Prisoner's Dilemma Mafia II {Game Over!}

[Plum]

/confirm.

[Plum]

evil i may be, but i am 100% pro-town. however, i shall let my play speak for me and leave the final decision to the town.

And here, we have our second early game claim. I don't really think you should be taking my Random Sends as my gospel. I'm just trying to get a rise out of you, but please, don't be so flighty and defensive. It makes you seem a little bit...skittish, I'll say as of now. Since we have until Groundhog Day to come to a consensus, I'm more than certain that my votes will change to someone more legitimately scummy.

anyway...i just thought of something: would a miller traditionally know he's a miller? what about a death miller?

With the amount of pretzeliness we've been told to expect, I think it could go either way. Lowell hasn't really said enough to give us a tell as to whether or not he truly is a miller/death miller.

Send: CouselWolf

Semi-random - I wouldn't consider Narsis' statement as a claim.

Send: Plum

Well, I don't consider it much of a self-vote, as my going to prison has potential benefits, etc. In fact, I'd say that I advocate sending two townish players to prison, if their townishness is determined by a substantial and convinced majority of the town. Yeah, big 'if'. Instruct them to choose 'No', hope to goodness that scumpowers won't screw things up (I didn't read the mini-game in-depth, but occasionally did skim it and take a glance. If possible I'll do a mild reread).

Yeah, Sly's 'the Death Miller' statement. Huh - the wording implies some knowledge of a Death Miller - sketchy, but the premise is hard to believe. I doubt there'll be a Death Miller, but then I've never been in a game with one and don't really know how much to trust that mod-guess gut.

A wise player once said that a Miller claim should be treated as a Vanilla claim: if the player acts scummy, lynch, and if not, don't. Simple-ish.

[Plum]

Assuming we send 6 townish players in and they all answer no (fairly big assumption, but as it's being discussed, my two cents): Maybe three daycops and three dayvigs? Cops use powers first, we vig any guilties, note the innocents, then use the remaining kills (if any) on the scummiest-looking players?

There is an informed mafia group and a very large uninformed group. Now you want to give the uninformed group the ability to kill 6 people within the game? That is absurd. Wouldnt the town want to gather information before blindly killing off almost a quarter of the players int he game. Assuming the breakdown is the way I think it might be, then by doing this and gaining 6 day kills you will almost assuredly only speed the process of the town losing the game. i am farily certaint hat 6 sane cop investigations would be much more relevant than 6 daykills. Also, how about this little trinket. What if you jsut voted 2 scum players in? they will both say no and go about prancing all over your dead body when the next day begins. you just gave the mafia 3 kills isntead of one. Brilliant.

What do you think lynches are for? You make a good point that we need information and shouldn't shoot blindly. At the same time, we don't have conventional lynches, and dayvigging could give us back some of that sort of power in the game. Your last point is noted. I'd like to know whether there's a way to confirm the choice of a player who gets powers from the prison scenario. If possible, perhaps assign powers to choose to the players before they're sent to prison, and assign them players to use their powers on. Do an unofficial investigate and/or dayvig and/or Doc protect vote. Any player who goes against the town is . . . dayvigged, if we have one, or a townie is sacrificed to kill him? On the one hand, that would change scum behavior, on the other, in that case a real townie wouldn't risk going against the town. On the other hand, that's a lot of potential loss . . .

I don't want to go the send two townie-looking players to prison route.

Why not, and what alternative strategy do you propose?

Freeko, may I ask why you're so interested in the possibility of an SK?

[Plum]

Assuming we send 6 townish players in and they all answer no (fairly big assumption, but as it's being discussed, my two cents): Maybe three daycops and three dayvigs? Cops use powers first, we vig any guilties, note the innocents, then use the remaining kills (if any) on the scummiest-looking players?

...On the other hand, that's a lot of potential loss . . .

Freeko, may I ask why you're so interested in the possibility of an SK?

I edited that down alot to cut out the chaff that was irrelevant to the discussion. anything else could obviously be seen int he post it originated from.

Part one. I just cannot fathom giving kills to people on the first day (to use for the second day), It is an incredible risk to be taking so early in the game. THis is on two fronts, what if in the process of everyone saying no someone gets paired with a scum.. oops free kill please. The second part of that gaffe is also absolutely ugly, a double vote AND the choice of "say no" powers. So they get one in prison and then get another during the next day. I dont like that risk vs reward evaluation at all.

As for my "interest" in there being a 3rd party, It is an option that I believe should be worth exploring. It could be anything really. I dont believe that I explicitly said there was an SK in the game so now I want to know if you are blatantly trying to twist my words?

Well, you brought the possibility of an SK/3rd party role up without anything I noticed prompting it, nor any suggestions along the lines of 'assuming there is an SK, we should consider X'. You brought it up in a succesive post, though on reread it looks a bit more closely related to your argument against the prisoners choosing Vig powers.

On that note:

1. The risk of scum gumming up any PD strategies we run is a given, whether we send in two townie-seeming players or not. We pair two townish, there's a risk scum get a free kill. Same thing if we send in a townish and a scummish, though theoretically a larger risk. Sending two scummish brings about a more dangerous risk of scum both living and gaining more kills.

See solorpg's post for more sentiments on this topic I'd like to echo.

[Plum]

@vel: The reason I say that they

potentially

have no use is that what are you going to do? Just randomly daykill a person when you dont know if they really are a town/mafia. It just leads to a situation that is more than likely not going to help the town in either the short term or the long term if we go down this route. Not on day 1 at least. My personal feeling is that information needs to be gathered first. THEN we can send in 2 confirmed town players so that we can daykill.

If I end up in prison, personally I would go for the cop ability this early into the game. A daykill on the next day would be next to useless for me as I would know nothing about anyone else and it would be a total shot in the dark that will most likely not work out very well.

I do not deny that trying to pair town early is not the best play. I assumet hat the scum have a break-in ability to bust up one pair (the last game had this mechanic). The problem I have is still this. What good will a daykill be on day 2 when you have no information on who to use it on?

What's the point of a Day 1 lynch in a daystart game, then? Answer: chance at killing scum, and secondarily, more information. I still advocate trying to find six townish players, ordering them to say 'No', and assign three of them the daycop choice and three the dayvig choice. The town then votes to determine the three scummiest players, on whom we'll order the PD players to use their investigations. If anyone gets a scum result, order a dayvig. That person comes up town, vig the daycop who claimed the guilty. Repeat until all three investigations are used. If any daykills are left, use them on the scummiest players not investigated (taking into account any relelvant alignment flips that have occured); these again will be determined by a town vote (like a lynch). Anyone who does not comply will be dayviged ASAP.

Sure, scum might have some methods to screw with the PD. Does anyone know of a specific power that can be used to screw the town only/worse if we use the above method, though? Dunno, I happen to think the above plan is close to as solid as we'll be able to get right now. Maybe, if possible, give the three towniest players of the chosen six the dayvig capabilities. Determine this by vote. In fact, perhaps we should try discussion, votes (for convenience), and overall consensus before we lock in

any

PD prisoners. Comments, criticisms, amendments anyone?

Summary/ tl;dr: Suggest attempt three pairs of two townies. Instruct three (specified) to choose daycop, and three (specified) to choose dayvig powers. Investigations used on scummiest players as determined by majority vote; after that, daykills are determined by the same method. Deviants and liars risk death.

Suggest vote instead of official 'send' before we reach consensus on the six players and the pairings. Orderly-making.

[Plum]

Maybe, if possible, give the three towniest players of the chosen six the dayvig capabilities.

I would give the three towniest players the daycop ability instead. Sending 6 players who look like town and actually sending six townies are two different things, a scum or two could easily slip in. If we assign a scum player the cop ability he could lie if asked to investigate his partner, or lie about what ability he chose and use protection for himself, or his buddies. However, if a scum slips through and is assigned the vig ability, he pretty much has to do what we say.

You're absolutely right. I should have thought of that, but was focused on another minor aspect of the plan and didn't consider that; my mistake. There's an amendment to my plan.

Unsend: CounselWolf
Unsend: Plum

Random stage does appear to be over. I'd like to again suggest we mostly stick to unofficial votes on whom to send until we reach a majority (?) consensus on all three pairs, at which point we officially use the 'send votes'. Whether or not you agree with my other idea, I think that making sure we know whom we want to send with whom for all six PDers before we get anything locked in would be a prudent idea. I'll volunteer to count the unofficial votes, unless someone else wants to do it. Stick to two votes for now, perhaps - theoretically six per player would work all right, but that's a lot of counting . . . all right, six, unless I find it unexpectedly hard to do, 'kay? It'll probably be a tally only.

For my part,

Vote: SlySly, Vote: Lowell, Vote: zachattack, Vote: Plum

- yes those are not Sends but unofficial votes. For now I'm comfortable with the miller claims, think that claiming was the right thing to do, and the apparant fact that they both got the same role PM (yes?) makes me feel that it's likely that they're telling the truth. I liked Zach's point on my strategy, as above, and agree with his assesment of our claimed Millers.

[Plum]

Yeah lets send all scum into prison. That makes almost as much sense as sending 6 towns into prison for 6 daykills. A mix will also result in bad things happening. I also could be horribly, horribly wrong.

Please enlighten me as to how you know who you willl day-vig? Just do it blindly?

As I've stated many many times before now,

no

. If you perchance took the time to look at and comprehend my plan before knocking it, you'd know that.

Basically, do you, Freeko, believe in Day 1 lynches in a typical daystart game, or in a game without cops (Gasp! )? Almost the entirety of the mafia community does. Do we have any confirmed scum at that point? No, but the town is the uninformed minority and gains power with more information. Not to mention getting a shot at scum instead of giving the scum a head start at killing townies.

The flaw with a six-daycop strategy is that while the plan would call for sending six of the towniest players to the PD scenario, it's unfortunately quite possible that one or two scum will find their way into the mix. Both your plan and mine call for instructing those in the PD to answer 'No', gain specific powers, and use them according to the Town's instruction. The problem with 6 daycops is at least twofold:

1. We can't trust that all the daycops are townies. Hence scum could clear a buddy and the lie wouldn't be found out or dealt with immediately, but allowed to fester. Perhaps the cleared scum is a scum powerrole - something you want to get rid of ASAP even more. And the scum have nightkill(s?). They have a chance to knock off townies, and can get at our confirmeds.

2. We might identify scum but not be able to get them killed as soon as we want. See above.

3. We won't have a strong punishment to use immediately if people deviate from the plan. Both our strategies call for the PD powerroles to be used

at the town's discretion

. But if I'm scum and I know the town can't daykill me for a Day or two, I will be much less hesitant to go against the town's wishes and, say, choose and extra daykill and kill a townie against the town's decision.

For a six townies, six 'No's, six one-shot powers plan, the

town

needs to be in as much control of the powers as possible. We don't have anything like a regulaer lynch, which is in most games the strongest power of the Town - to discuss, debate, decide, and take a shot at scum with the power of the majority. For now, at least, I'd like a plan that encourages as much of a copy of that idea as possible. This can only be achieved with some townie daykills as well as investigations.

Investigations will be determined by majority vote. PD powerroles who disobey will be shot. Kills are first used on players who flip scum on investigation (though millers won't be investigated - it's a waste), and on lying daycops. Then the town votes on the scummiest players, who are dayvigged. MAJORITY VOTE, like a lynch. Got it?

If voting on the players to send to the PD prison before send-voting is determined to be untenable for most of the town, I'm willing to withdraw the suggestion, as it won't go far without the town's cooperation anyway.

[Plum]

Freeko - NO ONE is advocating vigging BLINDLY. Understand that, please. With reasoned scumhunting, despite the risk of killing some townies, vigging is to our benefit. We'll get rid of scum and, if any town, the distracting, scummy, unhelpful townies. That's good.

Again - stop saying anyone suggesting dayvigging is suggesting RANDOMLY or BLINDLY dayvigging.

No one

is saying that at all.

If we go for the information route, how much damage could the scum do in the first night session? Assuming the worst here all 3 pairs result in a kill, the scum NK someone, and other forces do their thing (vig/sk/?) Thats at the worst 5 people.

We're not here to minimize loss of life, sorry. We're here to kill scum before they kill us. Minimizing townie deaths will help us reach this goal. At the same time, town needs both information and power and discussion to make

and carry out and enforce

scum killing descisions.

I pointed out the flaws in your six-daycops strategy above. No, my plan doesn't minimize loss of life fully. But remember it's trying to give the town kills to use as much like lynches as possible. I.e., it's about getting information (town discussion and vote on whom to investigate and investigation flips), using it properly (vigging any liars, vigging players who deviate from the plan - on the assumption that they're scum - and vigging lying cops; afterwards, town discussion and vote will determine the uses for the remaining daykills -

like lynches

), and enforcing the process (having the power to kill almost immediately any player who deviates, lies, or otherwise doesn't follow the town's instructions).

I don't care how many people die so long as we find a good way to kill mostly if not only scum. This is the best way I've come up with or seen another player suggest. No one will vig blindly. We can both catch and kill scum. That's enough for me.

What problems do you have with my plan after this, if any, Freeko? If they're not good points about something I haven't addressed . . .

[Plum]

Vote: Plan 2B

I'd also like to suggest that perhaps the four daycops should be instructed to investigate in a loop before any daykills are used. Objections/problems I haven't noticed?

[Plum]

I know that that objection applies to the plan of getting 6 day-vigs, which is why it is a terrible plan. But he said:

Every other plan so far that I have seen gets about 8 people killed.

Which clearly does not apply to the plan of sending the 6 townies or 4 townies + 2 millers and getting 3 investigations/3 daykills or 4 investigations/2 daykills. Nor, in fact, does it apply to my plan which involves executing only 2 people, assuming they comply. So, indeed he is engaging in very blatant straw-manning.

Ah. I see now. He presents the original argument as ridiculous up front to attempt to get his readers into the the mindset of...ridiculousness, so that he can set it up as a straw man to knock it down. Gotcha, ortolan. Well done.

Is a strawman, as stated, and after Freeko's previous cases of such (the way he continuously suggested anyone was suggesting vigging blindly/randomly) he seems scummy. Also

Though the part of having the 6 town players going in seems fine. Its the more intricate setup of having a pair by pair setup as well.

Do you not think that sending 6 poeple into the PD is a mistake?

Apparently your mind changed somewhere. That would be perfectly fine if I could figure out where the heck it happened. Please enlighten me.

NO ONE will willingly go into a PD and say yes/100% this early in the game.

Darn.

Because I'm actually open to thinking about plan 3, though I feel like I want to sleep on that etc. Plan 3 seems predicated on being able to correctly identify at least one scum, and making sure both players in that PD pair have no motivation to do anything but yes+100%. At the same time, if two scum of one faction are PD paired, they absolutely don't have a motivation to do that. Might have a motivation for yes/no bussing strategy, very well might have a motivation for a no/no dayvig choice strategy. If on the other hand the players don't share a faction (one's mafia, one's another mafia faction, SK, townie, for instance), and they're told that the choice is yes+100% or get dayvigged - it should work, in theory. At the same time, plan 2 gives the town more overall power (if it's not messed with, but I'm also working with that assumption regarding plan 3, as it's easiest for comparison purposes) - more actual investigates and more post-investigate dayvigs - but at the same time there may be less motivation for scum to play the game we want them playing. If I've missed something/someone has something to say on these musings . . .

Darn- because if plan 3 ends up being put into play, I'd have loved to have sent you, freeko, for the scum/scum pair. At this point in the game, at least, I feel this way.

And for the record, if I realized my play was distracting/detrimental to the town to the point that others wanted to lynch me and I thought I had a major shot at taking scum down with me, I sure as heck would yes+100%. Other things I'd rather have happen? Plenty, but in that situation I could see a sacrifice on my part benefiting the town most. If so, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

[Plum]

Send: SlySly; Send: Lowell

However - I think there might be merit, assuming we got with a variation of Plan 2, in having the daycops investigate in a loop. It should, in theory, help minimize the risk of scum slipping into the mix and confirming their buddies. Yes? In theory if we go with four daycops and get them all, and they're all players we picked as town, not scum, and we have them investigate in a loop, and a scum will only be confirmed if there are two scum in a row, we stand a decent chance of either getting four almost completely confirmed (Godfather is always a possibility, for instance, and I believe there was one in the mini) or three confirmed and one found scum. If the investigations are looped, though, the millers should be the ones to choose the dayvig option, for obvious reasons.

On the other hand, investigating scummy players by the town's vote would probably have a higher chance of hitting scum, with a lower chance of strongly confirming too many.

Thoughts?

[Plum]

Lowell: Dayvig
SlySly: Day Cop

Meh. I'd prefer an unofficial vote on this, at least, as I believe ortolan suggested. In theory I think you'd prefer to give those you trust more the daycop choice, and the ones you trust less the dayvig choice. Before that, in theory, we need a semi-official plan choice.

But I don't think anyone should be thinking about ending the day now. We have, what, over a month until deadline. We have plans that did not account for being broken halfway through execution. We have four more people we can send to prison today, and my current thinking is that the more pairs we send, the lower the pecentage of PD pairs that get messed with, in all likelyhood. What we need is more discussion. If nothing useful comes out of discussion in a week, I'll reconsider my stance on not ending the day yet. We made plans. One, which it appears the majority of the town do not support, advocates sending two scummy people to the PD. The other two, which have stronger support, advocate sending three pairs. I'd rather not give up on sending three pairs if possible. It seems that we're going with plan 3 or plan 2. Let's see that through, if possible/if minds don't change about it.

[Plum]

Why would you give people you trust less the ability to kill?

Because giving the more suspicious the daycop investigations means more risk of scum lies getting through (and some lies won't be too easily found either - and the last thing we need is scum falsly confirming a buddy innocent). Vig kills are more open, don't risk misinformation, and it's lots clearer whether the player did what the town instructed.

Send: Percy

Got some town vibes there. Not necessarily my final answer.

[Plum]

*BLATANT SARCASM*

OMG! someone thinks I am pro-town. STOP THE PRESSES.

*end BLATANT SARCASM*

Anyways, who are the 4 that are going into PD? Other than dripping goofball, who doesnt seem to know what is going on. Does anyone else scream out mafia scum to you? Right now I have 3 people that are pinging my scumdar right now. Damn shame I really cant do anything about it.

I almost want to go in and get cop so I can check on someone.

Sadly its not you ortolan, you are just looking more like a village idiot than a anti-town player atm.

I don't see anything wrong with you bringing up those who are pinging your scumdar, assuming you have some sort of case/anything that will lead to discussion. Discussion would be generally good right now, especially as we don't all have full consensus about whom to send under Plan 2B. It seems that I lead in votes, and I plan to do a rescan of other top votegetters soon so I can make sure my vote is on the person I think most townie. But I'd welcome your discussion of whom you think may be scum, as I think it will quite possibly lead to a better idea of which players seem towniest, so we can send them under plan 2B, and and to finding scummy players whom we can investigate etc. tomorrow.

Weirdy enough I see both Narsis' and Ortolan's points of view regarding you. I've seen you, Freeko, act noticeably anti-town, but at the same time I have a gut feeling that

you're

just a village idiot. Wouldn't mind checking it out tomorrow by suggesting the Town daycop you tomorrow, though.

[Plum]

Instead I will say I want to go in on the 3rd pair, or this one, I dont care. There is someone I am wanting to investigate at this point.

If enough of the town feels you're townie enough, they'll decide to send you. If not, you'll have little choice but to deal. Furthermore, the plan dictates the daycop investigate whom the town directs said daycop to investigate, so there's not really more point being the actual investigator as opposed to convincing the town that the person you have in mind is scummy enough to warrant investigation. Furthermore, you risk an instant Vig kill if you go against the town's decision according to the plan we're using, and I don't believe a Townie would want to risk that waste of resources and waste of a Townie life if avoidable. Furthermore if you investigate someone other than the player the town directs you to if you're a daycop, you'd better be prepared at the very least for the town to take your claimed investigation result with a

grain

fistfull of salt and scum using the WIFOM-condusive situation to their advantage

This someone you want to investigate? You can and probably should start trying to convince us now. Nu? I'm interested and it sounds like a good discussion point from which the town might well benefit. Shoot. Who do you think is scummy?

[Plum]

While I've privately speculated about the possibility of a Mafia Framer (simply because of the apparent potential for lots of oneshot daycops running around), I believe that until

a. a non-miller investigates as scum and flips town

or

b. someone dies and flips Mafia Framer

we'll have to work under the assumption that anyone who investigates as scum is actually scum. But the wording here:

Good, daycop me and get it over with so you know either one of 2 things, either I am a town player or there is a mafia framer.

Either you are town or there's a Mafia Framer mutually exclusive? I'll avoid getting too pedantic here about that, but the fact remains that if you investigate as scum, the Town won't know that there's a Mafia Framer;

you

assuming you're actually a Townie, will. Et cetera.

Yay for preview! Freeko:

As I have said MULTIPLE times, I am against this whole "town direction" thing. For all I know a mafia scum is the one directing traffic. So, If i get my investigation , I will then go for the kill the next day if I am right. I will deal with it myself. If I am wrong, then so be it. I move on.

You do realize that this only makes you less likely to get into the PD to get an investigation, much less on Day 2 to get a daykill. Realize this: The game is not principly about you being right. It's about Town working together to out and kill the Mafia. The end. Just reconsider your stance with a more open mind, perhaps.

What are you going to do, since no one cares to think more than not even a step ahead, when I turn up innocent from your daycop investigation? Or moreso what are you going to do when someone lies? You cant check it, at least not without wasting resources.

If you turn up innocent you'll be a semi-confirmed townie, with the possibilities for you being scum limited to you either being buddies with whoever investigated you or being a Godfather (or Investigation-immune SK) sort of scum role. Semi-confirmed town should help narrow down possibilities for who can reasonably be scum in the slightly longer term (there's the thinking ahead you were talking about), which is good (for example, the original investigators who investigated semi-confirmed townies may be killed by the mafia or end up investigated themselves; if they flip town, the semi-confirmed is almost fully confirmed. Great!).

State the player(s) you said you find scummy. Or at least your reason for telling us you have suspects but not sharing them. Remember, while there are some scum here, the majority of the players here

aren't

out to get you . But telling us you have suspects and then playing close to the chest is anti-town and unhelpful. Hey, you may even make a good case and help find some scum; so if you'd please do so?

[Plum]

Nuuuuuu?[/nudging]

[Plum]

send Ectomancer

send freeko

For pro-town sending? Explain?

[Plum]

Let's just get 4 investigates + 2 daykills and use one of the investigates on him.

He's not worth worrying about for the time being, and there is a good possibility he's a townie playing in a silly fashion.

That.

[Plum]

Well, that's interesting, DGB. I guess. My question here is that you say you sent Freeko and Ectomancer because they were the two everyone found most scummy - but what did you think of them? Also found them scummy, I assume?

Interesting note about possible bussing there. Reading back, it seems Percy was calling out more than half the players in the game for various degrees of lack of contribution (far from just Stepho or Stepho and few others); in retrospect, Stepho's apologetic response is telling of apologeticy scum, but hindsight is always 20/20 etc. Conclusion: Stephos' response is more telling than Percy's call for contributions, but it's useless now because he's dead Mafia. Possibly bussing, to be sure, but it's hard for me to say confidently that it was

likely

bussing.

[Plum]

I think, especially on day 1, we should send the 6 most townie people into Prison...

????????????????????????????????

????????????????????????????????

[Plum]

I think, especially on day 1, we should send the 6 most townie people into Prison...

????????????????????????????????

????????????????????????????????

Verily, friends.

VERILY.

I'd like to know what the excessive question marks are about.

I was wondering what DGB had such a monstrously proportioned question about, as the basic idea of trying to send the six towniest players to Prison has been up, discussed, and approved by many before this. If DGB seems to feel some sort of questioning outrage at this, why now at AA and -

On preview: Um, VRK, don't many/most of the people voting on plans actually like Plan 2? Wherefore 'that most of us think is crap'? Did I just miss something?

Back to your regularly scheduled programming: While I realize DGB didn't like Plan 2, she's only responded with the big question marks just now, so what's with the question mark baidyslam on AA as opposed to on everyone suuporting Plan 2 earlier in the Day?

Second preview: CW - Wait,

what

?

Third preview: Somehow when one person (AA) starts making sense it just makes the whole thing confusing all over again.

[Plum]

Ah, CounselWolf, I see where that question is coming from now; confusion on that topic is alleviated.

Empking, why do you want to end the Day now?

[Plum]

Because voting would just put a player in prison unable to do anything.

Correct me if I'm wrong, anyone, but I was under the impression that we're still able to send two more pairs to Prison.

[Plum]

Hm.

Unsend, Send DrippingGoofball

. Possible it's a scum power, but the death of Stepho makes it a whole lot less likely. I only have one send out, and whether we're going with plan 2 or 3 (to be honest, the flips of Freeko and Ecto make me feel less comfortable with the assumption that town will likely manage to send a pair with even one scum. ). I think in theory I could hammer myself into Prison now - no wait, I'm pretty sure that you need both potential prisoners at 11 (wasn't it?) votes simultaneously to lock it in. In any case, as we don't seem close to a partner to go with me, assuming it'll be me, I'll leave it to more discussion?

[Plum]

I'd like Plum and Percy to provide a list of who they suspect the most at the moment and why. Also, who they think is townie.

We need this before night.

I'll have a list ready, too.

Sorry about being briefly absent; should have this by tomorrow (hopefully then; I have studying to do . . .), want to do a reread anyway. It's a reasonable request. More later.

[Plum]

On brief rescan of hp[leaves] on a gut feeling: He's been lurkish, active and not so depending, a lot of either quick agreement an a quick unexplained switch from Plan 2 to Plan 3. Did I mention lurkish? Dunno, his play here remids me of Stepho's play. While I doubt all the scum are using a lurky strategy or are playing like Stepho, I really don't like his play.

If the Town switches from Plan 2 to Plan 3, I can deal, but as Zach rightly pointed out, we need some degree of unity or else we'll end up with a mush and a lot less clear of an idea what the best town play in Prison will be.

[Plum]

The leading bandwagons for sending a scum/scum pair are Narsis and Empking. This stems from hp[leaves]'s votes. I find hp[leaves] scummy. I want to see a good case on Emp and Narsis from those voting them, because otherwise this looks to me rather like a less-than-well-thought-out bandwagon, and scum can get lost on 'em too easily, not to mention that without too much actual reasoning for it discussed, they can tend to be, you know, baseless and bad. If the town decides to send a scum/scum pair I'll deal, as I said, but it's not going to help much if there isn't actual scumhunting discussion in addition to bandwagons.

Unsend

. Follow-up to my last post, I realized that it might be a good idea to keep my Sends off players until there's more consensus about what sort of pair we're trying to make.

I still endorse Plan 3 over whatever revised Plan 1 is being suggested. I still believe that hopefully having investigations and daykills out there will help give the town a little more control over the process, espcially in the event we somehow manage to send two Mafiosos to Prison et cetera.

[Plum]

The leading bandwagons for sending a scum/scum pair are Narsis and Empking.

I think a fair proportion of people were voting Narsis because they actually found him pro-town. I went along with it until I realised I was retarded and he had described freeko as pro-town which is blatantly incorrect even subsequent to freeko's pro-town flip (his role explains to some extent why he may have acted scummy but it certainly doesn't explain why some people may have found him pro-town)

I've gone over the opinions of Ortolan and Narsis regarding Freeko, and my conclusion is that Narsis' use of the phrase 'pro-town' was in the sense of 'town-aligned', whereas Ortolan mostly used it to mean 'seems to be actively helping the town'.

On the other hand, on more reread, Narsis' 'I told you so' post doesn't look great either. And while I do see reason in the one or two things people are finding scummy in Empking and Narsis, I'd very much rather stronger tells and stronger cases if we're planning to send them to prison to DIE. Makes me want to do a more thorough reread of them. Later; I've other stuff I ought to be doing right now.

[Plum]

Ah, excellent, stuff's coming up!

Because I'm actually open to thinking about plan 3, though I feel like I want to sleep on that etc. Plan 3 seems predicated on being able to correctly identify at least one scum, and making sure both players in that PD pair have no motivation to do anything but yes+100%. At the same time, if two scum of one faction are PD paired, they absolutely don't have a motivation to do that. Might have a motivation for yes/no bussing strategy, very well might have a motivation for a no/no dayvig choice strategy. If on the other hand the players don't share a faction (one's mafia, one's another mafia faction, SK, townie, for instance), and they're told that the choice is yes+100% or get dayvigged - it should work, in theory. At the same time, plan 2 gives the town more overall power (if it's not messed with, but I'm also working with that assumption regarding plan 3, as it's easiest for comparison purposes) - more actual investigates and more post-investigate dayvigs - but at the same time there may be less motivation for scum to play the game we want them playing. If I've missed something/someone has something to say on these musings . . .

These are pretty much my feelings, but I can't see how Plan 3 makes the scum somehow more restricted, which is what Plum seems to be suggesting. Could you expand on this line of thought?

Let me see if I can trace my original line of thought here. I

think

what I was thinking was that the game we want scum to be playing . . . Hm. I'm not actually sure what I was thinking Plan 3 would do to motivate the scum to do what. Looking at the rules, I notice that no one in Prison can use a power on anyone outside Prison. There could be some use in sending the scummy in to Prison, and in addition to the other advantages of Plan 3, if there are any scum powerroles, they'll be out of commission to use on anyone outside Prison. At the same time, I don't think that that was the potential benefit I perceived in Plan 3. Can seem to recall exactly what I was thinking. If so, it probably was not a huge awesome epiphany and probably was closer to a minor, vague, weird fleeting thought I had. Sorry about that.

Narsis' defense of freeko basically boiled down to "he's not scum, he's just an ENORMOUS NOOB". In hindsight, he was probably right on most points. However, people who defend others rather than let them defend themselves scream scum to me. The scum know they're town, and know they're so dumb that they're attracting a whole lot of attention for being dumb. Chances are they're going to get themselves killed, and it will let you say "I told you so!". Which, hilariously enough, he did. Attempts to take the pressure off people (other than yourself) who are legitimately under investigation is a scumtell.
I'm willing to give town points to Plum and ortolan for their thorough analysis of freeko's posting. Both seemed to come up with different and original attacks, and neither seemed interested in starting a bandwagon.

I don't recal a thorough analysis made by myself of Freeko's posting, unless you mean that I thoroughly responded/refuted/etc. many of the posts he made, which is true. If you mean PBPA, I don't recall having done so myself, though Ortolan did do so.

You make a good point that should have occured to me already: Narsis thought Freeko was newb-town; apparently he was right. The post-by-post analysis of his newb-townieness was over-the-top, though, rather an overreaction. An overreaction in the defense of another player is something I'm more inclined to associate with scum, not a townie. Heck, I had a gut feeling he was newb-town too, and so did Ortolan, if I recall. But I felt no need to make a megapost analyzing everything Freeko did and trying to put it in a newb-town light. Not at all.

Noted

.

Unvote: DGB

Send: Narsis

Percy as I said - Gut.
I considered two to have wong because it was ages since people had voted.

I'm pretty sure DGB is scum. Only her claim has stopped me from unsending her and is it really that pro-town a claim?

My gut and analysis on you were null, Empking, until this post. Anyway, why did you send DGB in the first place? This reeks of scum scared that DGB's power is multi-shot, and an attack on DGB and attack on her claim? It's remotely possible she's scum, of course, but she's got a solid-looking claim there, and, to choose the more plausible case, as scum she'd not likely have wanted to send lurker-scum in to die, not at this point in the game when he wasn't under any suspicion anyway. You unvoted DGB but didn't unsend her. Why ' un'vote', and why not unsend if you're 'pretty sure she's scum? The whole point of Plan 2, which, if I'm correct, you're sending according to, is to send those you think are the most townie. I, for example, would under most circumstances not want to lynch an uncounter-claimed Doctor Day 1 who's been actig fairly scummy. But I might not put him down as one of my top townie players either. Why are you sending someone for a town/town pair (unless I'm wrong about that part) whom you think is likely scum?

So unless you've got prior knowledge of how the scum night kills work, and therefore you know DGB is scum based on her ability, then this is just bullshit. All you're doing here is putting the pieces in place to lead a "lynch" on DGB tomorrow.

QFTrufax.

Suspicion.

HOS: Empking

.

[Plum]

I got prodded, classes have been really picking up for the spring semester so I have been falling behind. Percy, I tend to play very non-confrontationally (is that even a word?) in the first stages of games. I like to be more of an observer. That combined with being a little busy does make me look like I'm actively lurking, but I am town. For the most part I've been making my points known and throwing out stuff here and there but I've been content to let other people talk and just piggyback of what I'm learning from them. Theres still alot of people in this game and theres a lot to follow but I'll do my best to actively scumhunt.

So when do you think you'll get around to answering Percy's question instead of just avoiding it by posting only to address the accusation of active lurking? The sort of thing you're doing right here is part of the reason Percy's suspicious of you and I'm beginning to become interested in his case on you.

And say, wasn't it you who suggested and officially requested to end the day after sending the millers?

[Plum]

This fresh new meta is Empking-scum from a different game or just what you now deduce to be his scum self, DGB? Curious here. Personally I still think that his current belief that you are likely scum is bad and potentially scummy.

[Plum]

Sorry Vel-Rahn, ongoing games and all.

sounds like a good way to avoid needing to give proof.

It also sounds like a good way to be ethical. Think what you will though.

true as well. i wouldn't mess with an ongoing game either, but even so it's still an easy way to avoid needing to give any sort of real proof.

I'll say this: It aparently strengthens DGB's conviction that he's likely scum. It appears to be a legit reason for her convictions to be strengthened. It also appears to be something that, according to site rules, she cannot really discuss with us. She appears to be very very likely town. Her legitimately strengthened convictions, therefore, serve to slightly strengthen the possibility that Empking is scum in my mind. It was already there, anyway.

[Plum]

I volunteer to be sent in with Empking.

Do you remember how badly the last instance of this ended (Freeko and Ecto, who offered to sacrifice himself. Both flipped town)? Nah, I think it would be a bad idea in general to send in volunteers for any pairing based on the volunteering. If the town thinks you're scummy enough, ABR, I'm sure you'll get sent if we do a Plan 3 variation, with another scummy player also shose by the town on merit of scumminess, not volunteerhood. Same goes for town/town pairings.

[Plum]

And I think it should be ignored as a factor for whether or not we send you (unless someone considers the volunteering a scum/towntell in and of itself - but that's got to be full of WIFOM holes and such).

[Plum]

If it makes any differance, i too volunteer to go in, as anyone's partner in the prison.
and i'm not posting because all this seems so daunting to me, you guys debating theory like pros.

FOS

I see you've been on somewhat limited access for at least some parts of this game, however I still am not thrilled with the lurking and lack of willingness to analyze anything.

Quick, do you still prefer Plan 2 over Plan 3? What do you think of DGB? Do you think Empking is scummy, and, if not/if so, why? If you had to send for a town/town pair this minute, who would you send? If you had to send for a scum/scum pair this minute, who would you send?

Answer fast, active lurker. Pay attention or participate, as your lack of either is looking somewhat scummy, and at the very least is anti-town.

[Plum]

What about her bandwagoning and buddying up to ABR?

They're noted. But it's Day 1 and I'm willing enough to follow Occam's Razor for today at least. Occam's Razor on DGB is that she's town. She has done potentially scummy things, and they're noted; however, I feel that working under the assumption that she's town is the best idea for today, as it seems to be the vastly most likely possibility. The fact that you so forcefully argue for her scumminess despite the relative weakness of the case (it's not stronger than any other we've got but at least partially mitigated by the claim that indicates it's likely she's town) is, however, disconcerting.

I'm not going to ignore her scumminess, but I'm fully prepared to assume she's town at least until Day 2 or until she does something hugely scummy, whichever comes first.

[Plum]

If you apply Occam's razor to anyone, you get a town result. Its pointless.

Complete strawman. Occam's Razor = the most simple explanation. I am

not

saying that purely statistically DGB is likely to be town. I am saying that the simplest exlanation for one who claimed her power combined with the results of her use of her power (e.g., dead luker scum whom no one was strongly suspecting) points away from her being Mafia (and doesn't point too much to an SK-like role, though it's a possibility, of course); it does, however, point to Town-DGB using her role to try to glean some info on the players the Town was finding scummiest. Her being Town is the simplest explanation for what has happened.

Nice strawman, scum.

Also:

- Note

this last point isn't true, but it is the case

. Spent too much time thinking about the set up.

Huh?

Ortolan, why the heck do you want to send a town/scum pair???

Percy: For a first town/town pair I'd choose DGB and myself. Second I'd choose you, Percy, and . . .

maybe

Ortolan. That last one is most subject to change. Maybe Abstract`Actuary or CounselWolf instead (would need to do a brief reread of either of them before committing to it, as I'm only going on not remembering them seeming scummy and having a decent-feeling gut on both of them). If you want a scum/scum pair I'd send Empking and one of RW, Doc. No, or maybe hp[leaves] or Moratorium (bad gut on both but again would need a reread before committing to that).

[Plum]

If you apply Occam's razor to anyone, you get a town result. Its pointless.

Complete strawman. Occam's Razor = the most simple explanation. I am

not

saying that purely statistically DGB is likely to be town. I am saying that the simplest exlanation for one who claimed her power combined with the results of her use of her power (e.g., dead luker scum whom no one was strongly suspecting) points away from her being Mafia (and doesn't point too much to an SK-like role, though it's a possibility, of course); it does, however, point to Town-DGB using her role to try to glean some info on the players the Town was finding scummiest. Her being Town is the simplest explanation for what has happened.

WIFOM.

If you dismiss my argument as WIFOM, how in the world do you plan to legitimately argue that DGB's is a scummy power to have?

Bandwagoning and well her extreme bandwagoning along with a scummy claim.

If I can't argue that the claim and results mean it's more likely she's town, how the heck do you plan to argue that the power is more likely to be a scum power without being blatantly hypocritical?

On another note, it's been pointed out that until something is verified completely there will be an element of WIFOM in almost anything in this game. That doesn't mean we can't find legitimate reasons to find someone scummy or likely town, even though those arguments will always have an element of WIFOM. Read this, courtesy of SpyreX, for more of a dissertation on the subject:

http://mafiawiki.four-horsemen.com/index.php/WIFOM

It's nice that you think you can dismiss any argument simply by saying it's WIFOM, scum.

Plum: Areyou awarethat sending two scum in and telling them to go yes 100 is the worse possibility?

At worst it's a 2/2 town for scum trade, if we act intelligently about it. Scum/town is unpredictable: The townie could die and the scum could get out of jail with us having no further clue as to his alignment. With a scum/scum pair, we tell them to yes + %100 it. If they deviate, well, that's what the daykills are for. Pray tell what answer strategy you suggest for a town/scum pair?

[Plum]

I don't advocate sending DrippingGoofball on Day 1 as either a town or a scum suspect.

I want to be jailed with Plum. Gitmo for ladies.

Thank you.

I'm fine being jailed with you in a town/town pair. Curious - you're always advocating following ABR's suggested policies, but he doesn't advocate sending town/town pairs. You appear to want to be part of a town/town pair with me. Whence the deviation and disagreement with ABR? I just didn't really see it coming, or where it was coming from.

[Plum]

I'm fine being jailed with you in a town/town pair. Curious - you're always advocating following ABR's suggested policies, but he doesn't advocate sending town/town pairs. You appear to want to be part of a town/town pair with me. Whence the deviation and disagreement with ABR? I just didn't really see it coming, or where it was coming from.

Well first of all I am thirsty for scum blood, especially Empking's. But then on the other hand we can both gain abilities. I certainly would not choose to harm you, and I trust this is reciprocal. Hence the change of heart.

The trust is mutual. Would prefer we let the town do a little vote-thing on what abilities they'd like us to choose of dayvig and daycop according to whichever plan variation we use (and it seems that if we do a Plan 3, Empking's going to be toast anyway) - so:

Can we come to some consensus over what sort of pair we're trying to send within a few days, at least?

[Plum]

Explain why its hypocritical.

You say: Plum, you can't argue that DGB is town with a supporting proof that her power (and the outcomes of her use thereof) indicate such, because it's WIFOM.

Then you say: I'm arguing that DGB is scum with a supporting proof that her power indicates such.

You should be dismissing your own argument as WIFOM, unless I'm reading it wrong.

Also, Emp, an attempt at a scum/sum pair which doesn't utterly fail and end up sending two townies will result in a 1:1 ratio of dead scum to dead town. That's damned good work when you can get it. The arguments for Plan 3 are pretty good, all things considered; I'm willing to go along with either Plan 2 or Plan 3 so long as we can decide soon what sort of pair we're sending next, so everyone with votes for a different dort of pair in mind can revote and such. I fully support sending DGB and myself to the Women's Correctional Facility as a town/town No/No answer pair for Pair #2.

Emp again:

So they'd rather suicide than make us use our dayvigs?

I suppose not, but if we all don't totally lose our heads it will be a 2:2 tradeoff. That's good

Moratorium: I'm not keen on the premature claim: it was anti-town, if not scummy (I'm not totally sure here). Regardless, it's enough for me to hold my moderate gut suspicions of you until another day.

So what does everyone think about sending DGB and Plum?

So what do

you

think about sending DGB and me?

[Plum]

I fully support sending DGB and myself to the Women's Correctional Facility as a town/town No/No answer pair for Pair #2.

I disagree. I think we should decide on what would technically be Pair #3 (Either the Town-No/Town-No or the Scum-Yes/Scum-Yes) before we remove you and DGB from the discussion.

Actually, yes, that's a better plan. I support sending myself and DGB as the last pair and either

Percy and one of CounselWolf, AbstractActuary, and Ortolan (town/town)

or

Empking and one of RossWilliam and maybe Doctor No (scum/scum)


Empking's point on scum with powers killing our dayvigs - a potential solution would be getting three or four dayvigs. I don't particularly love the idea of needing so many vigs and not getting investigation powers for the town. We either risk it or go for Plan 2 - which I wouldn't mind at all.

as the next pair sent.

[Plum]

Also, if we do send DGB it should be as a daycop.

Because we know she will kill you as a dayvig.

Makes you sweat, does it?

QFTrufax.

Hey Emp, thought you didn't trust DGB as town. Didn't discussion come to the conclusion that the more trusted to be town should be designated to choose that daycop option? Nice. Either a contradiction or an explanation necessary for why you believe the one you trust least to be town should choose daycop.

Furthermore, there are so many people here suspiciou of you I'm trying to determine who will mind at all if she kills you a bit prematurely.

[Plum]

I think the least trusted should get cop.

Why? What about minimizing the risk of fakes innocent results on scumbuddies etc.?

[Plum]

I'm willing to go for Plan 3, as I've said before, and I'm just glad there's enough consensus that I can

Unsend all (if any); Send Empking, Send RossWilliam

Keep in mind that until further notice it seems we're attempting to send a scum/scum pair right now. You're sending in someone you find scummy and want dead. Sendees, remember that your options are yes/yes %100 lethality; if we manage to send in a townie, the best you can do is take scum down with you (and the alternative is dying and letting the scum live and gain powers).

Hey, DGB. You can and will probably still go with me under Plan 3. We're just probably going to send a scum/scum pair in before us. You can calm down.

[Plum]

DGB, what's your role/ability name? Freeko was an 'Avenger', Moratorium claims to be a 'Prison Security Guard'. If your role name includes how many shots you have, edit that out by all means.

[Plum]

I am town.

Mhm. Whatever.

Got any scum you want to send to the slammer?

[Plum]

send DGB

lets see how this turns out.

For our scum/scum pair? Either you haven't paid any attention to the thread or you think DGB is scum, am I right? Explain why in either case.

FOS

if I haven't already.

@ everyone with a vote left/who hasn't unvoted or revoted since we decided to try to send a scum/scum pair - PLEASE VOTE ASAP. If you have something to ask/discuss before you vote, I'd say that now's the time to do it.

[Plum]

EMPKING and RossWilliam: You are to both choose answer YES and percentage %100. You will be dayvigged ASAP if you do not.

No mistaking this, 'kay?

[Plum]

Send: DGB
Send: Plum

I'm up for it. Zach's suggested distribution of powers to choose looks fine to me, though I'm open to considering other suggestions, if any.

[Plum]

Lowell and SlySly: You are both to choose anwer NO; Lowell is to choose dayvig powers and SlySly to choose daycop powers. You risk being dayvigged if you do not.

DrippingGoofball and Plum: You are both to choose anwer NO; DrippingGoofball is to choose dayvig powers and Plum to choose daycop powers. You risk being dayvigged if you do not.

Can't hurt, can it?

[Plum]

Wait, the claimed millers aren't killing each other?

Are we recommending that claimed millers get vig powers???

Am I hallucinating?

No, you aren't. This has been the plan since before they got sent. I don't find them scummy and they're not going in to kill one another, at least not tonight. If you'd like to prepare a case against them so that they can be killed on a subsequent Day, please do not hesitate.

[Plum]

Just felt like a mafia-run prison to me. Every night scum had manipulative powers to affect prison. Kinda defeated the purpose of the core idea of the game (the dilemma itself) to have so much peripheral stuff affecting the prison.

Anyways, I would like to see M-M's opinion on this game, what he perceived, what rules he'd change in the future (if anything), etc...

Agreed. If the scum had only 2/3 of those powers, maybe . . .