R-SURVIVAL -- Game Over

[Cobalt]

When will roles be out?

[Cobalt]

Original Roll String: 1d16

1 16-Sided Dice: (2) = 2

[Cobalt]

gat: nachomamma8

[Cobalt]

how about we don't gate anyone

[Cobalt]

don't gate = don't put people in the safe zone

[Cobalt]

The safe zone just seems like a way for mafia to keep other scum from getting dayvigged. If we vote scum as the Gatekeeper then they'll likely move all their scumbuddies into the safe zone. And the safe zone doesn't protect from NKs or lynches, so it doesn't block any mafia actions.
Randomly voting the gatekeeper is risky but since it does reduce the amount of time the scum get to talk pre-game it's the best option right now. I know it's too early to be doubting other players but for all we know Cobalt's "random" vote might not be random at all :/

And I am taking this game WAY too seriously atm. Geez, me, this is too early to be doing all this speculation!

Um, there's no way to fake the dice.

[Cobalt]

yabba, there are no power roles.

[Cobalt]

Okay then.

[Cobalt]

yabba, there are no power roles.

This is a closed setup. I have provided sample "vanilla" type role PMs.

the OP says open setup.
???

[Cobalt]

sounds like bad idea mafia

[Cobalt]

I thought gating people into the safe zone had to be done in-thread.

[Cobalt]

The town Role PM in the front post has a daykill, while the mafia Role PM does not.

Ah. The queue topic said everyone had a daykill.

Well that changes things. I think we should probably do two daykills then, if we get a confirmed town out of each, and then toss them in with the other most protown guy.

The problem with that is that the mod has specified that the game is not completely open, ie it is possible that one or two scum have a daykill.

Or that some town don't.

[Cobalt]

Wait: easy fix. Majority members who know themselves to be bulletless are basically miller equivalents and should claim straightaway.

Not if they are power roles.

[Cobalt]

I'm pretty sure the gate actions are public. There's nothing to suggest they aren't. Parama, that line looks like it means if the scum target someone in the SZ, a random non-scum person in the SZ will die. So putting protown people in the SZ is actually a good idea, as long as there's more than 1-2, as it forces scum to target someone else or get a randomized kill.
yabba, majority/minority is more keystrokes than town/scum

[Cobalt]

Was Really Bad Idea the one town won because forbiddanlight randomly shot the godfather?

[Cobalt]

I thought so too, but ABR says the game is actually closed.

[Cobalt]

We should probably kill the GAT if we discover he moved someone into the SZ secretly.

[Cobalt]

Oh, this game.
This game.

[Cobalt]

Read the Bad Idea series.

[Cobalt]

no

[Cobalt]

hey don't vig me, I'm working on a PBPA of parama. that's why I've been less active. expect it later today.

[Cobalt]

Don't worry, this won't be too long.

GAT: nachomamma8

GAT: nachomamma8

Okay, GAT-ing the person I diced. No problems, right?

The safe zone just seems like a way for mafia to keep other scum from getting dayvigged. If we vote scum as the Gatekeeper then they'll likely move all their scumbuddies into the safe zone. And the safe zone doesn't protect from NKs or lynches, so it doesn't block any mafia actions.
Randomly voting the gatekeeper is risky but since it does reduce the amount of time the scum get to talk pre-game it's the best option right now. I know it's too early to be doubting other players but for all we know Cobalt's "random" vote might not be random at all :/

And I am taking this game WAY too seriously atm. Geez, me, this is too early to be doing all this speculation!

Here Parm gives us some IIoA about the anti-town uses of the safezone. Then he says randomly GAT-ing is risky, but worth it to cut down on scum talk in the pregame. Really? After saying a scum GAT can make his buddies immune to vigs, it's worth it just to cut scum talk short a day or so? That doesn't follow.
Then, after saying he doesn't want to random-GAT, he even suggests the dice I rolled was somehow faked. You can't fake the dice tags, first of all. And second of all, if you think a gatekeeper is a bad idea, AND that a random GAT is risky, AND I may have faked the dice... WHY DID YOU VOTE FOR MY CHOICE WITHOUT ANY QUESTIONS WHATSOEVER?
Notice that waffling at the end of the post, too. "tee hee, don't wanna be too serious, just ignore all this, it's too early, waffle waffle waffle."

Hmm, random though I had:
From the rules, I'm taking that only each individual in the safezone knows whether or not they're in the safezone, so the GAT could be secretly escorting mafia scumbuddies into the safezone.
If we don't want to use the safezone, or have it used by scum, wouldn't eliminating the GAT D1 (by dayvig or by lynch) and then not voting another one be the opportune way to eliminate it from play? (thus by voting in Nacho as GAT we've basically assured his death... sorry Nacho )
I know it could be a risky move, possibly sacrificing a townie... but if we really want to be sure the safezone isn't used, this seems like the only fool-proof way.

Now, Parm decides that the safezone is SO RISKY that it's worth killing Nacho out of hand just to ensure scum can't use it. Soooo... why were you OK with GAT-ing Nacho in the first place? Sounds like you went along with it because you wanted to get a free kill on a town player without having to actually make a case on him.

Hmm, random though I had:
From the rules, I'm taking that only each individual in the safezone knows whether or not they're in the safezone, so the GAT could be secretly escorting mafia scumbuddies into the safezone.
If we don't want to use the safezone, or have it used by scum, wouldn't eliminating the GAT D1 (by dayvig or by lynch) and then not voting another one be the opportune way to eliminate it from play? (thus by voting in Nacho as GAT we've basically assured his death... sorry Nacho )
I know it could be a risky move, possibly sacrificing a townie... but if we really want to be sure the safezone isn't used, this seems like the only fool-proof way.

What gives you that impression?

If you are right, daykilling Nachomamma8 is probably for the best whether scum or town to lessen his ability to protect scumbuddies.

I get that impression from this particular line in the first post of the thread:

If your target is inside the safezone, a random pro-town player will die inside the safezone instead.

It implies that at the very least, mafia won't know who's inside the safezone. At least the way I read it... the mafia don't know if their target is in the safezone or not, else it would be pretty pointless to target someone in the safezone... or at the very least it would lower their chance of NKing their target. I'm not sure about it but it's just the way I see it.

It's not at all obvious that mafia doesn't know who's in the safezone. Additionally, if that was true, then mafia would indeed have a lower chance of hitting their intended target. That's a good thing. It lessens mafia control of the NKs. How on earth is that worth killing Nacho for?

Parama is lurking.

Yeah, I'll admit I haven't been paying too much attention to this game :/ Though honestly there hasn't been much scumhunting going on, just a lot of speculation (partly my fault <.<)

Yeah, your entire post history so far is contradictory speculation and attempts to get Nacho killed.

The way you asked the question and responded to people's (over)reactions makes me believe it wasn't deliberate.

response to the poll, notice complete lack of scumhunting.

Read the wiki, Anon.

Actually- I think semiopen is the wrong word, this is really closed, despite some sample [effective] vanilla and goon PMs being shown. But w/e.

The polls are certifiably useless- but I think semioldguy might've taken it a notch too far, although I think he's town. Emotional excitement happens sometimes, not always for good, but it happens.

Orto's not fishing either, also. But enough of this poll malarkey, it's pissing me off.

So ya. We've discovered polls suck and this setup may/may not be open, semiopen, or closed. So where do we go from here?

I think from here we should stop speculating and lynch us some scum.

EBWOP: That was directed at everyone, not just Nacho.

WOW, THANKS. Yeah, let's scumhunt! How about you start.

hey don't vig me, I'm working on a PBPA of parama. that's why I've been less active. expect it later today.

Why exactly me in particular? Just wondering.

Because you are scummmmmm

Case summary-
a) total absence of any scumhunting at all, while telling everyone else to start scumhunting
b) Contorted and contradictory speculation of safezone in attempts to get Nacho killed
c) Lurking

unvote vote Parama

[Cobalt]

Because I thought he was scum and set out to prove it? Why else would I do one?

[Cobalt]

lol

[Cobalt]

Wow, way to kill me while I'm sleeping. Bah. Go town!

[Cobalt]

Guys, look closely at chamber and charter tomorrow.

[Cobalt]

I thought the moral was you decided pbpas are a scumtell and decided to waste a lynch for it?

[Cobalt]

<3
we cool
bah go town

[Cobalt]

Wow, I thought we had no chance in this game.
I still think it was kind of town-weighted- town basically controls 2 kills a day and could probably prevent some nightkills with creative use of the safezone.

[Cobalt]

Also, that bullet I got on day 2 was planned or desperate maneuver to make the game at least winnable for scum?

It was planned. If someone directly asked a mafia to shoot someone to prove they were town, they were given a daykill.

that's kind of ridiculous