Mini 775 - Hammersmouth Is Under Attack! (Game over)

[Percy]

Hi everyone!

Vote: CJMiller

Because random voting is

AWESOME!!!!

[Percy]

englosh

LOL

VOTE: _over9000

[Percy]

I don't feel under threat - I'm at L-4, it's very much the random vote phase, and if four people mysteriously conspired to hammer me right now (before others could unvote!) then that would constitute pretty good information for the town as to who the scum are.

It seems a little bizarre that you'd point out that I'm in some danger, and tell us to be extra careful, when you're one of the people voting for me.

FoS: CJMiller

.

[Percy]

Unvote, Vote: _over9000

Apologies...

[Percy]

My first vote (on CJMiller) was random. My vote on _over9000 was random as well. It wasn't counted initially because I forgot to unvote, but I put it back on after the mod pointed this out to me.

After

my failvote, but

before

my correction, I FoSed CJMiller for his post. I use my FoSes to clearly mark my suspicions, and tend to use them liberally (I find it helps on re-reads when other townies mark out who they're suspicious of, rather than hiding it in dense wads of text, and that's why I do it). I wanted CJMiller to answer the question, but I didn't want to leave the random vote phase. Leaving the random vote phase too early can help lurkers slip under the radar, and whilst I was suspicious of CJMiller, I wasn't going to charge at him yelling "OMGOBVSCUMMMMMMM!!!!!!11" before I got a chance to hear his response.

@Percy, why do you feel the need to make sure that your vote is switched to _over9000 for a simple spelling mistake? I know this is the random voting stage, and most of the votes don't make sense, but why do you feel it's important that you must make sure that a random vote switch is acknowledged? It shouldn't matter in this case, would it?

I wanted to switch my vote (this being the everyone-gets-attention phase), but I screwed up, so I corrected it. I didn't have a good reason for switching my vote, but did I need one?

And more importantly,

why do you switch it away from the very person you FOSed? Wouldn't it make more sense for you to keep your vote on him?

As I said before, I don't want to turn this into a "Either CJMiller or Percy must be scum!" fight. I didn't want to be voting for "real" reasons so early.

why even bother FoSing someone at this point in the game? Why not just switch your vote? Unless your first "random" vote was not random.

At this point in the game, my votes don't mean suspicion (and neither does anyone else's, for the most part). My FoSes do.

Either way, I think we all agree that Percy = first real suspicious guy for the Day.

CJM's action was a little odd, but nowhere as much as Percy's.

My "crime" is not voting for someone I'm suspicious of. My explanation is that I marked my suspicion with a FoS, but didn't want to leave the random vote stage and therefore left my vote random.

I have a particular idea of what the "random voting" stage means, and clearly it's not the same as yours, but after my explanation, am I still the "real suspicious guy"?

I think getting started on them is getting us out of the random voting stage and will hopefully lead to some content. It's early and we don't have much to go on, getting started on them will start giving us more to look at. If you don't want to get started on them what would you propose we do instead? Which other direction do you think we should take?

Urgh, tunnelling on the two of us to start with, when all of this has exploded out of not much at all, is pretty dumb. There are people who still haven't really got to posting, and much more info can be gathered about the entire playerbase. Why do you want to end the random vote phase when it's what generated this information in the first place?

To clarify: Yes, getting started on us will generate content, but it won't be useful content unless one of Psycho, CJMiller or myself is scum. If we're all town caught in a clusterfuck of vague reads, the scum will rub their hands and hasten this along until one of us gets lynched. I'd prefer to keep my focus wide at this point.


Having just said that, let's turn to CJMiller. He didn't point out the danger that Artem was in, and pointed out I was in danger even though he was the one putting me there. I called him on it, and his response was.....

I don't know why I said that, either.

You can do better than that, buddy. Some reason flashed through your brain when you were working your fingers around that keyboard of yours. Care to enlighten us?

Unvote
Vote: Pablo Molinero

[Percy]

I'm determined to keep things in the random vote stage, looking at everyone and yes, fishing for reactions before we go tunnelling in on any subset of players.

@CJMiller: Filler for what?!

[Percy]

Holy shit, I am at L-1.

This is

INSANITY

.

I am posting this while I type my reply. Do not hammer, goddamn.

[Percy]

First up, on a careful re-read I have noticed that two people have unvoted me, putting me at L-3 rather than L-1. I'm sorry, I saw 6 votes for me and panicked.

Anyway, here's my analysis so far.

Why do you want to stay in the random voting stage for longer than need be? What is the purpose of the random voting stage as you see it? I personally dislike the random voting stage and I'll tell you why I want to move on from the it, which you say has generated this information... but then you answered your own question...

because it generated this information

and now we actually have something to discuss.

In answer to your first question, I don't think it's been "too long" in the random voting stage. There are clearly some players who have

completely

coasted by, and I don't want them being neglected.

I see the random voting stage as forcing everyone to talk. Not just one person doing an investigation on another person, and others agreeing with or knocking down that investigation - everyone has to start somewhere. I like the random vote stage because it allows me to see a little bit of each player.

I know we have information now, and I think the way my wagon has progressed is good information. But I didn't want this to be what we're working with, and now we're stuck here.

You claim that this "exploded out of not much at all" and I don't disagree with that, but what do you really expect to develop from the random voting? Would you suggest we jump over skyscrapers while we're still standing on the ground, or should we jump somewhere not as high first to get us in better position to jump the skyscrapers?

I believe I answered your first question - I want to see each player talk and state opinions, even if they're small and dumb. I don't really understand your second question, but I think a lack of a good starting point (in the random voting stage) leads to unnecessary tunnelling,

as evidenced by my current state

.

How do we not generate any useful content unless one of you is scum? That makes no sense at all to me. You can get reads off of the other players and how they see the situation as well as use what people say to start going off in new directions. Just because we start somewhere doesn't mean we are going to stay with that same focus until the end of the day or that other things aren't going to be coming up for discussion.

OK, I phrased that poorly. When I said "useful", I meant "information accurately identified as scumtells". I'm wary of the situation where the three of us get honed in on, our posts picked apart, scumtells manufactured until one of us is dead, and there isn't

any

chance we could hit scum because we're all town. Maybe we're not, maybe one of us is scum and it would be a great idea to shine the light on the three of us, but unless that's the case we're narrowing our search too early.

If anything, what you are saying is something that could help us to find scum if you are all town, by seeing who is trying to convince and hasten the lynching of one of you without further support.

Well, with the current state of affairs, who on my wagon do you think is scummy?


@Artem: I hope some of your questions were answered above, but I will answer this one separately:

What information do you hope to gather from the RVS that you can't after leaving it?

Sure, I can gather similar information as the day progresses, but the random vote stage makes it easy for everyone to contribute without having to weigh in on this case or that case.

I don't think the entirety of our playerbase is stupid enough to tunnel-vision on 3/12 of the players, without calling out lurkers.

Perhaps you are mistaken?

Seriously though, there hasn't been enough talk, and too much lurking.

Unvote, vote: Percy

Diescumdie.

FoS

. This is opportunistic scumwagonning.

@Artem and Percy: I wanted to say something on-topic so I wouldn't be seen as a lurker.

What, so "Filler." is saying something on topic? You said you had no idea why you said what you said, I asked for more information, and you just said "Filler."
Explanation now, please. You're avoiding the issue.

Are you buddying up to me, by voting for the person who showed some suspicion at me? It's a pretty anti-town action, and you didn't give any case on Pablo before voting for him. I change my mind.

There was no buddying. The content of my post was "It is still the random vote phase let's get everyone talking goddamn", and I voted Pablo simply because he posted directly before me. That was the only reason. Ascribing scummy motives and then voting me earns my

FoS

.

The question at the front of my mind: Who's tying Percy's noose?

How about you put the question I asked you at the front of my mind and examine who is voting for me and why.


Summary of my suspicions so far:
1. I am suspicious of

CJMiller

, for his post 23 and avoiding all questioning on the subject.
2. I am suspicious of

kabenon007

, for his wagon-jumping
3. I am suspicious of

kirroha

for her accusation of "buddying" which seems entirely manufactured.

Note that I am not suspicious of PsychoSniper in particular. I know he said "I think we can all agree" and spoke on behalf of the town, but I am willing to put that down to poor phrasing at the moment.

Well, looks like the random vote phase is over, despite my best attempts. I'll therefore

Unvote

and put my vote on my number one suspect,

Vote: CJMiller

.

[Percy]

I have read Percy's explanation since, and I'm not sure if i can buy it. Your determination to keep this in the RVS may indeed explain your switch of vote away from CJM (although I'm still rather dubioous about that point), but when you placed yet another "random" vote on Pablo Molinero, I find that even more suspicious. I just don't see what that vote can possibly achieve after you've already publicly announced that your votes are random. What kind of reaction other than a good laugh can you possibly get out of that vote? Who's going to take it seriously when they already know the vote on them was purely random, whether they're town or scum? If anything, IMO throwing too much random votes around only diminish the effectiveness of the vote.

I wanted to keep things in the RVS. Thus I made a random vote. No-one was meant to take it seriously, because it was a random vote.
The reasons why I wanted the RVS to stick around have been addressed in my earlier posts.

At this point in the game, my votes don't mean suspicion (and neither does anyone else's, for the most part).

Wrong.

After I made the vote on _over9000, PsychoSniper voted me and two people (yourself included) voted PsychoSniper. Before that, no-one was seriously voting. It was the goddamn RVS. I wanted to indicate my suspicion without leaving the RVS, so I FoSed and continued to keep my vote random.

If we're all town caught in a clusterfuck of vague reads, the scum will rub their hands and hasten this along until one of us gets lynched.

Exactly. If you think you know how the scum will react in the situation where Psycho, Percy and CJ are all town, how can you say that it won't help us catch them?

I know how the scum will

feel

. That doesn't mean it will be detectable in their posts. Maybe it will be detectable - I'm sure we will get useful content doing it this way even if it isn't. I just thought that a wider search to begin with would be a

better

idea.

Sure, I can gather similar information as the day progresses, but the random vote stage makes it easy for everyone to contribute without having to weigh in on this case or that case.

If they're not weighing in on any cases, then what are they really contributing?

Having them weigh in on nothing much at all that has little to do with them is how the RVS works.
Having them weigh in on nothing much at all that has little to do with them is how this "let's run with the first malformed piece of crap case we can find!" idea works.
The advantage of the RVS is that everyone is actively involved. The danger of an actual case developing from the slipups of those under investigation (where scumtells are manufactured by the scum and overzealous townies) is also diminished.

-A lurker avoiding participation in the case discussion is more suspicious, in my opinion, than a lurker avoiding participation in the RVS;
-A mafia is given more opportunities to manufacture scum-tells when we're honed in on a case, thereby giving us more information to work with than we would have in the RVS;

Just look at Kabenon and Kirr. Players are suspicious of them because of the case on you, not because of the RVS. While the focus started out on you, we've expanded to more players as the case unfolded.

I completely agree. I am willing to concede that my efforts were somewhat unnecessary, as everyone seems to be getting along OK.

Point One
He says his FoS's are his signs of suspicion when his votes are not. First off, that's just weird. I never saw an explanation as to why he works like this, and would like one. It does not make sense that the vote that could kill someone is not a symbol of your suspicion, because it should. An FoS won't kill scum. A vote will.

I use my FoSes to clearly mark my suspicions, and tend to use them liberally (I find it helps on re-reads when other townies mark out who they're suspicious of, rather than hiding it in dense wads of text, and that's why I do it). I wanted CJMiller to answer the question, but I didn't want to leave the random vote phase.

There's your explanation. Should I quote all my previous posts whenever I post for your ease of reference?

That leads us nicely into:

Point Two
He wanted to keep things in the random voting stage. Keeping things in the random voting stage only traps the town in getting random information. Random voting stage yields random information until we find a way to get ourselves out of it, which is another reason for my wagon/ witholding of my reasons. It helped create responses and therefore information.

1. What is "random information", and why is it bad?
You said:

Gathering information is gathering information is gathering information.

What's going on here?


2. You voted me to deliberately hasten the end the RVS. OK, you disagree with me. But you did say:

I jumped on as vote four. If you're going to get pissed at someone for a wagon, go after the ones who put him at -2 and -1. I jumped on because I believed at that moment that Percy was the scummiest, therefore my vote would rest with him. I witheld my reasons for reactions, which I got.

What kind of a reaction were you expecting?
What information have you gathered?


@semioldguy: I think I answered most of your questions. Let me make one clarification. Most people seem to say "RVS sucks get out of it as fast as possible", and I'm getting a lot of questions and comments made about why I like the RVS. So here it is.

----

WHY I THINK THE RANDOM VOTE PHASE IS AWESOME

In the random vote phase, everyone is looking at how everyone else works, with no good grounding on any good reads. Some people know each other, and are scumbuddies together. We want to find these people!
We can start by flinging accusations around (and most games start this way). They're lighthearted, the reasons are usually pretty lame, but hopefully we can start to see some personalities. If someone's personality appears to change later in the game, we have something to call them on!
We take our notes, but keep the search wide and make sure everyone gets a look-in.

Eventually, we'll get something weird, something good, something worth seriously investigating. We do that, and see how people react - do they like the proceedings? Do they participate, or shrink away? Before long people are screaming at each other, and we have to sort through the confusion, keep our heads and keep looking for the knowing glances between the scum.

This is how the day proceeds, whether we get out of the RVS sooner or later. But later is better - it's the best way to prepare us for the day. It generates content for everyone, and establishes personality reads that can be scrutinized later.
----
In hindsight, the plan of "having random votes while having actual suspicion FoSes" was never going to work. It's either random voting with no FoSes, or you're talking about suspicious activity out in the open - thus not the RVS. I fucked up. But my desire to keep the RVS alive was genuine, and my reasons are above.


CJMiller's post 78 was some OMGUS bullshit. I also don't like the "don't hurt me, I'm new" defense, ever. Still liking my vote.

Artem's Claim

Now, I'm going to switch gears and talk about my role.

After spending some time thinking about it, I think I'm going to claim, because otherwise I don't see how my role is useful.

I'm a

Self-Watcher

, which means that (unless blocked or jailed) I get a list of players night-targeting me at the beginning of each day.

From what I understand, this is a doubly-edged sword. On the one hand, other than a potential doctor protection, the mafia has no night ability that would not kill or block me. That means that anybody who appears on my list at the beginning of the day is either town or a mafia doctor.

On the other hand, if I reveal my "investigation" results, I would be outing the town's power roles.

I'm still trying to figure out the best play for town with this information, but the reason I claimed is that my role requires others to target me at night, and outside of me being purposefully scummy or a stellar scum-hunter, it's not likely to happen.

There is no reason for a mafia doctor to protect you unless they want to use this ability. You have just given the mafia doctor (if there is one) a way to help them hide their scumminess. This is not good, and we'll have to keep it in mind later on.

However, I think your reasons for claiming are sound. Townie power roles can target you to help their claims later, and that really is the best use of your role. You're also right in saying that if the scum NK you, then the town isn't losing something really important.

Could you be lying? Well, you have just opened yourself up for investigation

and

the duty of confirming night actions, which no other role would be able to do accurately. A Godfather wouldn't know who has what role and what night he was targeted, so I'm happy to rule that out. I think the "ninja trying to draw a tracker" idea is more intruiging, but the problems are the same as for the Godfather situation.

I believe him, and think he claimed at the best time. Town points to Artem.



It's getting really late here. I will comment on the more recent developments (cases against Pablo, kirroha, Wulfy and kabe) tomorrow.

[Percy]

Apologies everyone, uni work is kicking my arse.

I will post tomorrow.

[Percy]

Answering questions about the RVS

1. What is "random information", and why is it bad?

Mm, perhaps I should have used a different word other than random. I was merely drawing a parallel between random votes and the information that would come of them, and so called it random. Random information in this case would be information garnered in a fashion that was not planned, and therefore the information received was not of a linear nature.

Say Person A randomly votes Person B. There are many different ways Person B could respond, so let's say Person B says "Lulz, well, you're ridiculous." Because the cause was random, it did not force Person B to give any kind of information, therefore it is not as trustworthy as if Person A made an accusation, forcing Person B to respond and make some comment on the exact information Person A is desiring. It makes sense in my head at the moment, if it needs a bit more clarity, ask and I'll try again when I'm less tired.

I don't know why information that you "plan" to get or "linear" information reception is somehow better, but let me paraphrase.
You think the Random Vote phase is bad, because it doesn't give you solid, reliable information. If you're not forcing people to comment on serious issues and take serious positions, how can you gather serious information?
To that I say: it's just a different kind of information. It's worth getting, gives us personality reads, and lets everyone say something to everyone else. We can do the serious stuff eventually, but there's no need to rush into the srs bsns. Scum

like

the serious business phase of the first day; they know everyone thinks "there's not much to go on, so anything is good!", so they can capitalise on the mistakes that townies make and ensure their lynch by making sensible cases.

This is how the day proceeds, whether we get out of the RVS sooner or later. But later is better - it's the best way to prepare us for the day.

It generates content for everyone

, and establishes personality reads that can be scrutinized later.

Bolded is the part that I entirely object to. By keeping things stuck in light-hearted silliness, you don't generate content, you generate irrelevant bullshit. And none of the supposed benefits you ascribe to your strategy are in any way unique to the random voting stage. You can still establish personality reads from what people say about actual game-relevant things, with the added benefit that they're also talking about actual game-relevant things.

I am not arguing against seriousness, guys. I'm not saying that the RVS is all we ever need to go by. I

am

saying that there is no need to rush out of it. You don't generate "irrelevant bullshit", you generate all sorts of good info.

For example, you used the light-heartedness of the RVS to great effect:

semioldguy! Imagine someone has a gun to your head, and is telling you that you must choose one of kirroha or PsychoSniper to be lynched RIGHT NOW. Who do you choose, and why?

You ensured conversation with semioldguy. He said kirroha, but unfortnately the RVS was on the way out by then. I immediately got a read on both you and semioldguy; a small one, but I knew straight away that you were an aggressive player, and as semioldguy just brushed it off, that's info on his playstyle too.

The thing is, the minute you placed a serious question accompanied by a serious FOS you pretty much ended the RVS. All random/joke/non serious voting after that is pretty telling one way or another because if they ignore the first talking part of the game you have to question why. If they talk about it, the game is being further pushed out of RVS.

Also I don't quite see how the RVS makes lurkers commit to the game. If anything they will post their random RVS vote/comment and then when the game does become serious they will lurk anyway. So yeah, I don't get it.

I acknowledged earlier that the fuckup was mine; I can't put actual suspicion down on the table and expect people to not talk about it, and continue on as if it never happened. In my mind, I wanted to keep getting the kind of info I was getting from the RVS, but putting my thoughts down at the same time. This is impossible, but I still like the RVS.

I think it makes lurkers talk. Notice that CJMiller is already complaining that the posts are too big, and it's all too hard, and most people are saying "Oh, he's probably just a townie!". Big long posts about things that have nothing to do with most players breeds lurking,

especially

if that's how the day starts.

If the three of you are town isn't someone manufacturing scum tells, a scum tell in itself? You have a big issue with not only being in the spotlight, but being in the spotlight with these players.

What are your opinions of Psycho (now myself) and CJ now? How do you think they handled all this?

It's hard to spot the difference between scum-trumping-up-mistakes and townies-identifying-scumtells (that's why mafia is awesome!). Various players were saying that the best thing to do would be to concentrate on a subset of the players, and I fundamentally disagree that this is the

best

option. It will still generate info, but I like to optimize my playstyle.

I believe Psycho. I know other players have been saying that his apology was too appeal-to-emotion, but whatever. He backed off when he didn't have a case, and I respect that. Too many people will charge on with a case that has no merit, simply because they don't want to appear to be 'backtracking'. Psycho (and now you) is in my town column.

As for CJ... I'll get to him.

The case against kirroha

Percy, I sort of defended you a bit since I didn't believe that you were the mafia, but this post you made made me think twice. Are you buddying up to me, by voting for the person who showed some suspicion at me? It's a pretty anti-town action, and you didn't give any case on Pablo before voting for him. I change my mind.

Unvote
Vote: Percy

...the post that started it all. This was followed by a backtrack:

I felt it suspicious because I thought RVS was over, and yet Percy voted for someone without any reason at all and the person whom he voted for was the person who showed a tiny bit of suspicion of me at that time, so I thought he was trying to buddy up. Sorry, I'm a bit paranoid. ^^;

Anyway, thanks for clearing up.

Unvote

There are two options in my brain at this point: townie who made a mistake and corrected it (with too much grovelling), or a scum who's embarrassed to be caught out in such an early wagon when her excuse didn't fly.

Most people went with the latter explanation. Artem raises a good point:

To clarify, rather than simply doing something pro-town, you are explaining that what you're about to do is pro-town. This, to me, is trying to appear too townie.

...to which she responds:

And also, you're picking out every single thing I've done here that a pro-towner would do and using that against me with the "Too Townie" case. I'm trying to explain myself here. I'm trying to tell you that what I'm doing is pro-town so that you all can start voting for real scum instead. But if you believe that that's what scum would do, I can't stop you - go ahead and vote.

See, this really doesn't address the issue, as others have pointed out. It's not that she's "too townie", but that she always seems to fall over herself trying to appear that way.

Also,

Don't try to scare people away from your wagon with scummy softclaims.

QFT. I didn't like her "I'm going to claim if you people don't stop being mean to me!" vibe.

Conclusion: I don't want a kirroha lynch yet. I'm very unhappy with the soft claim, and I don't like the "CHECK OUT HOW TOWN I AM!!!111" posting style, but I think there are more convincing cases.

The case against kabenon007

Wagons are used to lynch. Getting on them serves the town.

See, this is bullshit. Getting on wagons only serves the town if the person who is going to get lynched is actually scum. Not thinking and jumping on a wagon headed for a town lynch is just about the stupidest thing I can think of.

I find kabenon007's rationale rather contradictory. I feel that he's basically resigned himself to a bad day, bemoaning how no information will ever get generated, and attacking those who attack him.

That's how I play the first day. I hate the first day with a passion, more than likely because of my IRL mafia experiences of people just randomly bandwagoning someone to death, with no information coming out of it.

In this game, information is all we've got to go on, so we need as much of it as possible. Look at all the information that's come out of my short little post.

"That's just how I play" is an insufficient excuse for scummy actions, although you freely admit it (first step to admitting you have a problem). You say that you hate Day 1, due to lack of information we get from it, to rationalize your actions to get it over with as soon as possible. And yet in the same post you pride yourself on getting info and talking points going with your vote. I'm seeing two distinct themes that clash.

I found this post interesting. His response:

I hate it due to the quick lynches that I've seen happen that give no information, not the fact that there is no information.

This just makes

no

sense to me. Why is jumping on a wagon (without analysis) a good idea? And even if it is a good idea, why bemoan the fact that the lynches aren't good?
Players who spend all their time saying that the information isn't good enough, without trying to scumhunt and generate information themselves, are trying to sow confusion and muddle the waters. This is how I see kabenon007's posting playing out.

I've already posted what information I have. Should I quote all my previous posts whenever I post for your ease of reference?

No, seriously, quote it. Go back through your posts and quote your valuable information. I can't find it - has anyone else had any luck?

Miller had to think of something to fill his one line of post. Give him a break, semioldguy.

So, kirroha, seeing as how you still think I'm scum, why haven't you replied to my defense or pushed your interrogation? If you think I'm scum, you should be going after me. After all, it's what a townie would do.

Again, this post screams scum. Miller is lurking like hell, and even though the defense was still a joking one, that doesn't change the fact that he's saying "Don't worry about Miller". Now kirroha had attacked him, he defended, and now he's saying that she should respond to his defense. This is true, and she does eventually. But the fact remains that he hasn't scumhunted anywhere else, or done anything other than defend himself. It seems so opportunistic I could cry.

If a townie asks a question, and the question is answered, information was generated.
If a scum asks a question, and the question is answered, information was still generated. I'm trying to say that scum, while trying to act like townies, are still able to produce information that can be used by townies. Does that make a bit more sense?

If that's the case, then talkative scum are better than quiet scum. I happen to agree. If that's the case, then why are you voting and targetting kirroha, who is far more talkative than most other players in this thread?

I'm voting you because you haven't done anything to show how town you are. (ie, scum hunting) ...

...

if you were to dig through the game and show significant, REAL scum hunting effort, your towniness will be picked up on, and I will naturally remove my vote. Suspicion of you, like it has on Kirr, will be with me until your dead, the game is over, or you are proven town enough (of 50% town, let's say) that I can give you the same cursory glance as everyone else.

QFT.

Truth is, there is no such effort. kabenon007 wants to get by with the cranky, "I hate Day 1 let's lynch someone and get it over with!", defensive posting style, and it's seriously scummy in my book.

The case against CJMiller

FoS: farkshinsoup
FoS: _over9000

both for lurking.

...just after iamusername called over900 out for lurking, and when Fark really didn't deserve it.

CJMiller - Enough with the active lurking. You're coasting. Post something more than 1 line.

So I'm scum just because I don't post a 15-page dissertation every 24 hours?

Unvote

Vote: Pablo Molinero

for discriminating against new players.

*facepalm*

If you want to be handled with kid gloves, go join a Newbie game. You're in the big leagues here, son.

Also, why do you single out Pablo, when several other players have made essentially the same point as he did?

A good question! His response:

What do you want me to do? Whenever I do anything, it just makes you all think I'm scum.

Unvote

because I will remain neutral for the rest of the day.

...which he doesn't, becaue his next post jumps on the nearest wagon:

Vote: Kirroha

for acting too scummy to be a citizen

Then his Asperger's claim.

Listen up, buddy. I have Asperger's. It's why I love mafia - I find it easier to participate in things when I can go back and read it later. I also find that players will write down what they think, rather than expecting me to pull it out of the air. If you have Asperger's, then don't join a game that you can't handle. Ask for replacement. Also, explain to me why your condition prevents you from playing the game, and how.

If we knew that CJMiller was a 100% confirmed townie, which he is not but let's say he is for the purpose of this question, what do you think would be the best course of action for the town to take under the assumption that his style of posting and voting does not change?

The best course of action would be, of course, to ignore him. But we don't know that, and we'll never know that. We can't have him hanging around all game, waiting to hammer when it counts.

Conclusion: CJMiller is the most contradictory, harmful and anti-town player I've seen in a long time. He's not even willing to claim at L-1.

One way or the other, it seems like your posts contain a lot of flavour, not much content. You vociferously attack the easy target (kabenon) and come to the defense of someone else for poor reasons. Seems scummy to me.

...

If you're going to start throwing ad hominem attacks at other players, you might want to get your facts straight first. Better yet, just drop the insults all together.

Hmmm.... this smells a wierd to me. Wulfy didn't use insults in place of arguments, he used them as well; thus, it's not a fallacy, just hilarious. But I can understand not liking Wulfy's posting style, so I'll just leave this here for now.

The reason I have so few posts is that it appears I am in a far different timezone that the rest of you (US Eastern). Therefore, while you guys are able to actively partake in heated debates in real time, I am forced to be active only when my schedule allows it, which does not fall into any of yours. So, my posts are directed at the entire day, and by the time im next on a whole new page has been posted.

Weak excuse. I live in

Australia

.


I'm going to leave my vote where it is. I'd be happy with a CJ or a kabe lynch.

[Percy]

@iamausername:

I think getting started on them is getting us out of the random voting stage and will hopefully lead to some content. It's early and we don't have much to go on, getting started on them will start giving us more to look at.

I responded:

I'm determined to keep things in the random vote stage, looking at everyone and yes, fishing for reactions before we go tunnelling in on any subset of players.

I couldn't find any other quotes. Artem talked about it:

I don't think the entirety of our playerbase is stupid enough to tunnel-vision on 3/12 of the players, without calling out lurkers.

I understand his position, but everyone was doing exactly what he described. Whether my wagon had any merit, whether Psycho was scummy and whether CJMiller was scummy. We'd barely heard peep out of several other players. I felt that there was silent complicity in semioldguy's original sentiment.

Perhaps that's how you get out of a random vote stage; I felt that it happened too soon.

[Percy]

I don't hate the RVS I just don't see the need to prolong it when it becomes clear it is over, so your actions were very weird to me. How long would you have preferred the RVS to go on for?

It wasn't clear to me that it was over when I made my random vote. I intended to prolong it if I could. I like the RVS to go until we've had about four posts per player.

How have I resigned myself to a bad day? I've been working damned hard if I do say so myself to generate information, I haven't lurked like some, I have not avoided anything on purpose. I have addressed everything brought to me, I have questioned those I feel deserve questioning. How is that resigning myself in any form of the word "resigning?"

Resignation:

I jumped on a wagon then as well. Now why would that be, kids? That's how I play the first day.

I hate the first day with a passion

, more than likely because of my IRL mafia experiences of people just randomly bandwagoning someone to death,

with no information coming out of it

.
...
I believe that my vote should have rested with Percy because, as I said, he was the scummiest at the time I voted. This was because a)

there is never much information to go on in Day 1

and b) because he was the one exhibiting the scummiest behavior.

Emphasis mine. I think this post demonstrates a willingness to let bad Day 1 lynches be acceptable, and I can't disagree more.

The post wasn't about jumping on a wagon, nor about bemoaning the fact that lynches aren't good. It was me refuting kirroha's statement. Where did you get the idea, from the post quoted here, that I was saying anything about jumping on wagons? If your read the post, you would see I was talking about the difference between not liking Day 1 because you can't get information (which is how kirroha interpreted) and how I don't like Day 1 because people just go "Haha, I'm a chargin my lynch lazer!!" and speed lynch the hell out of someone, not giving them time to defend themselves and creating a useless day (which is what I said in that post.)

Yeah, I don't think I misinterpreted anything. You are saying that Day 1 is crap because people rush to lynch someone without talking, but at the same time you jumped on

two

different wagons without explaining yourself. I find it hard to understand how you can play the way you've played today (especially how you started the day) at the same time as acknowledging how unhelpful it can be (this applies far more to your earlier posting style).

Why would I start interrogating people if I don't see a reason to interrogate? I saw inconsistencies and scumtells in kirroha and Miller, and I'm watching Wulfy. Also, I don't think your scum, even though you're attacking me. If what you're saying is true, that I only find scum on those who attack me, then wouldn't I be suspicious of you as well? And _over9000 as well? Granted, I don't think his post was as attacking as yours, but still.

There is reason enough - they might be scum, they just haven't slipped up yet. No reason to tunnel in on the active posters.

Still waiting on an answer to this:

I've already posted what information I have. Should I quote all my previous posts whenever I post for your ease of reference?

No, seriously, quote it. Go back through your posts and quote your valuable information. I can't find it - has anyone else had any luck?

(I made an error with my quote tags. The quoted post was kabe's, and the question was addressed to him)

So here in this post you are saying that it is better to leave someone you think is scum alive... because they are more talkative? I call shenanigans on that shit. If you've found scum, you lynch them. You don't say, "Oh, well, you're scum, but you're providing information to the town, so I'll leave you alive and instead lynch a townie." You kill the scum. That's how the game is played, and that's why I'm voting for kirroha. I'm not going to leave her and go after the silent scum. It's easier to find the talkative scum, because the more they talk, the easier it becomes for them to slip up.

I'm saying that it's odd that you identify just how bad lurking scum are (worse than talking scum, that is), but make no attempt to root them out.



@Everyone not voting kirroha: What is your opinion on the kirroha wagon?

To answer my own question - I think kirroha is more likely "silly town" than CJ. I don't want a kirroha lynch, because whilst there has been some seriously questionable content from her, there are more scummy players around.

I think CJ is definitely the scummiest, and I'm not willing to let his play slide because it's "so bad he might be town because what scum would be so stupid". The "hoping for a vig" direction is unsettling, because what if we have a 0-shot vigilante and a bulletsmith? We'll be back at square 1 with CJ tomorrow. We have a sure fire way of killing our best targets - let's use it.

[Percy]

How is jumping on two different wagons, one randomly and the other for scumminess, equal to a speed lynch? I said I didn't want you lynched. So I was not rushing to lynch someone.

Yes, but the important point is that you said that later. The first time you voted for me, it was simply "Diescumdie", which says to me that you

did

want me to die, and wanted me to die quickly.

I know you've now said it was an elaborate plan, but please see below.

I do not plan on quoting all my posts containing information, and neither did you. If you need me too, it is only because you are too lazy to go back and find them. If you have specific questions, that's fine, I'll go find them, but quoting all my posts would be ridiculous, as most are quite long.

It seems like you're avoiding the question I thought I made quite plain.

You voted for me without stating reasons. When people asked you for them, you said you withheld them for information gathering purposes. I asked: what information did you end up gathering?

Now you've said it should be clear from reading your posts, but I don't think it is. As far as I can tell, you have leapt on others for attacking you, and your analysis has been entirely divorced from the reactions you got. I'll make it really, really clear.

Looking at the reactions you got after withholding your reasons for voting me, whose were scummy reactions, and why?

I would prefer to go after the talking scum, because I can form arguments against them better because they have given me more material to work with. I'm more confident in my ability to go after the talkers than the non-talkers, just as I'm sure others prefer to go after lurkers.

I understand that it's hard to go after lurkers. It's a lot easier to go after the talkative players -

that's why lurking is a great scum strategy

. That's also why we can't let them get away with it. If you're not confident in your abilities, I suggest you practise, starting now.

As for Percy's post 187, people will think of me as a flake if I ask for replacement without a legitimate reason.

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that you're town. You're saying that it's more important that we all say "oh, at least he stuck it out!" while you're screwing us over with your scummy non-participation, than to say "this game is beyond my abilities, I'm going to replace out"?! No-one will think less of you if you can't handle this game, especially if it's because of a mental disorder that means you can't cope. People

will

think less of you if you bite off more than you can chew and end up getting yourself lynched out of bad play.

You're trying way too hard for the sympathy vote here. You need to be lynched.


Re: kirroha's claim.... if she's the actual vig then I will turbofacepalm.

I still am not convinced on the case against her - she's clearly been nervous and going to great lengths to prove her townieness, but I don't see her as a good lynch (compared to CJMiller, for example).

I say we let her live tonight. If she's scum, she'll get vigged*. If she's not, someone else will die, and we'll have verified her claim. If a scum gets shot, hooray! If town gets shot and there is no other kill, we lynch kirroha tomorrow as scum. If two town get shot, then kirroha will have to state her reasoning behind her kill exceptionally well tomorrow to avoid a lynch.

* - in the case where there is no town vig or there is a mafia doctor to protect her from the town vig, the fact that there is only one NK and she's alive the next day will immediately disprove her claim.

If she gets NKed and she's scum, we celebrate. If she gets NKed and she's town, we cry (but the result would have been the same if we lynch her today).

I think the proposal that she shoot herself is worthy of consideration. I think we should leave that up to kirroha's unfortunate replacement.


@semioldguy: You told kirroha not to full claim. She's at L-1, she's claimed (which I think is always a good thing to do, but you might disagree); how have your opinions of her changed since your votepost?

[Percy]

@kabenon007: So your plan was to start a wagon on yourself by doing something scummy, to see who would vote for you and why... Is this correct?

We are not amused.

You're at L-1. You maintain that you're there because you don't have the time to do anything but participate in a scummy and anti-town way. Why are you not asking for a replacement? If you're town, then getting someone who can actually play to take over your position is the best thing you can do right now. Either that, or start playing properly. We are not amused? Are you the goddamned Queen?

The replacement should tell us the number of shots.

Yes.

As for the "let kirroha live and see what happens" plan, I'll give the situation more thought and see if I can come up with a more foolproof plan.

[Percy]

Unvote
Vote: _over9000

ENTIRE HAND OF SUSPICION: _over9000

No replacement could answer for everything she's done? Are you kidding?

You may have just cost the town their vigilante. And you waited.... a full 7 minutes after Wulfy's post to hammer! And just after Artem is discussing optimal town strategy to deal with this situation as well.

That is the scummiest quickhammer I've seen in a very long time.

[Percy]

I got no list which means that either nobody targeted me or I was role-blocked.

Noted. Unfortunately, your claim is looking a little less solid now.

Seems pretty likely that there were scum pushing for a CJ lynch instead of kirroha yesterday, and Percy was pushing that the most, as I recall, so:

Vote: Percy

Indeed, I was pushing the CJ lynch over the kirr lynch yesterday. I tried to stop the town lynching kirroha several times, because I thought her wagon was scummy. I think you'll find, however, that I spent quite a lot of time thinking about the whole issue and posted my reasons clearly; the same cannot be said of some on the lynching wagon. Now it appears that CJ earnt a lot of townie points through yesterday's shenanigans, but that doesn't change that he was the most scummy to me for honest reasons.

I'll also add that I stated clearly that I almost certainly wanted kirr dead; I just wanted to test the waters, and make sure we weren't losing a vig. Turns out, there was no vig, or at least none willing to shoot last night, which would have resulted in me voting for kirr today.

There was 1-2 scum on Kirr (the lynch)

Indeed. Are you one of them?

Right now I want to hear from Over. He promised analysis of the thread and barely delivered before dropping a quick hammer on Kirr after it was clear she was lying about her replacement need.

Vote: Over

My thoughts exactly. I think _over's hammer is still incredibly scummy, even if it did lynch the godfather. I can see over-as-scum hammering kirroha to try and earn town points, but the way he did it and his general analytical style yesterday are pretty damn scummy to me.

@_over9000: will you do a thread re-read now?

Why unvote and vote _over right then? Made absolutely no difference at that point - it was twilight. Kirroha was already dead. Seems like he may have been trying to look like an outraged townie.

I

was

an outraged townie. I wanted to make my feelings on the matter very clear. With kirr's flip, I kinda regret the forcefulness of my statement, but I still think the quickhammer was scummy.

And I'll admit that my quick-hammer on Kirroha is very suspicious and could be seen as bussing once the town all but knew she was scum.

But, from my experience, scum attempting to bus fellow scumbuddies wouldn't do it in the way I did. Because, you're right. I offered no reason whatsoever for my vote. And if I were trying to bus, don't you think I would have given some sort of reasoning for it to make myself seem more pro-town? Or, for that matter, ACTUALLY lynch one of my scumbuddies?

This sets my scumdar to maximum. Firstly, it's horrendous WIFOM (as are most sentiments that begin with "If I were scum" or something like that). Secondly, it seems like he's saying "It's so scummy it couldn't possibly be scummy!", which is absolutely ridiculous. It was scummy because over is scum.

Vote: _over9000

Why do you speak of the town as if it's a separate entity from yourself? As if you yourself aren't a part of the town but are just stepping in and pretending?

WTF? Stop putting words in my mouth. Your analysis is a ridiculous reach.

[Percy]

Acting as separate from the town? What the hell?

Seriously, this is what I said:

You may have just cost the town their vigilante. And you waited.... a full 7 minutes after Wulfy's post to hammer! And just after Artem is discussing optimal town strategy to deal with this situation as well.

"The town" is a faction in the game. How else could I have said what I said? I guess I could have said "You may have just cost

us our

vigilante", but is that really any different? Different enough for a vote?


I was trying to figure out a way to proceed more cautiously with the kirroha-kill, to make sure we didn't lose the vig (if she was actually just a stupid vig). It turned out not to matter, but the fact that the hammer was so damn quick while we were in the middle of discussing optimal strategy was worth calling out in the strongest possible terms.

Unvote

while we're thinking of a good strategy to deal with the vig claim. I'm not completely happy with any of the ones proposed, and I think a Kirr lynch may still be a viable play.

kirroha was then at L-2. _over9000 attempts to put her back on L-1:

I still dont have time to put up a full post (I can promise one by Thursday at the latest) but I certainly feel like we need to put a good amount of pressure on Kirr's replacement. Now, I suspect Kirr more at this point, but I didn't want to hammer, so...

vote: kirroha

...but the lack of unvote means the vote doesn't count. Now Wulfy posts:

Kirr <---Shouldn't be lynched. Mafia will definitely take care of the Vig/SK because both are very dangerous to them. Therefore, I feel no reason to worry about Kirr yet. Still, more thought on this is needed before we dedicate ourselves to any particular move.

Now Farkshinsoup wanted to go with the 'leave kirr alive' plan:

Since I'm good with a CJ Miller lynch anyways, I guess I'd vote for leaving her alive at least overnight, and seeing what tomorrow brings.

...but semioldguy points out:

kirroha has asked for replacement due to vacation/parents/time issues saying that she won't be able to post. She is in at least two other games currently with no mention of her vacation and no replacement requests there. She has even posted in one of those games within the last six hours and at multiple different times of day over the past three days and it appears that she intends on being active there.

I am going to go with "Lynch all Liars" and say we should get rid of her today.

Now this is a fair point, and fairly damning against kirroha. However, Pablo points out:

Look out, semioldguy. I’ve seen that whole “ongoing games” rule bite the town in the ass before.

...and Artem's 233 involved quite a lot of thought as to how we should best proceed, including:

That means that leaving Kirr alive and asking her (or replacement) to shoot somebody (i.e., Percy's idea) is the best play.

Out of the blue, Wulfy votes for kirroha, and

seven minutes later

_over9000 hammers, both based on the "ongoing games" post made by semioldguy.

I was stunned - if kirroha was town, then that was the scummiest hammer ever, as I said at the time. Both Wulfy and _over9000 seemed to have not even read the thread. Neither really stated their reasons for voting and ignored the discussion that was going on, and just voted. She's flipped scum, but it was still anti-town play. I do not accept _over9000's contention that not stating your reasons for voting for someone is indicative of your towniness because "what scum would want to look scummy hammering scum", as it's pointless WIFOM and ignores the central issue - that no reasons were stated, and a hammer was performed when it was pretty clear that many players didn't want kirroha to be lynched, and had a

better plan

in mind.

Claims that I've done nothing to help the town are greatly exaggerated.

[Percy]

@CJMiller: The problem with "Me too" is not in expressing your differing opinion, but in your lack of analysis. You say you agree with others - do you maintain that I am "acting as separate from the town" still? Even the person who suggested it acknowledged that it was a huge stretch. What about the other arguments? What about the other players?

@Wulfy: I can't prove that you didn't read the thread. That's ridiculous, and not what I was trying to do. However, your votepost seemed to reverse your earlier position without stating why (beyond the quoted paragraph), and ignored the discussion that was going on about how best to proceed. It certainly seems to me like you read semioldguy's post, then voted without reading the rest of the discussion. If you read those posts, you obviously thought they had no merit, and weren't worthy of even a passing mention.

[Percy]

Not only that, _over correcting his lack of unvote is exactly what we grilled Percy for early in the game (when Percy forgot to unvote on a random vote). So, it seems a bit hypocritical for Percy to jump on _over for doing the exact same thing.

When did _over ever say that he was correcting his vote? These were not the motives he has described at all.

How is [Artem's claim] any less solid than yesterday?

The way I see it, there could have been two outcomes - either he would have a list of names today, or he wouldn't. If he had a list of names, that would have strengthened his claim. Thus, without a list of names, he's either been roleblocked or lied initially. I'm still inclined to believe him (because it's a dumb role for scum to claim, and if you have the role I believe you should claim on day 1), but I'm a little more wary.

Now it appears that CJ earnt a lot of townie points through yesterday's shenanigans, but that doesn't change that he was the most scummy to me for honest reasons.

Some people seem to think so. Are you one of those people? Also saying you suspected him for “honest reasons” is a tad redundant. Everyone is going to claim that about every wagon they are on, scum inculded.

My convictions as to CJ's scumminess were lessened, essentially because kirroha seemed to genuinely want CJ dead, and CJ voted kirroha. I can see the scenario where kirroha-as-godfather decided to bus CJ, however, and may have even been thinking of saving her skin by getting an unhelpful scum off her team and appearing townie for doing so.

As for the "honest reasons", I agree that it was a little redundant. I was merely pointing out that I gave transparent (and what I thought were actually good) reasons for pushing the CJ lynch, rather than jumping on with a "me too" or "diescumdie" vote.

Now CJ has attempted to hammer _over. I'm far more inclined to believe the bussing scenario now.

Unvote, Vote: CJMiller

. Explain, now.

@Wulfy: Do you still believe that Artem has a high chance of being scum? If so, why?

OOC:

OMFGROFLSMILIE

[Percy]

@CJMiller:

Voting someone without stating your reasons is bad.
Hammering without stating your reasons is worse.
Hammering without stating your reasons while the person who's at L-1 hasn't had a chance to respond to the questions put to them is even worse.

...and the "he didn't post for 48 hours" excuse just doesn't make it any better.

Your emotional appeals, active lurking and lack of clear argumentation was bad enough, but this takes the cake in anti-town play.

Are you just the worst townie ever? Possibly, but if someone plays as anti-town as you have been, then they should be lynched as scum. "No exceptions".

I like the Percy attacking everyone theory better.

Say what? What is this theory you're referencing?

Unvote, vote percy

I believe Kirr went out of her way to protect you is also a fairly valid argument.

Double say what? Can you at least provide some evidence where she went out of her way to protect me? If you had said "gone out of her way to attack me", then maybe, but when did she go out of her way to

defend

me?

[Percy]

I am a

Bulletsmith

. I'll claim who I passed the bullets to when the MC is done.

Whilst Jailkeeper is an obvious fakeclaim for the Mafia RB, we can't test it until we know the results. Based on everything but roles, Xtomx beats IAAUN on my scumlist, and right now the claims are fairly null. We'll know more once actions are claimed.

Next up: kabenon007.

[Percy]

Artem is the towniest town that ever towned.



Results:

Xtomx - Weak Tracker (N1??, tracked Fark N2)
Artem - Self-watcher (RBed N1, one name on list from N2 (Percy))
iamausername - Jailkeeper. (N1 Fark, N2 Sotty)
Farkshinsoup - Gunsmith (N1 no result, N2 "no gun" on Xtomx)
Percy - Bulletsmith (N1 pass to Artem, N2 pass to Artem)
kabenon007 - Vanilla
Sotty - 0-shot vig
Pablo - Bodyguard (N1??, N2??)

Open questions:
-Who did _over9000 target on N1? What was the result?
-Who did Pablo target on N1, N2?

Thoughts:
-The setup still makes sense without the 0-shot vig role, as Gunsmiths can use the bullets. Alternatively, the Gunsmith need not exist in this setup.
-Passing a bullet to another player and getting them to target someone of the town's choosing may be the best way to test Fark and Sotty's claims. I believe at least one of them is town, given my role.

-Scenario 1: Both iamausername and Fark are town. Then we must have a mafia RBer who targetted Artem on N1. The scum are in kabe, Sotty and Pablo. I would be inclined to believe Sotty is the Mafia RBer in this case, as Artem was not blocked on N2, and Sotty was RBed by iamausername - as the most dangerous outed powerrole at the time, I see no reason why the scum wouldn't block Artem. As for Pablo vs. kabe.... I'll think about it and post tomorrow.
-Scenario 2: Both iamausername and Fark are scum. iamausername blocked Artem on N1, and Fark must have a night action (for Xtomx to pick up).
-They are either scum together or town together. I can't see one-town-one-scum working with how they confirmed each other.

...I'll have to think about that one, and a plan etc. But for now, bed (it is: late).

[Percy]

Xtomx's plan is too wasteful. Artem, I don't think you can shoot with a bullet on the same night you're passed it.

Xtomx, who did you target on Night 1?

At the moment, I'm operating under these assumptions:

(1) Xtmox, Artem and Percy are town.
(2) Fark and IAAUN are either town together, or scum together.
(3) Fark has a night ability that doesn't involve killing people.

Here's a better plan.

We lynch Sotty.

If Sotty is scum:

Pablo protects Artem. Fark investigates Pablo. I pass a bullet to Fark. IAAUN blocks kabe. Xtomx tracks Fark.

The flip (pretty much, assuming the BS role wasn't confusing on purpose) confirms Fark's claim (and therefore IAAUN's as well).
Pablo must target Artem (even if he's scum), and IAAUN's block on kabe should prevent anything else screwing with our plans.
Xtomx can confirm that Fark used an ability.
If Fark gets a guilty on Pablo, we lynch Pablo. Scumflip means victory. Townflip means we lynch Fark.

If Sotty is town:

either kabe/Pablo are the scumteam, or Fark/IAAUN.

Pablo protects Xtomx. Fark investigates kabe. I pass a bullet to Artem. IAAUN blocks no-one. Xtomx tracks IAAUN.

Fark/IAAUN scumteam scenario: This situation doesn't make much sense to me, as why would IAAUN block Sotty rather than Artem last night? Still, could be random scumgambit.

If they want to get their roleblock off, they'll have to kill Xtomx. Pablo's protect would mean they'd kill Pablo instead, and they don't want him dead, they want him scapegoated. No roleblocking would occur. They would be forced to kill either Artem or myself and not RB, and I think it would probably be Artem to make me look scummy.

Fark may claim a guilty on kabe: if he does, who is his scumpartner? As I'm not a roleblocking role I would have to be mafia doctor, which in turn would require kabe to be the mafia RBer. This makes no sense - why have a 0-shot vigilante in a game with no bulletsmith? Thus Pablo would have to be the mafia partner, but why would they kill Artem?

If he does not claim a guilty on kabe, Percy/Pablo doesn't make much sense either - Pablo would have to be the mafia RBer, and why would he not have targetted someone on N2?

kabe/Pablo scumteam scenario: kabe can't block, as they can't kill Xtomx and blame it on IAAUN; a second RBer validates their scumminess. Fark will get a guilty on kabe, and Artem may not get confirmation that Pablo has a nonlethal night ability. If he does, that means kabe has to be the RBer.


I'm inclined to believe that Sotty will flip scum. Otherwise, this plan should constrict the scum enough to give us good info tomorrow. I'll think about it some more, but I've been crunching scenarios for long enough today

[Percy]

EBWOP: Assumption (3) is both invalid and unnecessary.

[Percy]

Xtomx can work as a roleblocker - he tracks someone, and if they perform an action, they're scum.

I'll rethink everything, though. I agree that Fark could be scum with someone else, so I want to get the best plan possible happening.

[Percy]

This plan works if IAAUN's block doesn't prevent Artem from getting a list of names. From the way it's phrased, I'd say that Artem doesn't have an ability that IAAUN could block, he simply gets a list of people who targetted him the next day - but I'll still ask:

@Mod: If a Jailkeeper were to target a Self-Watcher, whose power trumps whose?

The latest plan (and I think it's pretty good):

We lynch Sotty.

Xtomx tracks kabe
IAAUN blocks Artem
Percy passes to Artem
Fark investigates kabe or Percy
Pablo protects Artem


Thus Xtomx can confirm that kabe has no night action, and Artem will get three names, so if there's an NK then Fark is scum. If Artem doesn't get one of the names, or is NKed himself, we also know where the scum are. Fark's investigation will only help any cases that result, and if the scumteam is part-Fark and they forgo their night kill to avoid implicating Fark, apart from "yay" we also force him to claim an investigation result on either kabe or myself, and having delayed LyLo we can lynch him for investigate results that turn out to be false.

[Percy]

EBWOP: Damnit, I think I know what the answer will be. The Jailkeeper text is more explicit than I thought. I'll ask a better question:

@Mod: If a

Mafia Roleblocker

were to target a Self-Watcher, whose power trumps whose?

If the answer is "Self-Watcher trumps Roleblocker", then IAAUN is confirmed.


Anyway,

*screws up his paper, starts again from scratch*

Xtomx tracks kabe
Pablo protects Artem
Percy passes to Artem
Fark investigates Percy or kabe
IAAUN blocks Fark

Fark and IAAUN will be the only ones who can perform the NK, but IAAUN can't anyone but Fark, and Fark can't claim a guilty unless IAAUN dies.

If they're scum together, they may kill Xtomx to make kabe appear scum, but won't be able to claim a guilty. IAAUN may block Pablo (most likely), myself or Artem to implicate us, but our innocence after a lynch will get them killed. The only concern is if Sotty is town and we can't afford a mislynch tomorrow; then we might just have to figure it out the old-fashioned way.

If Fark is scum with kabe, Xtomx and IAAUN will prevent any mafia shenanigans.

If Fark is scum with Pablo, IAAUN and Artem will take care of the mafia.

If the scumteam is two of Pablo, kabe or myself, then Xtomx and Artem will be able to confirm what they were doing.


It's got that one damned Fark/IAAUN snag. I can't completely break the system, and I've tried for a good while, so I'll leave it there - does anyone have any better ideas? Is there something I've missed?

[Percy]

EBWOP: IAAUN can't

block

anyone, and Fark can't claim a guilty unless IAAUN is NKed, but that would be impossible as Fark himself would have to have done it!

[Percy]

If the mafia RBed Artem, then Xtomx could confirm kabe, and IAAUN and Fark could confirm each other.

If IAAUN and Fark are the scumteam, then if IAAUN blocked Artem, Fark would be the one giving the kill. They would probably kill Xtomx to prevent kabe being confirmed. Fark couldn't claim a result, but we'd start tomorrow with either Fark/IAAUN as the scumteam, or two of Pablo, Percy or kabe.

If two of Pablo, Percy and kabe are the scumteam, then if they block Artem, the other one has to send in the kill. If kabe is scum, Xtomx will die. If Percy and Pablo are the scumteam, they might kill Xtomx to implicate kabe. They won't NK IAAUN, because Fark will get an investigate off, they won't NK Artem... in fact, under my current plan, if Sotty is innocent, Xtomx is almost certainly the mafia NK target.

Goddamn it! My plan is solid if Sotty is scum, but if he's not, Artem will be blocked and Xtomx will be NKed. My power will be useless in confirming anything, Fark's investigate will be suspicious and since we'd be in lylo we couldn't lynch him if he's scum.

Conclusion: If Sotty is scum, we've got the game in the bag. If he's not, the setup is solid - I can't find an optimal strategy (I tried a few more times just then, still no luck) that doesn't end with a dead townie and no reliable info.

Therefore, I advise anyone voting for Sotty to do something like what I've suggested that you stop now. Whoever has night actions should use them at their own discretion. Hopefully being unpredictable will give the town the edge when it comes to going over our night action info tomorrow.

I still like the "Sotty is mafia RBer who got blocked last night by IAAUN" idea, but I think I have to get out of this analytical headspace and re-read the game.

[Percy]

Sotty does actually talk about vig quite a lot, and pushed Kirr pretty hard on the premise she didn't believe the claim.

I agree. I can't see Sotty breadcrumbing the way he did unless he's the vig.

However, I can't see a mafia RBer not blocking Artem. If IAAUN is the Mafia RBer with Fark, I don't know why Fark wouldn't submit the kill and IAAUN block.

Pablo is right, this plan only works if Sotty is scum. Still re-reading, but the 'neatest' scenario in my mind is still IAAUN-as-Jailkeeper blocks Sotty-as-RBer.

[Percy]

Actually, that might work. If we keep Sotty alive and I pass a bullet to Sotty, then if IAAUN-as-townie is the Jailkeeper, then Sotty-as-scum won't get a bullet. However, if IAAUN is just a roleblocker, then blocking Sotty won't prevent to bullet getting through - thus Sotty will have a bullet the next day, and he'll be town and IAAUN scum.


Thus, we lynch kabe. If he's not scum,

Xtomx tracks Sotty
Pablo protects Artem
Fark investigates Artem
IAAUN blocks Sotty
Percy passes to Sotty

IAAUN/Fark scumteam - can't prevent Sotty getting a bullet, so Percy will be NKed by IAAUN, or they'll let it slide and hope to win LyLo. If Fark is the Mafia Doctor, then his name may be on Artem's list. Thus the scum will appear to be one of Sotty or IAAUN, and if Sotty can't be paired up with Pablo or Fark then we're done (e.g. if Fark and Pablo are both on the list, then it must be IAAUN if there was an NK).

Sotty/Fark scumteam - Sotty won't be able to act, so there will either be an NK and Fark will be screwed, or no NK if Fark is mafia doctor who wants to confirm himself. However, the NK can be used on IAAUN, but Sotty (as Mafia RB) still can't act. He does end up with a bullet in this scenario, but it rules out the only other likely scumteam.

Sotty/Pablo - Pablo must target Artem and keep him alive, so Pablo would have to be the mafia doctor. Sotty would be blocked by IAAUN, so this scumteam is busted.

Pablo/Fark - Again, both must target Artem and keep him alive, so this scumteam is also busted.

Fark/Xtomx - Xtomx would have to be the Mafia RBer who blocked Artem on N1, as Fark was blocked by IAAUN. However, there was an NK, so that makes no sense.

Anyone else/Xtomx - Fark is town, "no gun" result, makes no sense. Just reiterating that Xtomx is confirmed town.


What do you think? Will this work? The only snarls I can see are:
-Sotty is a Ninja, so evades Xtomx's watch. However, they would still need to kill IAAUN, and they can't to afford to kill another suspect.
-One of the scum is a hitman. Thus they can kill Artem, which will make Pablo look bad (in a WIFOM way).

XTOMX HEY I ASKED YOU SEVERAL TIMES WHO DID YOU TARGET ON NIGHT ONE PLZKTHXBAI

[Percy]

*turbo facepalm*

Sorry Xtomx.

I think we're ready to go.

Vote: kabe

[Percy]

If they kill IAAUN, then thet's ends up being their nightkill, though, right? What's the hitch here?

In the event that Sotty is not the roleblocker who was blocked by IAAUN and he is in fact a ninja, then Sotty will still be blocked by IAAUN (I think). So no conflict.

what's the conformation that Artem was blocked N1?

I got no list which means that either nobody targeted me or I was role-blocked.

I passed Artem a bullet N1, so he was blocked.

[Percy]

If IAAUN blocks Artem, then Sotty gets a bullet, and we know either IAAUN or Sotty is scum. If Xtomx reports that Sotty had no night action, Sotty can't be scum as there was a block and a NK. Thus they will kill Xtomx.

Now if Sotty and Pablo are the scumteam, they couldn't block Artem and kill Xtomx - Sotty will be blocked by IAAUN. If they kill IAAUN and block Artem, Xtomx will report movement from Sotty. Thus they can't replicate the required innocence-preserving kills of the IAAUN/Fark scumteam.

If Artem and Percy are the scumteam, then Fark will get a guilty on Artem. Sotty also won't get a bullet, so IAAUN will be confirmed, and therefore Fark. Neither of the other possibilities have a motive to kill Fark, so Fark's death will implicate them.
(Leaving aside how ridiculous it would be for scum to claim self-watcher on Day 1, and for there to be a 0-shot vig without a bulletsmith!)




If kabe is scum, then if his parter is:

-Xtomx - Fark got a not guilty, so we don't have to worry about him.
-Fark - kabe would have to be the blocker, as Fark was imprisoned N1.
-Percy - Would have to be the mafia doctor (as he targetted Artem N2), and kabe the blocker.
-Artem - How would he know I passed him a bullet last night? Also stupid claim.
-Pablo - Possible blocker.
-IAAUN - Two blockers makes no sense.
-Sotty - Possible blocker.

Thus the field is narrowed to Percy, Sotty, Pablo or Fark. Therefore:

-Xtomx tracks Sotty
-IAAUN imprisons Fark
-Fark investigates Artem
-Pablo protects Artem
-Percy passes to Artem

If Sotty is scum, he would have no choice but to either forgo his kill or kill Xtomx. If he also blocks Artem, that clears Fark and Percy, as they can't be blockers.

If Percy is scum, he can't kill Artem, so he's screwed.

If Pablo is scum, he could kill Artem, but as the only one who can, he'd implicate himself.

If Fark is scum, he can't do anything - he can't be the blocker, so he'd be blocked. If there are no NKs and all the others check out, Fark is toast.



So, yeah. Man up and vote, scumteam - I think we've got you cornered, even if kabe is innocent.

[Percy]

He's a Self-Watcher. He should have received my name at the start of Day 2 on his list.

[Percy]

I think your plan is a little better than mine, X - my plan possibly involved the scum getting a bullet, and your plan works just as well at trapping scum. So in the event that we are wrong, I would rather no-one gets a bullet. Nice work.

The Plan

If kabe flips scum:

Xtomx tracks Sotty
IAAUN imprisons Fark
Fark investigates Artem
Pablo protects Artem
Percy passes to Artem


If kabe flips town:

Xtomx tracks Sotty
IAAUN imprisons Xtomx
Fark investigates Artem
Pablo protects Artem
Percy passes to Artem


...so only IAAUN has to worry about changing his actions given the result of the flip.

[Percy]

The only remaining possible scumteams are as follows:

IAAUN/Fark - IAAUN blocks Pablo, and Fark kills Artem.

Sotty/Pablo - Sotty is a ninja who kills Artem after Pablo blocks IAAUN.

Fark/Pablo - Fark kills Artem, Pablo blocks IAAUN.



I am inclined to believe Sotty's vig claim. Him being a ninja is unlikely, as IAAUN pointed out - why would you submit a kill with the RBer on N2?

Thus I'm happy to say it's either the first or the third, with Fark being in each. Pablo knows this, and that is why Pablo-scum is voting for his scumbuddy.

IAAUN reads town. I'll also point to two particular posts from yesteday that caught my eye. Whilst IAAUN was actively engaged in plan-making, Fark was not:

unvote

.

I'm useless at this stuff. Really.

Added to that Pablo's conspicuous statement:

Percy

-One of the scum is a hitman. Thus they can kill Artem, which will make Pablo look bad (in a WIFOM way).

Oh, I can appreciate this one, though, but that's a damned powerful role for a town like this.

...and the lack of both PM and Fark's votes on the kirroha wagon, and I think we have the scumteam.


Either way, we lynch Fark. If Fark is town, then we lose. If Fark is scum (which is almost certain), a sole mafia RBer will be able to take out Xtomx and block the other of Pablo/IAAUN, so the only night action we can bank on is my bullet passing. So Xtomx will probably die, and Pablo and IAAUN will resume their finger-pointing. Thus, do whatever you like with your actions; something may slip by in the noise.

Vote: Fark

(Lynch).

[Percy]

I think that in a game like this, there is definitely going to be a massclaim. I don't see how we could have proceeded any differently than with the general strategy of catching scum in lies about their powers.

I agree that lynching kabe was not great. However, Sotty breadcrumbed his fakeclaim, and I didn't want to lose our 0-shot vig, so I thought we could immobilise Sotty and still get good info.

It would have been very different if the town power roles were all dead, but everyone was still alive. But even then, the town would have tried to play the game the way we played it - trying to verify claims.

The plan wasn't solid, and I trusted too much in it. However, I will say that had we known that the mafia only had two bullets each at the beginning of our planmaking stage, we could have reasoned our way either to a 'don't know, abandon plans' or 'this plan is solid'. Our error was in assuming that all information was provided to us at the beginning of the game, and I don't think we were wrong to think that.

So, yeah, I'm a little annoyed that we didn't know the scum only had two bullets each, but it was an enjoyable game.

Thanks everyone!