R-SURVIVAL -- Game Over

[yabbaguy]

Hi everyone.

GAT: Nacho

Still thinking about theory behind safezone- there has to be some way it can be useful. Maybe defending powerclaimers from a NK?

[yabbaguy]

Stuff a claimed [cop] with two other plain majority and diffuse the odds of hitting them, for example. Maybe even increase the odds by further adding more majority members. That complicates minority's job, and makes it more difficult to kill the person they're after.

So I'd start stashing majority away asap to begin this process.

By the way, if I'm melting your brain already, I'd suggest playing Candy Land instead.

[yabbaguy]

Nacho is at G-1 now, I believe. Anybody? Somebody?

[yabbaguy]

RVS is a joke. So is Random Questioning Stage/RQS.

I much prefer the game theory discussion, much more convenient. Still thinking about optimal strategy here...

[yabbaguy]

Actually, can't resist this:

yabba

guy

votes: semiold

guy

...

Unvote

@charter: Watch a majority member be bulletless or a minority member have a dayvig. That throws a wrench into quite a few strategies.

[yabbaguy]

@charter: Most often, we presume, majority is armed and minority aren't. But with a closed setup, someone may have a "power" role that alters that one way or the other. If that's the case, strategies based on confirming majority from their shooting capabilities hits a wall for that moment.

[yabbaguy]

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

Can't vouch for armed minority, of course...

[yabbaguy]

Any vanilla bulletless, then?

PS: Am I seriously the only one who's gonna call the factions majority/minority?

[yabbaguy]

There's probably a

W

Yanker or some similarly named powerrole who can force people out.

I think semioldguy talks sense here- the randomization of a minority kill is really heightened if we start stuffing majority in by the masses. If minority goes in, opportunity lost, but nothing terribly negative.

[yabbaguy]

Vote: Ellibereth

-Generally sounding like he's too informed about minority. (knows scum likes more discussion and is quite confident scum don't have daykill)
-Lurker hunting != scumhunting, esp. when not calling them scummy.
-theory conjectures are generally unhelpful, sometimes dead wrong (gives advantage to minority.) Brushed one off as a mistake, which I can't necessarily vouch for.

[yabbaguy]

I think yabbaguy is highly likely to be scum personally.

Does you no good in a game of majorities if everyone else is in disagreement already. You MUST explain EVERY accusation if it's a novel one. Not doing so is simply not scumhunting, and therefore is anti-town.

Is this case serious?

A )Scum like to talk privately longer, what a suprise, right?
I believe Scum don't have daykills, do you?

B) I stated who the lurkers were. Anon and mal are nearing prodding time. For the record, I would be willing to shoot anyone who just posts two-liners to avoid prods. (see mal)

C) What are you referring to here?

This is partially an initial guess... but there are interesting points here:

A> That's not the point that it's bad advice. The point is that psychologically, understanding what minority doesn't want and their attributes most easily comes to people who are a part of the minority.

That's the hunch I get when you say statements to the effect of "Town should stop scum from talking", while it's absolutely good advice, it also shows an understanding of what scum want. That and "Scum don't have a daykill" (later switching to "probably doesn't"... which is curious), while it's probably true, again, you're talking about this game from the minority perspective.

B> Again not the point. You outright stated that you wanted to do normal scumhunting, which can easily be done from analyzing the contributions to the theory session we had at the beginning of the game. Lurker hunting is ridiculously inaccurate at this stage of the game, and a good way to "look helpful" without actually scumhunting (By the way, thanks, but I can check for lurkers myself.).

Also, policy lynches are ALWAYS anti-town. But that's a theory debate...

C> You referencing the safezone:

Hell, it's probably for wusses scared of being DKed.

(albeit it was early in the game...)

---

And another tactic you bring up... this one blatantly wrong.

Near end of the day, GAT brings in most pro-town player and two scummiest, so scum can't NK most pro-town player without hitting their possible buddies.

Ortolan: "Scum can't die in the safezone"

Ah fuck, didn't notice.
I can't see a point then either.

[yabbaguy]

I think yabbaguy is highly likely to be scum personally.

Yeah.

...

[yabbaguy]

I have an answer ready, but before I respond, is that the entirety of your scumread on me?

[yabbaguy]

And that matters why?
Answer the question.

First off, avatar is sweet.

Secondly, is this calling me scummy, or just being aggressive for the hell of it?

@orto: Yeah, I looked at "Sample" PMs, and that tipped me off. That's just my mind working differently, I honestly didn't catch the typo in the first part of the sentence.

I also think you're dead wrong on the point of everyone believing it was open, because all I saw was that Cobalt was under that false impression after I flagged the possibility of bulletless majority (etc). No less, malp posted about it before I did, although I had the idea before he posted- the time period between thinking and posting is ridiculously large for me.

The fact is, apparently that's all you come up with so far, and based on that one snippet that you seem sure about (which I strongly contest), I'm highly likely to be scum. The fact that you've now shifted to uncertainty fascinates me (you haven't totally figured me out, I take it?), but it really can be just that, backtracking. I'll have to sit on the fence on this one, esp. since I'm nowhere near figuring everyone out. Feels pro-majority since you're conveying uncertainty about a player's (my) read, a normal behavior.

[yabbaguy]

Latter option.

*headdesk* Okay then, Ellibereth just wants to make me look bad for no reason. Not exactly the point of what we're doing here, but I don't think "you" are a part of the "we" here, so that's okay. :)

You're right though, my chronology's scrambled. I still don't see though anyone suggesting otherwise other than Cobalt prior to my post (maybe one person did and I missed it). Saying that everyone was under that assumption is still a stretch, in my mind.

[yabbaguy]

Regis Philbin: All right audience, Ortolan needs your help. On your keypads, either "Open", "Closed", and "I really don't give a damn about this crap"... vote now!

*dramatic music*

[yabbaguy]

I thought semi-open was F11, C9, or some other game that involves a batch of setups or roles, and ONLY those can be drawn from. In that case, the players know all the possibilities, though not entirely which one is chosen.

Since we don't know possible powerroles or even how many scum could possibly exist, it's totally closed. Sample PMs don't count, in my mind.

But again, I honestly don't care because the point is moot. The fact of the matter, there is a way that the original post could have been construed as both closed and open. The fact that I took what might be the lesser-taken interpretation just is not scummy. Simple.

Therefore wasting time with this poll is anti-town.

[yabbaguy]

*sigh*

Vote: Ellibereth

-Generally sounding like he's too informed about minority. (knows scum likes more discussion and is quite confident scum don't have daykill)
-Lurker hunting != scumhunting, esp. when not calling them scummy.
-theory conjectures are generally unhelpful, sometimes dead wrong (gives advantage to minority.) Brushed one off as a mistake, which I can't necessarily vouch for.

[yabbaguy]

Well, hey, wait a minute. I thought the point was that we dayvigged before we voted, even.

Find your own scum suspect. The vote is more symbolic; I agree with dayvigging first, ie: having someone else scummy shoot Elli.

[yabbaguy]

That's exactly it. But we need another scum suspect, and I think I've scared the fish away now.

...here fishy, fishy!

[yabbaguy]

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.

[yabbaguy]

NO! That is horrific play, with a system in place. And I'm sick of putting up the WIFOM that lurkers are just playing to their meta and should be regarded as town for shameless killing. If anything, I'm now deliberating the opposite, possible opportunism.

Absolutely ridiculous. The correct move is to make the scum suspect shoot. Now we've lost 1, most likely 2 townies.

[yabbaguy]

This quote makes me think chamber and charter are prob town since scum cobalt attacked them.

Anon, I know charter shot, but you're diving headfirst into the shallow end right now by jumping to that dangerous conclusion.

[yabbaguy]

Not at all the point, I'm just trying to point out to Anon that he's making dangerous logical errors.

You very well could be town.

[yabbaguy]

I still would like to resume thinking that Ellibereth is the way to go.

[yabbaguy]

Today or tomorrow, I'll find some way to post.

[yabbaguy]

SOG has it right. Confirming town based on who shoots is a bunch of malarkey for the statistical reasons he's laid out. Elli is contributing lazy questions which seem to lead nowhere, IMO, and is so far using gut as a reason to kill Nacho. This doesn't sit well with me.

Again a shitty decision to kill... what the hell does "useless" mean, Dragon? That sounds scummy to the max to me.

Still, gotta go with what I've been going with all along, as my gut read still is checking out. Sorry if it's a duplicate vote, I haven't been keeping careful track of this game.

Unvote if needed, Vote: Ellibereth

[yabbaguy]

Who's scum, Nacho?

Useless means, posting without ever really commenting on anything. None of dramonics posts give any information on anything. I had a serious problem with that.

Is useless = scummy?

[yabbaguy]

Oh... shoot. He may have slipped some people in.

[yabbaguy]

I'd like Anon to have a shot at chamber. I think it's scummy lurking on both their parts, and I think chamber should die anyway.

[yabbaguy]

Dragon's kill makes so little sense to me- and is therefore ridiculously opportunistic.

Vote: DragonsofSummer

I think vote count is reset, so I'm the first vote counted.

[yabbaguy]

Bogre came up with a very strange hypothesis on Nacho- but I'm inclined to call it legitimate scumhunting instead of bussing. Dragons needs to explain why he made that kill, and why dram was scummy.

@orto: Bogre and semi are possible scum according to you... yet you're asking them for advice on whether or not you'd shoot me? Explain that. Also why DoS? Why nobody else?

[yabbaguy]

I'm really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really unsure why I'm being called scum or a good kill target right now.

Ortolan- I thought I was right... turned out to be town, but I thought I had the right path. The lurkerhunting was a mistake, but in a game this dysfunctional, I don't have much to go on at this point.

[yabbaguy]

This game's out of gas...

Here's everyone in the game again, with an asterisk by those who have shot.

Code: Select all

Anon*
Bogre
chamber*
charter*
Dragons of Summer*
ortolan
semioldguy
yabbaguy

One thing that occurs to me though is that we probably want to get rid of the people who have NOT shot, which I cringe at saying considering I have not shot either. However, if Mafia make it to LyLo, and one happens to have a bullet, BLAM-O, they just take out any town and they win.

Now HackerHuck suggests that scum may have used their kill(s) already, but I'm just calling it baseless speculation, and I bet someone may have been astute enough to realize that saving a bullet for LyLo is a game-clinching scenario. I'm with charter here, I don't want this to undermine our game.

That said, ortolan has been ridiculously all over the map, first suspecting me, then immediately asking me for advice and asking to "hold his hand", and then threatening to shoot me, and I think should go down in history as one of the biggest "buddying up" tactics I've ever seen in my life, in addition to taking advice from people who he suspects as scum.

I call shenanigans. That and ortolan's promise to kill someone is 15 days old... so I'm starting to suspect he's not going to follow through with it all.

Unvote

One thing that's stopping me from shooting is the possibility that I or ortolan is in the safezone. Apparently I have to know that I'm in before I can come out, which is upsetting if I'll never figure that out. That or me being the GAT, but ortolan as a scumbuddy may be in the zone, too, which would make the scenario fail.

Vote: ortolan

for now.

[yabbaguy]

Where did you get this information?

Mod's iso #17.

Interesting that you bring this up. What makes you think off-hand that scum-nacho have put town-yabbaguy in the safezone?

It blocks a pro-town player from making a kill. Keeping scum behind the wall isn't a horrible idea either. Not putting anyone in isn't a horrible idea either.

It's just a matter of bracing for worse-case scenarios.

Now if you don't mind-

@orto: Bogre and semi are possible scum according to you... yet you're asking them for advice on whether or not you'd shoot me? Explain that. Also why DoS? Why nobody else?

@charter: That empty statement implies baseless speculation. Did you even read what I'm saying?

We've done reckless shooting already and the game's still at a crawl. I'm in midterm week right now and I"m still trying to make a concerted effort to get this game moving. Ultimately, everybody's gotta get their ass in gear and get talking, or we're just going to resort to boredom kills for the rest of the game (bad).

[yabbaguy]

if it doesn't end the day, let's just elect a Gatekeeper, put someone in the safe zone and have all of us shoot at him (or two of us shoot him and the one of the last two shoot the other). Accomplishes the same as charter's plan but we would be much less likely to be cut down to a four player game.

Dislike. Wasting shots doesn't sound smart.

[yabbaguy]

Bah ortolan sucks.

[yabbaguy]

Apathy kills games and daykills people recklessly. That is the one thing everyone should be getting out of this.

Also, statistical quirk- Cobalt has now been scum in all 3 games I've played with him. (once SK, once I was Mafia buddies with him, now this).

I did not deserve that daykill. It was ridiculous apathy-pushing and was absolutely inexcusable. When games degenerate to "I'm bored, how about yabbaguy?" or whoever, you know you're doing something wrong. Accuse the apathetic and hold the gun to his head. Do something.

I think the constant aspect of the game possibly being possibly being powerrole infested was what screwed us up. Anon having a kill would've screwed us up then, so I suppose that wasn't the case.

CMAR- you posted one of your posts consistently with ellipses...thus never providing an actual sentence...kind of like this one...it looked like you were indecisive with your thoughts...and made you look like an apathetic scum...know what I mean?

Clear sentences. Please.

Everyone who randomly killed is full of fail and needs to lurk less.

Bad game, okay setup. Honestly, I thought setup balance-wise was okay and almost town-favorable with effective Double Day Mafia, but yea, the safezone mechanic needs tinkering. I think if we tried what we did with semi every time before we killed someone, scum could slip their buddies in among all the townies, and nobody would know what the hell to think, so I don't see the massive statistical favoring that SOG suggests.

[yabbaguy]

If only the goons weren't vanilla (or seemingly so)

:dislike post content-based game mechanics as well: