Mini 861: Hellsing Mafia - (Game Over!)

[Amished]

I'm back, but not in any shape to do a proper read of the game, especially RVS. Hopefully can get you all something good tomorrow.

[Amished]

Vote: DoomBunny

If I had more votes, they would go on Sabre and Netopalis, respectively. It should be pretty clear why they're the scummiest so far.

[Amished]

Based on 100, Saber is Doom's scumbuddy. As such, I think Saber is trying to keep a more powerful role alive by not voting for him. Net's first post is why I think he's scum, as well as not participating at all either.

[Amished]

You mean how he's been around to confirm and I've been on Vacation?

[Amished]

Unvote
Vote: Netopalis

[Amished]

lol if 144 isn't enough of a reason for you, you're scum too. Oh wait, I already pegged you as scum, good deal.

[Amished]

You're all scum, so it doesn't matter who I really vote for. Net's 144 is scummy enough to make me the most confident that he's scum out of all 3 of you. No suspects = scum. There's plenty to go on.

[Amished]

EBWOP: Sabre's chainsaw defense of Net is noted.

[Amished]

Ahh, ad hom too. Good deal. I love how you're attacking *me* for things other people have said as well. Why not attack them?

Cause I'm right and you're insta-omgus'ing me like the scum you are.

Also, thank you for the strawmanning, it's helping your cause, keep at it.

[Amished]

I didn't say they were inflammatory, care to point out where anybody had said that?

Care to state why you refuse to believe that people have different playstyles than you, instead of relegating them to stupid (ad-hom) or scum (which you have no proof of, and won't?)

You can always pick out something to go on. I don't care what day or page you it is currently.

[Amished]

@Sabre: I've presented my evidence. Reactions to jokes are also telling, as well as having to joke around at a certain point of the game, especially after the RVS we had. 144 as well at Net's first post are what I have for evidence as to his guilt.

I'm using a loose definition of evidence as there will *never* be a clear cut tell that only scum always do. My evidence is what I believe to be compelling alignment-telling posts. In said posts, the alignment of the poster is clearly not the same as my own.

As an aside, I agreed with Chaco's reasoning about the jokes, and I don't feel he should've let that go so easily.

[Amished]

@Sabre: Why is it no longer minor *now* that I've called joking at that point (and voting for it) scummy? Chaco did the same thing, and voted for it as well.

Again, you shouldn't need pressure to advance the game. Scum try not to advance it, while town do. Thank you for admitting you're scum by not trying to advance it on your own.

What else do you want to talk about? In a game with nights, I will not talk about my pro-town reads (of which I have several at this point), all else is fair game.

[Amished]

Question for you: Why did you not follow through on your decision to RVS konowa, after seeing that he voted for you first?

[Amished]

Yes, there is no place for jokes, as town should advance the game (and jokes don't do that as it's not game related content). Jokes therefore come from scum, (which is good, easier to find them) and those reacting "favorably" (haha you're awesome, I'm *never* going to vote for you) are also scum (which is good, as we're still finding more scum). Jokes have no place from a town perspective, while scum can, and the town should capitalize.

[Amished]

So you wouldn't vote for somebody voting for you right away? Why is that logical? (don't answer that q); Why did you want to vote for him immediately before the game started?

[Amished]

Ahh, but post 12 says you are.

Also, it depends on when the joking occurs, do you do it after the RVS has ended?

At a glance, Forb and Konowa haven't posted a lot, and are being the "best" lurkers.

[Amished]

Also, since you only looked at Konowa to vote early on, does that mean you haven't played with anybody else?

[Amished]

Also: So you wouldn't vote for somebody voting you right off the blocks? Why not?

[Amished]

Any time past RVS you can have suspicions. You don't have to vote for those suspicions, but you certainly have them, unless you're scum.

I've already explained why joking is scummy.

I've also already explained why I view each of you to be scum.

[Amished]

Also, 144 was super scummy enough for make me vote for him first above you and sabre. I don't care how many votes were on him or becoming on him at the time.

[Amished]

179 was @Doom as well.

@Doom: Not yet, as I've not been able to post/haven't posted as both alignments. If I have a hard time getting a read on the active players (or think they're all mostly townish), I'll go after a lurker. Until then, I'll go after who I think is scummy through their posts, which is what I'm doing now.

@Sabre: I meant don't answer the "how is that logical" question. If you've played with other people, why didn't you vote for them instead of going after Chaco for a different random reason? The fact that you're worried that an RVS would look scummy and OMGUSy also pegs you as scum. Thank you again.

[Amished]

Yes, but town always have suspicions. Scum have a harder time putting them down as it hurts their ability to mislynch. If they don't post suspicions early, they can hop on and add whatever they want later on and the town will have nothing to go on to say that they're backtracking to a mislynch when it's obvious that they are. Town always have logical reasons for their vote switching, and can put them out at a moments notice. It's another thing scum have trouble with.

Are you really going to argue theory instead of pushing against me or with me?

167 is my opinion on jokes.

@Net: Yes, you not having suspicions is why I'm voting for you. I don't care if we fight, as long as you get lynched, scum.

[Amished]

@Doom (188): I agree completely. However, Net didn't even give those. If you made a joke, while also asking questions/answering questions that does help the game along, that's fine.

@Sabre: How do you feel about me then? You don't want to keep messing with me, but your vote is still on me. Have I changed at all in your suspicions? Why or why not?

[Amished]

@Net: What do you feel about my play is erratic?

@Sabre: Your responses haven't changed my opinion of you in the slightest.

[Amished]

@Net: Along miller lines (a highly bastardized role) typically claiming is reserved for first post material. Or play so pro-town that you draw a NK instead of an investigation so as to not mess with any investigation roles. With roles that are similarly bad/worse, I'd say one of those two were going to be your options. As you've blown both of them, I'd say claim as soon as possible to get everyone weighed in so that we can all analyze it.

[Amished]

The only reason I know is because I played in a game with a miller once. I got the advice from X I believe, while other pretty well known scummers have agreed with them. Game was Vi's Mafia ViPod in Coney Island (I'm truant in that game). I replaced in after the miller discussion was had, but it's on the same page as the end of Day1 if you want to skim back for the information.

The problem is that you claim to have powers. You're effectively outing yourself as a power role in this case, while a miller is only able to show up guilty to inves. results.

[Amished]

What do you have against a full claim in this regard?

[Amished]

Day vig or night vig?

[Amished]

Well, he's self protected at least....

[Amished]

Unvote

Yeah, this is definitely able to be tested..

Vote: Sabrewolf

lol sabre fail at knowing game status. Net was L-2 I think, and scum can't nk him from the claim.

[Amished]

Exactly. Which is why you claim miller early on. You might've been able to draw a scum nk which would've helped the town by eliminating their NK. Or just play well enough to make the scum nervous, trying to kill you and still wasting their NK. As such, you're a vig that if we don't believe you we need to lynch after you've vigged for the town. Especially as NK + guilty make you look like an SK.

Also, flavor with your role?

[Amished]

amnish: please tell me you did not just vote for me because I didn't know neto was at L-2....

Nope, for your other scumtells.

[Amished]

Well, that actually makes sense. Alexander Anderson first appeared in episode.. 4 I believe. Immune to being killed early on, looks like scum to the hellsing organization, able to kill rather effectively. Wouldn't be an SK as he only goes after evil...

Claim status: Believed. You better pick a good player to choose, and it's theory debatable that you should wait with your 1 night-vig. Doing it now makes it less likely that you'll hit scum, but it will also help narrow the suspects for the duration of the game. Doing it later, while being more likely to hit scum (assuming all mislynches) also adds to it being more detrimental if you miss scum.

I've been sick so I'm home from work.. We'll get people back tonight.

Question for everybody: Who has watched Hellsing (either watched the anime, read the anime, or watched the OVAs, or any combination of the three?)

Also, lol at rule 18 and 19. Go back and read them if you want. Further evidence that the claim (I think) should be believed.

One last thing: @Net: what about my playstyle did you think was erratic?

[Amished]

Yes, role doesn't indicate alignment, but think about a miller. They're a miller because they turn guilty. 18 says that he can put a nk-immune miller vig in. Why would he be a miller if he was already guilty to begin with? And why would he claim if he wasn't worried about turning a guilty?

[Amished]

In other words, a "guilty" miller would turn innocent, so could pull off being cleared through an investigation. In that regard, you could just be a one shot vig (hiding NK status, for obvious pro-town reasons). To claim miller, while the mod said that he can put one in, makes sense from a pro-town reason.

[Amished]

The only question is the one typical of most theme games: was his name a safe-claim provided by the mod.

[Amished]

@Sabre: but you have to look at the rest of his claim too. 1 shot vig. If he's scum, then he's limiting the amount of kills they can do (directly against their wincon, basically); and here's where an early kill comes in more handy. 2 kills N1 (scum and him) and then 1 kill N2 (just scum, as he's claimed 1 shot) makes him more clear, as even an SK would be going against their wincon by not killing when they could. Mods balance duration based on how many mislynches and townie kills happen per night, assuming all town kills. To extend the time that they have to make a mistake harms them as well, and we're already looking at him as having that killing power.

This is why I favor an early (N1 or N2) kill, so that we can differentiate between kills and hopefully help to prove innocence or guilt. I'd say wait til N2 (more likely to hit scum, etc..) which also prevents his hypo-SK self from killing right away (harming his wincon in that situation) and allowing us more time to evaluate people for directing him (if that's what we want to do, debatable).

@Net's crosspost: Yeah, I know, I'm just putting it out there as Sabre looks newbie and might not know how most theme games work.

[Amished]

Also, with roles flavor not necessarily indicating alignment, why would they need safeclaims?

[Amished]

@Net a third time: What about my play was erratic to you?

[Amished]

Circumstances. He was likely to get to L-1 (typical claim time) and with NK immune miller vig (gogo Oman, btw, though I'm not sure where he got the title from) it's unlikely to save at a very crunch time (L-1, somebody is almost sure to hammer just due to the miller part of it).

Otherwise if you ask people to claim unnecessarily, you're helping scum either find power roles as town (which is stupid enough to get lynched for) or you're scum looking for power roles (which you deserve to be lynched for).

[Amished]

*sigh* ^ that is the wrong circumstance to rolefish, and is extremely scummy. Do not answer that question.

[Amished]

I honestly don't know which of you two I'd rather vote for. I don't think it matters anymore, so if either of you (saber or Doom) get a higher wagon, I'll vote for you in a heartbeat.

[Amished]

Should I need more than something I view to be a solid scumtell to attack you?

[Amished]

You really think that a) the mafia would decide to no-kill in an effort to make you look more lynchable *as a nk-immune miller vig* and b) that the "theme" of each kill wouldn't be different as to figure out if it fell into a pattern or not?

[Amished]

@Mod: Could you prod Archon? Approaching 48 hours at this point, and said he'd have content yesterday without actually giving content

[Amished]

Really only an insane cop would get an "innocent" but that's still beside the point as you *could* just be an NK-immune SK and lying about your one-shot. The fact that we'll never *know* until it's much too late is what I'm thinking the scum will bank on, or you will and we really can't trust you (net).

[Amished]

@Fuzzy: I remember playing with you, but I can't find the game.. Which one was it?

@Shotty: The lurkers are bugging me, so I'm hoping that they either come around so somebody else or I can start asking them questions about the game.

My feelings on Saber and Doom are pretty clear, as well as my feelings on myself

I still stand by Net's kill being directed and sooner rather than later. While it could be argued that we'll tell the scum who not to kill, we're not going to pick somebody pro-town that the scum would want to get rid of, instead we'll pick somebody scummy (or inactive, as how I generally would like inactives to be dealt with) that the scum would like to keep alive to generate mislynches (if our target is town); or inactives that will slow the game down and therefore helping the scum.

Either way, scum aren't likely to kill who we'd pick in the first place; and with the growing opinion that Net shouldn't be allowed to get to endgame (which I agree with). They aren't going to bother wasting time not performing their NK (that net was worried about). I can't remember who said, but reducing the number of suspects early on is pro-town as well, and is a common way to help out the town and I agree with that sentiment whole-heartedly. Which is why while vigging N0 is debatable (and generally leaned against), vigging from every night possible from then on is the right thing to do.

[Amished]

EBWOP: Oh, I remember you now, Fuzzy. You tried to fake CC my doc claim in Newbie 694.... Good effort, but that game was rather weak compared to the way I'm playing now.

[Amished]

@Doom: What don't you agree with that's been brought against saber; or, to put it another way, what have you seen that seems pro-town?

Also, stop saying that my attacks were unsupported. Clearly enough other people saw the support so since you don't see it doesn't me it's true.

I've seen the full series, none of the OVA's, and read the first third of the mangas, just FYI.

[Amished]

@Shotty: The lurkers are bugging me, so I'm hoping that they either come around so somebody else or I can start asking them questions about the game.

[Amished]

EBWOP

He has been helping the town recently and before he was making jokes. Not really scummy to me.However, he wasn't helping town out much which is why I labeled him as Fail Town.

He's been helping, but not helping. Got it.

[Amished]

@Looker: Why is Archon now your best place to have a vote?

Also, my EBWOP'd post simply shows how DB9 (no, not Aston Martin) has no real position on saber, allowing him to change in the future without repercussions. To state that you (DB) feel that he's (Saber) helping, but then state *in the same sentence* that he (Saber) wasn't really helping is logically inconsistent, and not something that should have given any form of pro-townieness for. Giving people town points when they don't actually have a good reason for it labels the giver as scum.

[Amished]

Also, with roles flavor not necessarily indicating alignment, why would they need safeclaims?

Okay, let me think this through. This is why I don't like the claiming crap until someone gets L-1, it's too much to deal with and it halts town. Not to be anxious or anything, but now I'm confused.

What have you surmised in your thinking?

[Amished]

@Doom: What of Saber do you classify as helping the town? Does his earlier unhelpfulness outweigh his recent helping? Is he fail-town or still scummy? Scummy-town?

How does that correlate to me? I was on vacation, but am I helping the town or hurting the town now?

Who else has been unhelpful to the town in your eyes, if anybody?

The point of lurking is that you *can't* get a read on them. It's unhelpful, but it can't be classfied as scummy. The people that I have a read on, and have been scummy are then inherently more scummy than people that I can't get a read on.

[Amished]

Clearly Archon has never played with chamber...

[Amished]

@Looker: chamber is a player well known for his stance that cases are scummy. His meta is if he *ever* posts a case against somebody, he's instantly scum, he feels so strongly about it. There are quite a few people that are out there that don't post reasonings behind their vote.

If you don't log on that often, why would you feel a need to switch your vote every time you'd log on? Do you feel the same if the game is in Lylo, that you need to have a vote out there?

[Amished]

Ok, so why not take time to read the thread, and vote for a better reason than "I had my vote on you already" which reads to me "I don't want to offend anybody else and get votes on me for bad reasons".

[Amished]

@Doom: Is he (saber) scummy or is he townie. He can't be "scummy of course" but also a townie. Does it matter that he only stopped joking after being voted for it?

The "that" is at my first question. How do you feel about me? Unhelpful, townie, scum putting on a good act, what? Are my incessant questions helping or hurting?

Why do you not want to vote for somebody unhelpful, and why did it take me asking you who was scummy for you to even FoS them (which is absolutely worthless in my opinion)?

[Amished]

@Looker: True, but why not vote for somebody you think is scummy now rather than just putting it back on where you had it in the first place?

[Amished]

So, you're going to hold off on giving strong opinions (through your vote) because ... you just want to wait? Of course there will be new developments, but that shouldn't prevent you from voting *now*. If you always wait for new developments, nothing will ever happen.

[Amished]

Unless you have a method to get lurkers to talk, your method doesn't work out too well. Also, I know I've seen a couple people call me pro-town and I've easily been the most prolific poster since page.. 6? where I came in.

I'm thinking game theory difference on this point, but unless you post some real content soon, I won't hesitate to vote you.

[Amished]

Chaco and Forb = QFT.

[Amished]

EBWOP:

@Forbiddanlight:

Pretty old news here. I don't like this question at all. The buddying and defending between saber and Doom, and the discussion thereof, has taken up the majority of the day. Not quite sure how you missed it.

Yeeeeahh...I'm just waiting for a chainsaw to seal the deal ^-^

I believe Saber's 154 is what you're looking for.

[Amished]

@kiku: I saw that too, which made me doubt. However, I can see scum trying to slowly "change" (which I see as more altering, especially after my questions of how DB got to classification of why saber was looking town in his perspective).

Scum (especially early on) try to keep their buddies in the middle to leaning pro-town in my experience, which is exactly where DB put saberwolf.

@forbiddan: You're welcome I saw that right away, but I was rather into the discussion at that point.

[Amished]

Bolding and italicized mine.

Then who should be lynched?

I'm leaning on Looker myself but I'm still going to wait and hear more from him before I put a vote down.

So when do you vote someone for being scum? How do you determine that they are scum if people who "act like scum" can be town?

I vote for someone when I have good reasons to. Joking is Not a good reason. Maybe I wasn't so clear on this part but I've said it a lot before. Joking around is scummy. It is not lynchworthy. It seems like failtown to me because it was scummy but not scummy enough to get a vote from me.

Elaborate on this?

What more do you want me to say? Amished was attacking me, saber, and neo with weak points such as "You were joking around" and

"You wern't here for a while"

. Lately he has been giving better arguements and helping town more.

Some of his questions toward me were good with others such as the one I answered here "Are my questions good" seem like fluffy questions that have no point here.

Regarding the bold: Net had access. Between the 2nd and the 7th (not counting the RVS posts), he had one vote with nothing else. He didn't declare V/LA like I did, so I was hammering him for active lurking when I was being compared to him for some awful reason. Active lurking is not a weak point, and with my elaborated stance on joking, I don't believe that's a weak point either. Stop undermining my arguments after you say that my questions are good.

Regarding the italicized: You answered my question/point before I could point it out. I wanted your opinion on me so that you had less wiggle room on everybody. You state that my questions were good (so putting me more in a pro-town view) and therefore you can't retract that statement. I don't do "fluff questions".

[Amished]

Now we just need to get Archon and Fuzzy to catch up, konowa to post his extended thoughts that he promised yesterday, net to actually post opinions on other players rather than talk about his claim and we all should be good to go!

[Amished]

@Saber: What about Looker's posts make you feel weird?

Also, AtE = if you're scum, and if you're town.

[Amished]

There are several ways to go about it, but it all comes down to looking at motivations. You might've picked up on that with some of my earlier posts (especially about joking, and somewhat so about "no suspects"). Scum will try to get away with anything that they think they can get away with. If you think that somebody is trying to do something that wouldn't help you (as town), then it's likely that they aren't town. For me, joking = distracting from the game, and slowing it down. Townies need all the information that you can get, so both outcomes of joking are anti-town and probably scum.

The caveat, however, are that people are prone to mistakes, so you need to try to separate the mistakes from the intentionally anti-town. Politics comes into play after you think you've identified scummy behavior, where you have to convince half of the remaining players that you're right (as you'll be the half + 1 vote to lynch them).

Lurking doesn't progress the game, and makes it hard for people to read you, and doesn't allow you to get a read on other people. All of these *are* anti-town, but this is such a "touchy" subject that that comes down to individual outlook. Some will lynch lurkers above known scummy behavior in game as they'll be around tomorrow (by not lynching them) to get more info from them and probably lynch them then if they don't change your outlook.

What's occurring now, in regards to saber and doom, is that they're wishy-washy. Scum have motivation to keep their options open so if they switch onto a popular wagon, they won't have contrary evidence to directly question why they're on said wagon.

Saber (as forb was looking for, and I provided evidence) is also guilty of a chainsaw defense. Tarhalindur came up with this originally, and is often found between scumbuddies. In fact, it rarely (read: basically never) works if either of the pair are *not* scumbuddies. There's ample scum motivation to save their partners (generates mislynches and keeps scum numbers up to make lylo draw closer). That's why people will often attack the questioners of their scumbuddies, and often vote for them like Saber did when I was attacking both Doombunny and Net. In this particular case, Net's claim makes it more likely that Saber was chainsawing for DB, which is also why I'd like to see DB lynched moreso than Saber, but either would work for me.

Also, the AtE that I commented on by Saber, and you quoted as well. There's motivation on both sides (town and scum, but leaning heavy scum) to make it look like they're a victim to draw sympathy to keep themselves alive. What makes scum different from townies in this situation is that townies know they're pro-town, and will strive to prove it to everybody instead of scum knowing that they *are* anti-town, and will try to look for other tactics to not be lynched that aren't based in solid evidence.

After all of that, I want you to go through and look for scum motivations. Also, I want you to place a vote, back it up, and ask at least one pointed question at anybody questioning why they did what they did.

Finally, the point about your vote: during the day, that's all you really have as a weapon, as any town role (barring dayvig). To put it somewhere that's useless has plenty of scum motivation behind it. It looks like they're scumhunting (by voting) but there's no scumhunting behind it at all.

This is all relatively basic, bordering on mediocre (which is what I classify myself as) mafia play, and should've been brought up in any newbie game around here from any IC's/SE's that we currently have.

Ugh, monster posts take forever. I've missed like 5 holes of golf on TV because of this. I'll most likely take the rest of the day off, and probably a good chunk of Sunday as well. I might pop in quickly, but not all that much. This is what I get for basically only playing one game at this point.

/me wanders off to the queue/replacement thread

[Amished]

whoa you're awesome.

otay!

Agreed, anyways, hope you're actually working on what I sent you out to do. If you missed it:

After all of that, I want you to go through and look for scum motivations. Also, I want you to place a vote, back it up, and ask at least one pointed question at anybody questioning why they did what they did.

[Amished]

WIFOM.

Personally, that's not something I ever look at. Theoretically, scum will have an easier time voting for scum, but it's just as easy to vote for any other stupid reason as RVS stages have that effect on the whole game's "meta", so to speak.

I'd say it happens as much as anybody else votes for scum, but that's looking at it from my own perspective and without any evidence to back it up.

Where are you on a readthrough? Did you start? Where do your suspicions lie? Have that question yet?

[Amished]

@DB: Cause one vote is a buss when there's basically no votes out there.... /facepalm

@Looker: I expect you to back up your Chaco/Shotty connection, but every (mediocre and better) scummer knows that flips and NK's are worth tons more than anything said in thread. I would suggest looking for a single scum first, and go from there (especially with buddying, distancing, and all those other sneaky tactics that scum can do with town).

[Amished]

I think it's more likely that scum start off the game with admittedly completely random votes so they can't be held accountable at all for them...

[Amished]

@Forb: lol /facepalm

I was making a point that doombunny made an admittedly random vote (from random.org) and is more likely scum because of it, but if you want to claim scum because you have a meta for certain votes, I'll take that too...

lol

[Amished]

1 problem, Shotty didn't random vote Chaco back. Why is Chaco + Shotty any more likely than Saber (who also voted for Chaco)? Motivations in the RVS are generally considered extremely weak as certain people (forb, myself, *plenty* of others) always do the same thing in every game regardless of alignment.

Currently it looks like we have 5 people on Saber/Doom combined, for very similar reasons.

To the other 4 (forb, kiku, shotty, and chaco): would you consider voting the other if necessary? Is your current vote the one you think will produce the most information with a scumflip?

@those not voting (Netopalis, fuzzylightning, Doombunny9, Konowa, Looker) What are your exact opinions on *both* Doombunny and Saber?

@Saber: What is your rationale for not voting for doombunny?

@Mod: Can we get Archon either in the game or replaced?

Doing activity checks in like 5 minutes.

[Amished]

Possibly actually defending yourself would've helped.

Jesus.

@Mod: Can I please have like a 4 vote (1-shot) ability so I can just lynch him?

[Amished]

Yeah, well, I'm already voting him Chaco..

[Amished]

That's the point I was trying to make, shotty. You and Chaco doesn't make any sense, so I was trying to make Looker see that and get to something that's actually worthwhile. Dabbling in dead ends is anti-town, and if Looker continues, I will modify my read on him? to scum and vote accordingly.

I agree with your position on Saber's lynch, btw.

[Amished]

@Looker: Do you see why I said Shotty and Chaco don't make sense? In any case, I'd like to see you pick out one other person (besides Saber/Doom, as they've gotten a lot of scrutiny lately) and ask them a question to try to figure out their motivations for anything in the game.

I'll give you a hint to my first question: look at the acronym RVS.

[Amished]

Normally I would like a claim (if Saber was still around); but I don't think anything the/a replacement says would make us believe him as he'd look like he'd be trying to just save his own ass with a PR, or vanilla which wouldn't stop anybody from voting.

[Amished]

Is it going to sway your vote? We already have a claimed 1 shot vig? Do you want WIFOM and potential outing of another power role?

[Amished]

Konowa: I read throught the ISO of the game you linked to, and while he was under more suspicion there than here, he was also actually helpful during that exchange and made a particularly good point against NabikovNabikov...

[Amished]

@Mod: That sounds fine to me, though I don't suppose you can give us his role PM now, can ya?

[Amished]

It was a sarcastic question, but ok. I'd rather have a replacement come in for somebody that'll live instead of add WIFOM.

[Amished]

Personally, 408 is ridiculous and should be strung up for that as well.

On a side note: I'm getting extremely frustrated with Net's not answering my questions and refusal to put something down in the game. I don't give a shit what you claimed, I'd lynch you for active lurking and looking like you're lying about being a miller and are actually scum.

I've only wanted like 2 opinions out of you, and you haven't been able to even give me that.

Overall the question is: is doombunny or saber scummier? It's damn close. Like forb said, you can rage as either alignment, but with doombunny actually being around and continuing to be scummy (sheeping without reason) I'm almost of the opinion to lynch one and make net "vig" the other.

[Amished]

Yeah, what konowa fixed for me..

Deadline in ... 10 days and 3 hours. I want to get *looker's* opinion on something before voting for DB. (it wasn't Net that I was frustrated with in 418, however, net weighing in would be helpful as well. Can someone look up the prod times? It seems like we have a core of like 5 people actually posting and I don't want the lurkers to go by unnoticed.)

@Chaco: In the extremely unlikely event that DB turns town, who would you have net vig?

[Amished]

What's your opinion on non-limited vigs then?

[Amished]

What's your opinion on non-limited vigs then?

Not to endanger town unless they are sure of their shot.

Seems like a wasted use of a pro-town power role. You can't even be sure of a lynch without sane cop and no busdriver/godfather, how are you going to be sure as a vig?

[Amished]

I want you to clarify your position, cause this is what I think you're saying, and it doesn't make sense to me.

1) If DB flips scum
a) Net should shoot Saber for being a scumbuddy because he's also scummy.

2) If DB flips town
b) Net shouldn't shoot a damn person because Saber isn't scummy enough without DB to be shot/lynched on his own.

I know I'm going a little off the handle with B, but they're both scummy enough to be lynched on their own, without going into buddy/distancing wifom. Why should we waste a claimed 1s.nki.m.v.'s *opportunity* to kill somebody that scummy and probably get scum either way? If I were vig, I'd shoot DB/Saber, whoever doesn't get lynched.

If you (metaphorical you, applies to anybody) wants to push either of them to claiming (DB in this case cause saber won't come back) go for it since I feel it's just going to be one or the other.

[Amished]

Hiya SSK. You have plenty of scummy play to cover for your typically scummy play, so congrats!

[Amished]

(to those that don't recognize sarcasm: I've seen SSK as town, and nobody believed him. This will be fun to see what he does with archons already scummy play on top of his own.)

[Amished]

Screw this. Net should vig DB.

Unvote
Vote: Looker

For active lurking.

[Amished]

I really really really want a couple daykills right about now... Doombunny's asking absolutely pointless questions is obviously a front to appear to be scumhunting when not actually doing so.

unvote
vote: Doombunny

I want Saber/SSK dead, but we'll give SSK a chance to say something (anything). Looker I also want dead as I've never seen somebody be so unhelpful in my mafiascum career. Well, I have, but they were all scum.

Clearly I can't convince anybody to switch from either of the candidates to Looker, so I'll wait for him tomorrow; hope that SSK dies due to Saber's actions and lynch DB today. To me, this seems like the best course of action.

[Amished]

Rephrase that one chaco? with names?

[Amished]

So you hold the position that they're only scum if they're scum together? Not one is town while the other is scum?

[Amished]

You think the mod doesn't balance it if all townies die in 1 day? ........ Yes, cause if we all make 1 mistake; we're boned in a 12 player game. *headdesk*

[Amished]

Assuming we're wrong about both saber and doom (which is unlikely, but possible). Mods *plan and balance the game* based on worst case scenarios. Lynching townie, vigging townie, and scum nk'ing townie *are planned for* if the mod *and the mod's reviewers* have an IQ over like 6. IT'S NOT THE END OF THE WORLD. I can assure you that it's planned for and balanced. I can guarantee that if Net is 1-shot, his 1-shot hitting town is planned for. I will bet anything you want on it; both because I know how Kairyuu plays, and he's not that stupid. For two people to perform the same uncommonly stupid mistake; by not allowing the town to make any mistakes is ridiculous to the point of impossibility.

Let me put this another way. If we wait with the vig, and later on *hit a townie anyways*, it's no different than to hit one now. FFS is this hard to understand? I realize you're new to the site, but what I'm saying makes perfect sense.

To get rid of our 2nd suspect (widely considered here) now allows us to have *everyone* come in and put in their opinions tomorrow on the flips and who else looks to be scum. If we leave the other alive, we'll all just bandwagon him anyways as they're still the most scummy person around; and we've wasted a day.

Do you understand what I'm saying now?

[Amished]

@Chaco: Does it cut down our time any more than if we make Net wait and then possibly screw up later and shoot a townie? The outcome will still be the same. However, this gives us *more time* to evaluate Net's claim.

@Doom: I feel you're all scum for reasons I've provided in thread. If you'd actually like to defend your actions, go for it. Otherwise keep acting like scum and ignoring it. I don't care if you claim now.

[Amished]

But *why*? Do you not agree with my logic? Specifically my point about vigging a townie later in the game rather than now?

[Amished]

Because the only reason I see for you not wanting us to vig the other of whoever gets lynched is that you're partners with them, or you're partnered with net (who's lying then in this case) and you don't want to out them as an only killing role (highly unlikely).

[Amished]

Unvote

1) counterclaim anybody? This is fully a flavor claim that I expect to be in the theme; so without CC I believe he's telling the truth.

2) knowing the story behind the theme, I'm trying to figure out how your ability actually helps. We can guess the number of scum anyways, and I don't expect all vampires to be evil either. Pointless, but the flavor is enough to prevent me from voting for him for now.

[Amished]

fuck if I understand your play at all today, DB. Jesus.

[Amished]

Balanced means that if the worst case scenario happens, the town still has opportunity to win.

Fine, say that we don't vig anybody tonight.

We lose 1/6th of our population (lynch and scum kill). We're then at 10 people.

Say we mislynch tomorrow, and we want to vig then (and say the vig misses). The scum will still kill, losing 3. 3/10 is 30%; which impact's the game more than 3/12 that we'd have today. Your logic with your math just doesn't follow. The vig should never kill in case he misses? That's on par that we should never lynch in case we screw up!

[Amished]

Care to unvote then Chaco?

Also, playing while moody is probably your worst decision that you could make for whatever alignment you are. As town it causes a distraction and makes a lot of plays look scummy, and as scum it makes you look scummy which obviously you don't want to do.

Hell, take this last page. You've said you were defending Saber because he was being attacked for weak reasons, but then YOU VOTE FOR HIM for no other reason than saying that it's the play of the day. *%&$#%yu$#)*%()&#$%&@*()#)$^ BLARGH.

[Amished]

You're obviously not understanding my real point if you're just focusing on my analogy. How is the math better in case we miss later, cause that's your point for not vigging. Any way that we can get suspected scum is beneficial to the town.

[Amished]

@DB: I, however, want Net to make the best theoretical decision possible. If we have this debate (while also looking for scum (Looker/Saber are my top suspects at this point)), net can make a decision and we'll get scum anyways.

Vote: Looker

Still for active lurking.

[Amished]

Do you deliberately try to avoid my question, or do you not read all of my posts?

You're scared of missing scum with a vig shot. Understandable. How is never shooting (or shooting later in the game under the 1-shot-UNK-miller-vig claim) better for the town?

1) It wouldn't be "on a whim"; it'd be because of suspicion. It's like a cop, you investigate who you're suspicious of, and you get a result. Yes, this is an analogy too, so don't just quote this line either and ignore the rest of my posts.

2a) The vig is right (i.e. we get scum). We test Net's claim immediately; and we're rid of one scum.

2b) The vig is wrong (i.e. hit a *suspicious* townie). We still test Net's claim (which helps us with determining his claim = beneficial). We eliminate a distraction from the game, reduce the list of suspects while not offing somebody people view to be pro-town (=beneficial).

In your scenario, we make anybody scummy to have to be lynched until late game when mistakes are more amplified. I will not allow you to delay something that will benefit the town so that you can allow a sketchy claim to go through til it's too late to evaluate it; while also hurting the town by allowing scummy people that we don't have enough lynches for.

If the vig misses, I've already pointed out with math why it's more beneficial to miss now rather than later. The reduction of the list of suspects is also beneficial, and widely regarded to be true. I can dig up the MD threadS on this as well if necessary.

Yes, I'm confident that my reads are right. Clearly they not always are. Are you not confident when you think you've found scum?

Chaco replaces DB on my list of suspects.

[Amished]

Even though the reasons were bad I still agreed with them.

I still thought he was scummy. I would still be fine with a vote for him. I would however, prefer to vote Looker. I thought I made this clear before. Guess not. Oh well.

[/quote]/facepalm

[Amished]

We still gain information from a night kill. In this specific case, we even get more information about our outed vig. We get twice the normal amount of information than from a normal vig shot.

I do not imply that you don't want to lynch.

Oh, I dunno, leaving your vote on a claimed PR after asking you to unvote when at deadline the number of votes needed are halved is a pretty decent reason for me to suspect you.

[Amished]

My mistake then, I looked at the wrong vote for doombunny.

[Amished]

@SSK: My stance on your position is very clear (I think saber's play alone should be lynched).

@Shotty: I also want everyone to look at Looker; because active lurking to his extent is scummy as hell and both of you {SSK/Saber and Looker} should be lynched.

[Amished]

Chaco, we realize that you're saying don't shoot at all.

Under what circumstances later in the game would "allow" Net to use his shot?

[Amished]

Yes, but you don't provide reasoning. You've stated that you think 3 townies are too much to lose in 1 night. I'm not going to go into a stupid argument saying "how do you know so and so is town" but what I am saying is how will we *know* that anybody else is scum later in the game?

The scum are always going to kill a townie. That's irrelevant and part of the game. Why shouldn't we use our vig now to help confirmed Net, get rid of a suspect (like you know, we do with our lynch) and not potentially lose us the game now?

I know our opinions differ, and frankly I don't give a shit. I want you to back up your opinion with more than "I think we should wait" because that's far from convincing. I've used math and a point that it will help us to confirm a "sketchy" claim.

Use some backing, I know we don't agree. FFS is that that hard to understand? I want you to provide evidence to back up your point as I'm *not* just going to trust your judgement or anything. To then FOS over such a weak point shows that you're not paying attention either.

[Amished]

/headdesk

3 killing roles in a small theme. o.k.

Regardless; we'll take your worst case scenario.

12-4 = 8

With 2 anti-town killing roles, the mafia only have 2 people. 1 SK, 3 scum, 5 townies.

One of the townies is basically confirmed by claiming who they killed (and doing what they were directed). 4 "unknown" townies + 3 scum remain. With 2 killing roles, there's more town power roles, so they can be confirmed town as well (and either clear or condemn somebody). Say they can't condemn anybody, but confirmed somebody else. 2 "unknown" townies + 3 scum. I'll take odds like that to hit scum multiple days in a row.

However, I contest that 3 killing roles (even if one is a 1 shot) is unbalanced.

12 people start:

2 scum, 1 sk, 1 1-shot vig; will assume that they shoot townies every night.

T S SK
9 2 1 D1
8 2 1 (first mislynch)
5 2 1 (all shoot, hit townies)
4 2 1 (2nd mislynch, D2)
2 2 1 (N2, S and SK shoot and hit townies)

2 mislynches and we're in a lylo that needs cooperation with an SK to pull it off. That's not balanced and no competent mod relys on crosskilling to balance their game as smart scum try to avoid crosskills.

I would appreciate it if you would *stop* fear-mongering to stop the Vig from killing.

[Amished]

Alright, whatever. I see no one viable for him to shoot at the time. From what I can tell though, Amished wants: Lynch Saber, Vig Looker

Pretty much.

[Amished]

Uhh, DB claimed btw, I would hope not without a counter claim...

[Amished]

+scum points to forb for 533. Sir Integra is a major part of every series and somebody you expect to be in the game. Not as a safe claim, as a real claim. Unless you have more evidence than "oh, it's a likely fake claim" I'm gonna hold 533 as the scummiest thing you've said.

/facepalm at 531 and Looker. Can we please lynch for active lurking?

[Amished]

Say that DB didn't have to claim. How does scum benefit from knowing how many vampires are out there? I don't see how that benefits the scum moreso than the town to make it a fakeclaim.

@Mod: Can we get a votecount

(seconded forb's request, but in bolding )

[Amished]

@Forb: Look at the theme; there's clearly pro-town and anti-town vampires in the Hellsing mythos. To let a townie know how many people are vampires makes more sense than to let the scum know, especially considering we don't actually know what we're up against (could make a case for the manufactured vampires, the nazi's, and a couple other things that we're "against"). That's why I believe DB.

[Amished]

Unvote
Vote: Saberwolf

(L-3)

[Amished]

So, since you feel DB is a goon, you think he'll tell the truth about anything and it's worth leaving him alive since you're not voting for him?

[Amished]

Makes sense.

[Amished]

Ok, this is probably a bad example as I haven't paid as much attention to theme games as I could have; but every theme game that I actually know the flavor behind it has all the really main characters. That's more the point of theme games; to have some of the people that you know be in the game and have a chance to be them, rather than be absolutely balanced. It may still be balanced with work by a mod (and I'm not particularly commenting on that) but my point is that the main characters *are in the game*.

I'm not saying that flavor makes you guilty or innocent as that would make the setup breakable; but combine my belief that Integra would be in the game with an ability that doesn't make sense as scum. I don't know if that makes sense; hell, I don't think I'll even convince you {forb} but I'm putting my ideas out to see if everyone thinks I'm on crazy pills or if I make sense.

Unvote

I don't know if ABR will convince me to keep my vote off of him (as he replaced Saber); but I'm going to see what he has to say.

[Amished]

(Your first question is answered by the first line in the 2nd quote box, btw)

[Amished]

K. I would like to hear your exact opinions as to why you feel he is scummy as well; if you would.

[Amished]

@Chaco: Yes, but I want to hear forbs opinions too.

@ABR: I think that you mistook my position. I would like the UNK-M-Vig(1Shot) to kill tonight because it is such a bogus role. I stated why I thought that; and who *I would choose if I were the vig*. Because there's a claimed vig out there, I feel the need to provide who I think is 2nd scummiest. The vig can then therefore choose to follow my advice, follow somebody else's, or choose their own. In any situation, they supremely have to be responsible to us; especially with a claim that you obviously disbelieve.

I look forward to the rest of your analysis. Where's SSK btw? I saw one clump of posts and that was it...

[Amished]

No, regarding your suspicions on him to make you believe he's scum.

[Amished]

@DB: You can go to the bottom of the page and select "Display posts from previous {all posts} by {Doombunny9}{oldest first} and click "go". Then you can see your posts numbered.

[Amished]

If it was just about anybody *but* ABR, I'd ask him to claim. As such, I'll leave it up to him.

[Amished]

@Net: I doubt we could "force" ABR to claim if he didn't want to, knowing some of his style.

[Amished]

Well, I'm gonna claim credit for forcing Net to not be able to do anything, but we now have a clear vig target. ABR even around to defend Saber's play?

[Amished]

Looker, not net -_-

[Amished]

Yes, but it provides us all with as solid a vig target as I've ever seen.

[Amished]

1) Looker *claimed* scum
1a) Scum don't claim scum
2) Jesters claim scum
2a) Jesters win when they're lynched
2b) Jesters must be NK'd
3) We have a claimed 1-shot vig
3a) Vig the Jester through NK
3b) The Jester doesn't win, and we're not all stuck playing for second
4) Go on with the game
5) ?
6) Profit!

[Amished]

How are scum gonna know anything *D1* without a night start? Also, Net is nk-immune, a jester (looker) isn't. Also, way to run yourself around in a circle with WIFOM, instead of keeping the simple conclusion.

[Amished]

@DB9: The simple conclusion that you came to in 620....

Scum don't want a Jester lynched any more than we do; since they'll play for second place as well. Ok, so it's a lynch on a non-mafia (and therefore they do kinda want a lynch) but if there's any other killing role out there, the scum would have to worry about that if they had a doctor or something.

[Amished]

@SSK: Do you have a point? Other than having another reason why you want Looker dead, or are you going to sit there like a bump on a log much like Archon did and not contribute to *this* game?

[Amished]

There's a theory (I haven't tested it/looked at it) that scum say honestly (or related) more than townies because they want to appear earnest rather than actually just being earnest. The game that I saw that this was brought up in I saw a townie do it more than I did (and I did, as scum) so both sides can (just like anything else). I'd rather look at motivation behind actions rather than motivation behind words; but that's just me.

Moving on, Shotty, who else do you suspect? I've lost this all in the shuffle and my hectic life this weekend and I need to get refocused on the game.

[Amished]

Net, are you about to counterclaim scum or something, or should I just policy ignore all your posts until you're lynched?

[Amished]

Well, Net's going to be my lynch tomorrow.

ABR, I'm really waiting for you to catch up so I can gauge your play. If it's nothing too spectacular, I don't think I'm going to vote for anybody other than you {ABR}. Otherwise without going into too much detail, I think I'll avoid the WIFOM and want to lynch DB9.

[Amished]

So I'm supposed to be happy that you're not advancing the game?

[Amished]

Or you can joke while also making a point. Do not post for the sake of posting. It just adds to the signal to noise ratio making it harder for everybody.

[Amished]

^ best argument for anything I've seen so far. I hate any mods that put Jesters in a game, and in a mini the game won't end anyways.

Unvote
Vote: Looker

[Amished]

I highly doubt that anyone will disagree with lynching claimed scum.

[Amished]

I've addressed this before, but irregardless of Jester, the mod is a bastard (no offense) for putting one in if he is. Avoid WIFOM and lynch the claimed scum. This is my first game with a Jester, and if they "win"; I won't count it as "2nd place" if the town wins behind a jester.

[Amished]

Kiku was more persuasive than you and SSK were.

[Amished]

@Doombunny: Is there a reason you think you need to post who you think is most townie?

[Amished]

@DB9: Well, I'd suggest not doing it ever again unless you really know what you're doing.

[Amished]

You want to make their job easier? Ok, tell everyone everything you think at all times! Might as well claim so they know how to narrow down their NK suspects if they're going for a PR.

[Amished]

Bah. Go Town.

[Amished]

(Hopefully Kai will forgive me, but I wanted to wish konowa the best of luck the biggest day of his life *so far*, I'm sure you'll have even bigger ones together with your wife.)

[Amished]

One question, and I mentioned it in the green room too. Initially the maf was gonna knock off Net with the strong-arm kill. Instead you {ABR} knocked off me through konowa's jailkeeper ability (thanks Konowa )

What made you go after me instead of Net? I mean, I'm glad I (as VT) drew a kill that normally would've been stopped, and took it away from a pro-town vig ability that allowed us to kill ABR at night if he didn't claim.

[Amished]

So why was I killed? Cause I wasn't manipulable like Forb seemed to be?

I really wanna stop getting NK'd N1 by scum

@Shotty (I think):Also, I was more against Saber D1 than Doombunny, so I don't know who was trying to link my death to Doombunny killing, but you were on the right track if you had actually looked at who I was more pushing against.

[Amished]

I hate being ignored

[Amished]

I'm addressing you {ABR} as you were the one that switched the mafia kill (according to kiku)

[Amished]

I have enough games on my plate at the moment, and I have a V/LA period coming up =\

Otherwise I would ABR, thanks for the invite

[Amished]

I do wanna say that Saber's reaction to that joke vote was on scum >_> That is all.

Net, I did notice a lot better improvement D2; so keep up that playstyle. Not sure if it was cause of me that D1 didn't go all that well =\

[Amished]

Chaco, early on D2 you did alright, but then you started to go into your "alternate playstyle" which was just god awful and I'm surprised people didn't vote you out of frustration. Put some thought into why something happens/why something is posted (motivation is key) and then you should do a lot better for yourself.

@FL: Scumtells are largely bogus. Joking only "works" cause you're not advancing the game (which is a scummy objective). Look at motivation. Shotty had it right on the number though, kik's bussing, then backing off D1 was scummy. Look for people who know more than you should as vanilla. Scumhunting just takes time, and overall it goes a lot to "gut". I remember before I ever posted in a game here, I read one of ABR's games and he called out scum (and damn near got him lynched before being NK'd) for taking something that was pro-town and casting suspicion on it when there shouldn't be suspicion.

I tend to look for thinks that I wouldn't think of as vanilla (outlooks). If somebody suggests something that's unconventional, determine if they know something due to scum or PR. If their outlook doesn't match yours, it's a pretty good indicator. Just keep your mouth shut until you're more sure that they're scum rather than PRs.

[Amished]

One thing that I need to do moreso now more than ever though, is reread people.

I find scum through gut, mostly (a post just doesn't read right); and then I make a tally. After I get my tally, I need to actually reread somebody cause after I got to Saber/Doombunny being lynched, I reread DB when I was dead (without knowing his status) and I was wondering what the hell I built my case on =\ Still takes time to scumhunt properly, fortunately right now I have a lot of free time on my hands.

[Amished]

Oh fuck off with your future meta/game experiences. You claim scum, you should always die. That will never change, so you can die in a fire if you thought that was a good idea.

[Amished]

Relying on the stupidity of others rarely works out in your favor. Especially when said others play a game of logic and psychology relatively constantly and throughout the day were pretty much proven not to be all that idiotic.