Xylthixlm wrote:populartajo wrote:With 1 post, wouldnt hurt to hear more about him, dont you think?
If Walt is scum, we kill a scum.
If Walt is town, we kill someone who is slowing the game down.
Seems like win/win to me. And I think Walt has a pretty good chance of being scum.
This game started just over 37 hours ago; relax, I don't think it is possible to gauge who is lurking and who is not in a little over a day, let alone a few days. Are you telling me that you expect all of the players in this game to stop working, sleeping, and cancel all their plans in order to be considered an active participant in this game?
Xylthixlm wrote:populartajo wrote:Xyl, just a hint, not everyone can post as much as you do. What is the case on Walt again?
Every word he's written has been scummy and noncommittal.
You twisted the content of my post in order to meet your adjenda. I asked someone to clarify a rule for me before I elaborated on my post, voted, or used my hurt/help. There was nothing scummy or noncommital in what I wrote.
Xylthixlm wrote:Kinetic wrote:I'm thinking the pushers for attacks are right. Once we have decided on a "lynch" can we at least agree that it isn't a bad thing to heal the other players if there is a lot of harm going around?
Healing up people who aren't under active attack is a good idea. Healing up people who have a real wagon on them is counterproductive.
People arguing about voting systems, random hurting, etc, etc, need to keep in mind two indisputable facts:
1) In the end, the thing that will determine whether the town wins or loses is
the order in which people die
. Nothing more, nothing less. We need to make sure scum die before townies as much as possible.
2) The scum get more influence over who dies with every week that passes.
#2 means that, if they're smart, the scum will be trying to slow the game down. Keep an eye on who is acting to slow the game down, and who is acting to keep it moving. If we're willing to punish people for slowing the game, that will mean the scum will have to help keep the pace up, which will be good for the town.
Here's some math:
The scum get a kill roughly every 2 weeks (more if we bring people down to low HP and leave them there a lot, less if we kill several scum early).
The town gets as many lynches as we want.
There are probably at most 5 scum.
If scum get close to a majority, they can heal to prevent the town from killing in a reasonable time, and force a win using rage. Call that -2 mislynches.
So, depending on our lynch speed, our number of mislynches before we go lose goes down:
If we kill once a day, we get around 8 mislynches.
If we kill once every 2 days, we get around 7 mislynches.
If we kill once every 4 days, we get around 6 mislynches.
If we kill once every 7 days, we get around 5 mislynches.
If we kill once every 10 days, we get get around 4 mislynches.
If we kill once every 14 days, we get get around 3 mislynches.
So... how much deliberation before each kill do you think is worth losing a mislynch?
Gee, what a well thought out, in depth, articulate post. Although, what side of the argument are you tring to make; faster or slower? With all your mathematical calculations, you missed an important point. We do NOT know if scum have rage, how quick they get it, and how many points they may be able to inflict. If we take out 8 innocent Townies using your strategy, the scum may be able to sweep in with their rage points and end this game in a few weeks.
Furthermore; based on your post and subsequent strategy, scum can win this game without ever needing to use a rage point. We can eliminate all the other townies ourselves.
There are several other players who are trying to make the point that we need a quickened pace, however they are apporaching it in a far wiser way than both you and DGB. I ABSOLUTELY agree that we should try to keep a healthy pace, but never, ever at the expense of losing Townies.
DrippingGoofball wrote:Nuwen wrote:Cybele wrote:Also: I really do agree with the idea of fake-voting instead of hurting. New mechanics means we need to adapt.
Good catch, though not as much of a shining beacon of grovelling for mercy as WaltWishbone.
So, I guess that is a NO to fake voting?
DrippingGoofball wrote:Nuwen wrote:...approximately 16 hours ago. His lurking is inactive and indicative of absence, not willful withholding of content.
I don't even care that he may be lurking, the content of his single post is pretty damning. He's positioned himself to play the role of a poor innocent little rabbit.
Really, please enlighten me? Have ever heard the cliche, "you are damned if you do, damned if you don't"?
Xylthixlm wrote:For those too lazy to find WaltWishbone's only post:
WaltWishbone wrote:So I am not sure I have a complete understanding of the way this game works, however I am comfortable making a few early observations. I do not feel confident enough yet to make a vote or hurt/heal anyone.
My initial thoughts from reading the first six pages are; Cybele, Hoopla, and Kinetics opening posts came across as very honest and containend an element of truth which would indicate they had no idea what kind of Rage, ect abilities scum may have. Although, I do understand a couple of points made against Kinetic, I would have a hard time voting for him at this point. I think ABR has put in lot of detail into his research and subsequent reasoning behind his post however I want to go back and reread the first 6 pages (as well as the previous game) before elaborating.
I am a bit torn between two different stratagies, I do however agree with going with a majority. I am not sure whether it would be best to hold onto my hurt/heal until the rest of the players have a chance to check in and and add their thoughts or if I should return the favor and heal vIQleS? (thanks by the way
)
One thing I am not clear about in the rules is how time works in this set-up? In otherwords, do we have 24 hours from Mr. Flay's post to hurt/heal someone 1 time? Tomorrow by 7am? Also if we dont use a hurt/heal does it carry over to the next 24 hour period?
I am gonna reread everything now and try to get a better handle on how this set-up works, thanks for any advice.
Translation: "I want to look like I'm contributing, but am unwilling to actually take a position on anything. I'm just going to sit here and let the town reach a decision and then I can pretend I supported it all along."
Thanks for taking the time to answer to my question by the way.
I mean, I really think this comes down to a difference in opinion on strategy. I prefer to be more careful and calculated before randomly eliminating players. I don't like going solo, I'd rather get a consensus from the town and understanding of a game before I make mistakes that will cause a mislynch and hurt the town.
Xylthixlm wrote:Seraphim wrote:@Xyl
Juls and WaltWishbone are lurking, correct?
I also think it's important to sort out the lurkers from the scummy lurkers. Generally, scum lurkers will either say less or pretend that they're saying something when they're not.
WaltWishbone is a scummy lurker. Read his post.
Juls is OMGUSing rather than scumhunting.
As oppossed to what... a shining beacon of irresponsible town?
Xylthixlm wrote:Actually
Call intent to hurt WaltWishbone
Die, lurkerscum.
After you.
Although I am not sure if you and DGB are scum or just anti town.
q21 wrote:WaltWishbone wrote:
One thing I am not clear about in the rules is how time works in this set-up? In otherwords, do we have 24 hours from Mr. Flay's post to hurt/heal someone 1 time? Tomorrow by 7am? Also if we dont use a hurt/heal does it carry over to the next 24 hour period?
From experience in the last game: You hurt/heal refreshes 24 hours after your last hurt/heal. Regardless of Flay's posts.
Thank you for the clarification. At his point I am going to return the favor and...
Heal: vIQleS
Hoopla wrote:So, I'm not super familiar with what the most sensible play is when it comes to hurting and healing, but from what I've read of the previous versions of these games, it's possible scum accrue extra damage/powers over time. I think it's in our interest to play this game in a relatively quick fashion.
I agree with this, as a few other people have stated. I don't think we should consider townies sacrificial lambs though as Xylthixlm and DGB seems to be doing.
Kinetic wrote:The more I think about it, the more I feel the best scum strategy is a highly aggressive one. Especially if they can make it look townie to be aggressive.
populartajo wrote:I wouldnt call them obv town or obv scum. Kinetic is kinda right that is a valid strategy for scum to appear agressive.
In all scenarios they are blatantly antitown since they are giving scum (if they are not) the free pass of being aggressive and random hurting that WE KNOW its detrimental to town in the long game.
I agree with this, I think scum may be trying to point as many fingers as possible and in as many different directions to get us to elimante ourselves. As well as pushing the pace of the game to the point where we are not thinking and just reacting to wagons as they form. I think it's something to be approached carefully.
Tenchi wrote:More Notes/Comments from me
ROFLCOPTER: For the record I played with Rofl before too.
roflcopter wrote:
speaking of organize, i'm organizing a brute squad, and inducting the following obviously town people into it immediately: abr, xyl, dgb, and tajo (if he'll accept). we should all agree on one person and put them down. over and over, until we've killed all the scum.
This is so creepy. The last time I saw people do this, it allowed scum in the council (even when they were in the minority) to manipulate the vote. Also, why should we trust your choices? I feel just placing one scum in that council of four can really sway things.
Also, this prevents us to see true accountability on Hurt and Heal actions. If we let Hurt and Heal actions to be as natural as possible then we will be able to dig through better intentions of each ad every person.
On another note, I totally agree with the fake voting system because it lets us express our disagreements and scum hunting without putting innocent people in jeopardy.
I agree with all of these points, although the one thing that concerns me is that it seems that we are not getting a consensus of people who wish to proceed with the fake vote... and I do think it will slow things down to a point were it could be detrimental if we can not come to an agreement quick.
@Rofl: I see your point for wanting to form a brute squad, but I can't see how you can confirm those people as town this early in the game. I think you may end up eliminating too many townies if you don't listen to other opinions.
populartajo wrote:Sorry for the fourth post but I think this is also important:
1. Town lost last time because town's HP were already low for random hurtings. I dont agree with random hurting but I also dont agree with long days (more rage points). We have to find a balance.
2. So I propose we do a mass healing of everyone to take them to one more point of their current HP before we start hurting. This could be beneficial someday.
3. We also could manage to have a fake votecount instead of having people hurting and/or healing. Like a normal game when someone is majority fake voted we could mass hurting him and "lynch" him.
This was a great post, I really like the idea of a fake vote count, but it seems to many people are resisting the idea and would rather go solo or form small groups. I'd be willing to vote if we put a deadline of like midnight tomorrow night for a majority if others agree?
Kinetic wrote:Albert B. Rampage wrote:FOS: Kinetic
You want to make the day as long as possible, which goes in direct contradiction to this rage point theory.
Yes, as long as possible, but not too long that it becomes horribly detrimental. I've yet to see a game where quick lynching has won the game, and I refuse to quick lynch for the sake of such. This doesn't mean I'm advocating waiting forever, but I'm not going to make hasty decisions either.
You also have to look at the other side of the coin. While the scum are saving points, they aren't using them, which makes them useless until actually used. It does mean that they can dump, and effectively night kill with such a dump, but these rules highly favor the town, not the scum.
By making sure we're not spreading damage we can make it so rage dumps are few and far between.
Hoopla wrote:ABR: Thanks for your summary - you put together a case weightier than expected, but I think you're exaggerating what to me looks merely like a strategy disagreement.
I agree with Hoopla, the whole discussion between ABR and Kinetic, came across as a difference of opinions in strategy between two Townies. I don't think either look scummy at this point, just at odds.
Kinetic wrote:q21 wrote:]
Kinetic wrote:
Quick days will only HELP the scum, so I intend to draw out their intentions and actions and refuse to let them cause chaos and push the town into hasty actions.
Wrong. Long days allow scum to accumulate rage points as has been pointed out. Quick days in terms of real life time help the town. Optimal town play requires long day is terms of posts but quick in terms of time.
Not wrong, by your own admission. I judge length more by the number of posts and less by the time it takes to get the posts.
Either way, I think its generally agreed upon at this time not to take too long, but also not to let rage points control us either.
qft, I don't intend to draw out long conclusions, but I am not going to be pushed into making hasty reactions.
Kinetic wrote:Xylthixlm wrote:
I don't see any need to subvert the hurt/heal mechanism. Just try to concentrate your fire on people who are already hurt, rather than wearing everyone down at once. That will make it harder for scum to suddenly kill townies using secret damage.
As several people have said, a fast-paced game helps the town even more than normal. Expect scum to try to slow it down by lurking.
Something about this post reeks.
Agreed, it stands out as bit contrived and with deliberate intent to quicken irresponsibility. Perhaps maybe more anti town than scummy, but there is something amiss that's worth investigating further.
