Mini 870: Melee mafia. (Mod Abandoned)

[Grover]

Also, populartajo, notice the number of players in War in Heaven who sided with the scum the entire game...

that's

why the scum won,

not

because the town was attacking who they wanted to.

[populartajo]

I dont want to turn this into a why did town lose in War In Heaven. I was there so I still think this is why town lost:

Nuwenscum used normal damage to finish WaltWishbone who was obvtown from my POV but not from others. Did she get flake for that? No. Why? Because, spreading damage was not punished in that game and scum could hide behind rogue townies.

Scum dont need to kill townies during the day, they only need loose cannons to win the game, as it happened in some parts of War in Heaven. Or either they kill townies and hide behind the "Im so rogue" group, as it also happened in War In Heaven.

Post 372 doesnt explain your brutal change of approach, Grover. You went from to abiding the majority to avoid being mislynched (wtf, did you seriously say that?) to saying that whoever suggested we all attack the same player, that person was scummy and that you were wary of people following us, while you were doing the same thing (!?).

Also Yosa2 is prob town, so you are not improving anyhow your suspicions.

More importantly, do you think KirbyYoshi is town?

[Kirbyoshi]

Ok, current list time (this is not in order of surety, this is in the order they appear in the OP):

Town:
Nuwen
Kast
Yos
Snow
chamber

Neutral:
Grover (kinda wavering back and forth)
Stark
Farside (where are these two?)

Scummy:
Tajo
Tony
drow

And this list is by no means set in stone.

You are basically proposing that a scumteam of three could easily control lynches.

That's not at all impossible. In fact, if the scum happen to be good arguers for their fake cases, it could become likely.

That I only said "attacks" isn't a technicality, it's the whole enchilada. It's so dishonest to deem it a techincality just so you can say i stated something i didnt. ("your answer was negative")

This I actually agree with. It's been said time and time again in this thread: ACTIONS AND ATTACKS ARE NOT THE SAME THING.

I'm gonna take that as you simply calling me a retard, and move on.

I'll let you know when I decide to call this a straw man or an ad hom. It has the characteristics of both.

Yes, I'm the one causing confusion

Yes. You are. Stop.

And I have no idea what the last part of that post was supposed to be.

If I wanted to "go rogue", I would not have voted. I do like democracy. I simply have a more liberal and individualistic view on how I want to play this game and win it for the town.

But if you're simply going to attack your own target, why even vote? It's like voting for Obama, then vehemently opposing socialism.

Here's how I see it: Head honcho Yosarian and a couple others try to take advantage of the town by controlling all the lynches, claiming that it's for the sake of unity while mislynching us one by one until the scum take over.

I assume this is talking about the game that keeps being referenced? I ask only because HH isn't in this game...

[Kirbyoshi]

Post 372 doesnt explain your brutal change of approach, Grover. You went from to abiding the majority to avoid being mislynched (wtf, did you seriously say that?) to saying that whoever suggested we all attack the same player, that person was scummy and that you were wary of people following us, while you were doing the same thing (!?).

This is a good point. If you had gone the other direction, I would have understood. But to go from (very) quietly following the majority to basically "coming out of the closet"? Needs a better explanation.

[populartajo]

Scummy:
Tajo

Hahahah. Seriously, why?

Also you have decided to not answer my questions. Or did you miss post 360?

[TonyMontana]

4 people ganging up on someone can hardly be called "rouge". You are basically proposing that a scumteam of three could easily control lynches

Even a scumteam of two with a couple ignorant townies while the third acts as backup can easily seize control of all the lynches. This is disastrous.

I don't think this was quite what Kast was suggesting, but in any case I see your point and realize that there's an obvious pitfall in the fact that actual majority is not needed to lynch someone, just relative majority.

[Kirbyoshi]

Wat? Really, what was so town of that post?

357 explains it. Basically, singularly disagreeing with majority decisions about how we are to play the game is a dumbtowntell. However, it is a towntell nonetheless. I think after he said it, Grover realized how dumb it was and tried to patch it up. However, I think I've said before that if he does go rogue, he's got my vote toMorrow.

Someone seems too worried about what his reasons would look like, huh?

I don't think one can be too worried about that. I'm trying to stop y'all from mislynching me, but I guess I'm epically failing.

No its not. Why do you think is it scummy?

In a recent game of mine, there was a jester. One of the posts that most drove me (and others) to lynch him was when he came in, voted, and left. No explanation before, and none after. I found you bursting back onto the thread and simply complaining about how I wasn't dead yet was extremely scummy.

You disagreeing with it doesnt make it go poof.

You trying to force it doesn't make it magically appear either. It's simply not there.

What happened with the town read you had on me, huh?

It went away when you started tunneling on a case you don't have.

Null tells. Im more interested in the everything else part. Care to elaborate?

Ok, I fail to see how those are nulltells, but stand by for "everything else". The reason I said that was because I think he does have other points against him, but I couldn't remember what they are.

[Kast]

scum can one-hit us or take half our life if we are lucky enough to roll a saving throw...so the scum will have to hammer us themselves, and

this will be an action that everyone can witness

even if they PM this action.

Unless you have a feat that turns everyone into a watcher/tracker, then you are mistaken. The standard scum nightkill happens at

night

. It does not happen during the Melee Phase. We will not know when scum are using it.

I didn't assume you were ignorant because you hadn't posted. I assumed you were ignorant because your post shows you don't understand the game mechanics.

If they kill us during the day we will find out and swiftly lynch them.

Explain how this works in regards to the following situations:
-Player A and Player B are townies. Player A attacks and kills Player B who flips town.
-Player A is scum and Player B is town. Player A attacks and kills Player B who flips town.

I assume you aren't proposing we lynch all "hammer" attacks.

...so, he lurks, he suggests the most anti-town stratagy possible, he declares he's going to go off on his own and hurt people, and you declare him town for it?

Good post. Grover makes no sense. KY sounds like he's looking for an excuse to abandon reason for the nonsense.

@Tajo-
If I didn't push TM, then he would have coasted by with no attention and he probably would have posted a third as frequently. His posts are exclusively reactionary attempts to confuse and drop attention.

@TM-
I read your post as:
-"Nuh-uh"
-Random stuff to sow more confusion.
-Let me know if you think you posted something relevant.

@Grover/TM-

there's an obvious pitfall in the fact that actual majority is not needed to lynch someone, just relative majority.

A relative majority (plurality) could control a lynch. However, you're hiding the worse problem that a minority could plausibly overrule a majority. This doesn't require an entire scum team piling on. Most games of mafia naturally weed out candidates until there are only 2-3 main suspects.

A targets AC values can change the expected damage per attack drastically, as can an attacker's Attack or Damage bonuses. We aren't all equal in this game.

ex. A player with improved crit as a feat and a STR bonus of +2 or +3, could solo-lynch a target in a single Melee Phase. Such a player is equivalent to 3-4 players who have low STR and/or non-attack related feats.

[farside22]

I'm really sorry to do this but I'm finding it difficult to get into this game.
It's more complicate then I'm ready for at this time.

Mod: my appologize but please replace me.

[TonyMontana]

@Tajo-
If I didn't push TM, then he would have coasted by with no attention and he probably would have posted a third as frequently. His posts are exclusively reactionary attempts to confuse and drop attention.

How do you know how I would spend my time, if I didn't spend it answering/rebutting you?

@TM-
I read your post as:
-"Nuh-uh"
-Random stuff to sow more confusion.
-Let me know if you think you posted something relevant.

I'm quite happy to take this segment as a kind of capitulation.

ex. A player with improved crit as a feat and a STR bonus of +2 or +3, could solo-lynch a target in a single Melee Phase. Such a player is equivalent to 3-4 players who have low STR and/or non-attack related feats.

Do you think this is likely?

Hold on, let me let you answer:

-My understanding (based on my role + mod clarifications) is that it could take multiple melee phases to arrive at a successful lynch.

So we might need multiple phases to get someone lynched, or someone might roll 12 perfect rolls, and end it in a couple of turns?

[TonyMontana]

EBWOP

@Tajo-
If I didn't push TM, then he would have coasted by with no attention and he probably would have posted a third as frequently. His posts are exclusively reactionary attempts to confuse and drop attention.

How do you know how I would spend my time, if I didn't spend it answering/rebutting you?

@TM-
I read your post as:
-"Nuh-uh"
-Random stuff to sow more confusion.
-Let me know if you think you posted something relevant.

I'm quite happy to take this segment as a kind of capitulation.

[Yosarian2]

Have you read the game we linked with similar features and how damage spread lead to the town loss?

I did. That game was different.

First of all, the scum's damage was secret. Second of all, their damage was limited.

I totally disagree with Yosarian's claim that "scum will kill us all day and all night". If they kill us during the day we will find out and swiftly lynch them.

Did you miss the game rules?

If the scum have more hitpoints then us in endgame, WE CAN'T LYNCH THEM. They'd be able to "race" us, damage wise, and win, EVEN IF WE KNOW WHO THEY ARE, and even during the day. Or, if both town and scum are badly hurt at endgame, scum can just kill town in a single attack and win, because once someone dies, the day is over, and then scum get another chance to kill. That's the whole point.

That's why we can't afford to damage people haphazardly; town hit points are a vital resource, and if we want to endgame to actually be determined by town lynches instead of scum being able to just force kills, we CAN NOT allow ANYONE to fly off the handle and just start hurting people.

Now, I'm going to ask you this one last time. Are you going to do the pro-town thing here and help us keep the damage focused on one person at a time, or do we have to speedlynch your ass before you can hurt the town too badly?

[Yosarian2]

Note Yosarian's "I have been more active than you therefore you are more scum than me" fallacy.

No, I never said that. More active does not mean more pro-town. On the other hand, lurking, like you've been doing, is a great scumtell.

Here's how I see it: Head honcho Yosarian and a couple others try to take advantage of the town by controlling all the lynches, claiming that it's for the sake of unity while mislynching us one by one until the scum take over. Is that a fairly accurate description? Yes, yes it is.

Do you really not understand why it would be incredibly bad for the town to spread their damage around, or are you just pretending not to in order to create an excuse so you can act in an anti-town way?

[Kast]

@TM-
You aren't reading carefully.

We aren't all equal in this game.

If we lynch a player with high AC, it will likely take more than one melee phase. If we lynch a player with low AC, it will probably take a single melee phase (~dozen attacks).

Individual players who have bonus to Attack, Damage, or both have more control of the lynch.
-A player with the improved crit feat (double critical threat range) and +3 STR bonus could roll mediocre rolls and kill a player in a single melee phase.

Attack1: 2d20-17,12
Damage1: 2d6+6 - 2,3 = 11
Attack 2: 2d20-18,13
Damage2: 2d6+6 - 4,3 = 13

-A player with Defense-oriented feats and stats would have to roll perfectly to match it.

Attack1: 2d20-19,12
Damage1: 2d6+0 - 6,6 = 12
Attack 2: 2d20-19,12
Damage2: 2d6+0 - 6,6 = 12

-Without crits, it would take 4 players with perfect damage rolls to match

If we only attack a single target, then differences in stats don't matter. If multiple players are being attacked, then the different Defender and Attacker stats drastically alter the dynamics of the lynch and allow minority lynches.

[Kirbyoshi]

Well, this is kind of embarrassing. I reread the thread, and Tony has done a better job of defending himself than I thought.

Unvote

Do we have someone keeping track of the votes? If not, I'll keep track of them, but I'll need everyone, in their next post, to tell me if they're voting, and who they're voting for.

[TonyMontana]

If we only attack a single target, then differences in stats don't matter. If multiple players are being attacked, then the different Defender and Attacker stats drastically alter the dynamics of the lynch and allow minority lynches.

I see your point, even though I think you might be playing the worst case scenario in terms of someone managing a solo lynch.

I have no intention of deviating from a MC today anyway.

[TonyMontana]

In fact with an actual Majority choice, i'd consider blanket punishment of rogues

[Grover]

Yos: I do see the point a bit more now. As I have said previously, this is not a dynamic that I'm used to. That being said, I do think that someone may see something that the rest of us might not be able to. That is not a bad thing necessarily.

[Kast]

@TM-
-Why would you support punishing rogues if there is an actual majority but not support it if there are 6 players voting for a single target?
-I dislike the notion of players deciding whether to support an MC lynch after seeing who is on the table to be lynched.

@Grover-
Agreed that it is not a bad thing if someone sees something the rest don't. It's actually great and whoever sees that thing should share it. However, it is unnecessary and potentially harmful to permit him to make a rogue attack.
-If a single attacker can't affect the lynch, then he doesn't need to attack.
-If a single attacker can affect the lynch, then allowing townies also allows scum, and that is not good.

[Nuwen]

Hey Shea, how are you handling damage reports? Will we find out who is at health-x after every sent action, or are you waiting for the end of the melee phase to report damage?

Will damage be reported at all?

[Snow_Bunny]

Kirby, why do you think drow is scum? Just wondering.

Yos earned townie status in my list.

[Kirbyoshi]

@Snow: I think drow's 325 pretty much sums up why she's scummy. I pointed out why her argument was invalid, and I was willing to let it go on the basis of a misunderstanding, and she comes back with "you're still scum". It's come to the point now where I don't care if people think it's OMGUS: if people are attacking me with non-existent or already-refuted points, I'm gonna find them scummy.

[TonyMontana]

@TM-
-Why would you support punishing rogues if there is an actual majority but not support it if there are 6 players voting for a single target?
-I dislike the notion of players deciding whether to support an MC lynch after seeing who is on the table to be lynched.

I said I would support

blanket

punishment with actual majority. It's a matter of enforcability to me. A majority have the authority to judge minority. I'd discourage rogue activity, and threat of persecution should discourage it as well.
I also think we should strive for a simple majority.

What happened to the idea of timelimit, btw?

As for your second point, I certainly don't support people to do as they please given no majority. It should be said, that any person is always in the minority if they play on their own team.

[Kirbyoshi]

What happened to the idea of timelimit, btw?

I know, really. Today should be chamber day, but we're still waiting for something to be posted about Yos.

@mod: What up with that?

[Kast]

-Our mod doesn't seem to check the site that frequently; all my PMs take a day or two before he checks them. He could also be searching for replacements before entering Melee Phase.

I suggest treating it like an extension and making use of the bonus time. Also Yosarian2 may want to submit back-up orders in case mod suddenly jumps in and ends this turn.

-Whoever is making vote lists, my vote is still on TM. Anyone who isn't voting, please either vote or give a reason for your abstinence.