum/town I'll eat my hat" is a stupid "bet" to make.
Wait... you have a master plan, but we don't get to know it? What, any of it? How do you know people won't do the wrong thing?Oman wrote:I'd love to, Unfortunatly, it relies on nobody knowing it.Adele wrote:Care to describe this plan?
Oh joy, let's go there again. I assume you're willing to acknowledge that, if a scum can get away with it, he'd like to support wagons on townies to the hilt and derail wagons on co-scum? That, whether right or wrong, it's a simple fact that someone who's pushed all the wrong wagons is suspected as a result? That, therefore, any significant statement on any wagon might (or, more often than not, does) affect your position on peoples' scumdars? And that, as a result, attacking or supporting someone causes a relationship picture between the two of you in other peoples' minds - attacking or supporting someoneOman wrote:Oh and on the innocence wager. I thought it was a bad idea from the start.This part sucks. Forget the second part:Adele wrote:. Then, leading on from there (IF you do) I was asking if you were willing to put any kind of deposit down on itThe first part alone is enough to make me fume. Townies (in this context, including powerroles) shouldn't vote/not vote because it makes them look scummy or not. They should do what they want based on what alignment they think the person is. AND TOWN MAKE MISTAKES, all the time! So the only person who gains from your "innoncence deposit" is scum.Adele wrote:never thinking it'd be as bald as "if he's innocent you are if he's guilty you are",
Sorry for the ambiguity:Oman wrote:I never said that, stop putting words into my mouth.Adele wrote:If this master plan is a reason for you not to be lynched today
I have the same sometimes. However, while I can't explain it, I'm usually able to patch together a few quotes from that player that illustrate it. So, even if you can't justify exactlyYvonne wrote:Going by instinct however, I've a generally bad feeling about Adele. Can't really explain it, it's been like this since early D1.
Dude, I, like,Oman wrote:Thats a good point, one that I had not thought of. I suppose it all depends on how scummy the players are (i.e. how likely they are to be tracked).
Adele wrote:Wait... you have a master plan, but we don't get to know it? What, any of it? How do you know people won't do the wrong thing?Oman wrote:I'd love to, Unfortunatly, it relies on nobody knowing it.Adele wrote:Care to describe this plan?
More to the point, why should I believe you? If this master plan is a reason for you not to be lynched today, then how do I know that you're not scum lying in desperate hope you can make something plausible up tomorrow (doesn't actually have to work if you're not submitting it to public scrutiny, you can just say "whoops! didn't notice that flaw in the plan") or at least assist your co-scum with your skill tonight?
Completely understandable.Oman wrote:I think you're assuming too much, that the scum wouldn't want to use their powers and feel safe that certain people wouldn't use their powers.Shaft.ed wrote:thus have no cover if they are caught by a tracker/watcher thus they're only making NK's if they're Sylar who can't be seen by a tracker.
Oh, and Adele, your cockiness annoys me, just letting you know whilst I die.
NOT.YvonneSeer wrote:Also, discuss whether Gorgon should or should not reveal whether he phased out on nights.
Tell me about it.TSQ wrote:So we get rid of ZA and then have to deal with DGB? Ugh...I hate this game so much.
reason enough for me to stay sane, I guess.DrippingGoofball wrote:I joined this game during night, forgot about it. I only joined to push Adele over the edge of insanity, but I never played a "smalltown" game before, I hardly even play open games.
(bolding added) - no, that's a result of her waiting towards the end; she could have faked any number of results, but since she's statistically more likely to be town than scum it made sense for her to be in a position of the Sword or Truth; if anyone had lied that they had or hadn't targeted me or shaft.ed, that'd be a good lynch for the day right there. She's useful in that she makes lying hard/dangerous for scum about nightchoices - as, now, am I.shaft.ed wrote:I'm finding this bit about me VERY out of place. There's very little reason for a scum group to kill me. Sylar would get nothing form the motivation, and scum would likely keep me around after pushing a mislynch so hard.YvonneSeer wrote:I got motivated. My watch targets were Adele and shaft.ed.
Nobody targetted Adele.
And cicero did indeed target shaft.ed.It's also very handy that cicero already admitted to targeting me. I'm finding this choice very suspicious.
FoS Yvonne
It's likely she'd've known that if she'd developed a rudimentary understanding of the game and the roles prior to making her choice. As it is, she was (as usual) playing the Goofball.Yvonneseer wrote:Hiding comes before dampening.The Fonz wrote:Could Goof be Sylar? A Goof-sylar could dampen Gorgon's ability to hide, and kill him the same night.
How is it avoidable? If everyone reveals their nightchoices, then it can be easily figured out; either my information matches what they say or it doesn't - in which case I think I ought to say so.mathcam wrote:I came in today too late to make this argument in time, but it's not clear to me that Adele should reveal what powers she has. If she's town and doesn't get any, than all the better for us when the mafia, fearing she has super powers, goes and kills her instead of one of our power roles. If she's town and gets powers, why not leave it to the mafia's imagination which ones, at least until she can reveal them simultaneously with some incriminating information?
Cam
cicero could be in cahoots with shafted (ie. both scum together, agreed that cicero would claim he targeted shafted and Shafted would confirm this; I'm not saying it's probable, merely that we don't "know" theat cicero didn't perform the kill)The Fonz wrote:Those we can prove used their abilities:
cicero
Yvonne
shaft.ed
CKD
He who cannot have committed the mafia kill:
Gorgon
That means the mafia killer is amongst this group:
(me)
DGB
mathcam
Adele
TSQ
Unlikely, though. OK, so probably not Cicero.YvonneSeer wrote:Adele, I watched shaft.ed, remember? So I can confirm cicero targetted shaft.ed. Though there is the possibility that one might think cicero, shaft.ed and I are all scum together.Adele wrote:cicero could be in cahoots with shafted (ie. both scum together, agreed that cicero would claim he targeted shafted and Shafted would confirm this; I'm not saying it's probable, merely that we don't "know" theat cicero didn't perform the kill)The Fonz wrote:Those we can prove used their abilities:
cicero
Yvonne
shaft.ed
CKD
He who cannot have committed the mafia kill:
Gorgon
That means the mafia killer is amongst this group:
(me)
DGB
mathcam
Adele
TSQ
ckd could be in cahoots with Gorgon (plan gone awry due to lack of SK-kill)
So I think you need to add cicero, CKD and Gorgon to the list - leaving just two people who definately didn't perform the kill, but could still be scum.
Could have performed it (I think):
Fonz
DGB
mathcam
Adele
TSQ
Cicero
Gorgon
CKD
That's not actually true. In fact, I don't recallDrippingGoofball wrote:Fascinating. I love this. Adele, Fritzler, Quagmire, MoS will kill me on Night 0 if they can - they can't help themselves. You can take it to the bank. Maybe I should add TSQ to the list.cicero wrote:To others. I'm gonna go ahead and guess that Adele is probably scum based on the simple principle that Adele is still alive.
Discuss.
mathcam wrote:...Sure. A rough argument is the following. Consider all possible pairs of the form (Player A, Player B) where Player A is Sylar and Player B is whoever Sylar tried to kill last night. As of last night, with no extra information, there were 11 possible choices (anyone but Oman) for Player A and for each choice, 10 different choices for Player B (assuming Sylar would not target himself). A total of 110 different possibilities.TSQ wrote:Someone want to run by me why Gorgon is 50/50 the SK again? Or rather, for the first time because I don't think I've seen it done.
Now, assuming that Sylar tried to kill last night, the fact that no one died means that Gorgon was either Player A or Player B. He is player A in exactly 10 of the 110 possibilities (e.g., (Gorgon, Adele), (Gorgon, cicero), ..., (Gorgon, The Fonz)) and is Player B also in exactly 10 of the 110 possibilities (same pairs, just flipped). Thus out of the 20 possible scenarios, he was scum in 10 of them. This makes for 50/50...
Obviously there are some erroneous assumptions in this model...