Mini 902: Pick your Poison 4 (Game over!)

[Patrick]

Votecount

Yosarian2 (1) -- farside22
Riceballtail (4) -- Sajin, Yosarian2, ortolan, Anon
chamber (1) -- Riceballtail
CooLDoG (3) -- Porochaz, chamber, Leech
Leech (1) -- scotmany12

Not voting: CallMeLiam, CooLDoG
12 alive, 7 to lynch.

[Porochaz]

We hypoclaim. We protect who we want. This may mean that we have repeating people. It worked in pyp2 and I cant really seeing it not working here.

[Riceballtail]

We hypoclaim. We protect who we want. This may mean that we have repeating people. It worked in pyp2 and I cant really seeing it not working here.

I do have to agree with the merits behind having multiple protections on a person, but I also have to agree that scum are probably going to target town that they know won't be protected anyway. I'm not sure which is better between free choices, or trying to make sure we have people spread out. I'll probably go read pyp2 first.

[Porochaz]

does that matter? I see cop as an information role, which I think is more important than it as a doc role.

[Porochaz]

weak doc even

[Yosarian2]

(shrug) Hypoclaiming certainly can work, I've seen it work, but I've also seen it backfire and I think it's less likely to work then the alternative. I also think weak doc is not really a good role to do hypoclaiming with, even though, yes, I have seen it work in the past.

[scotmany12]

Hypoclaiming cop is pointless due to sanity issues and godfather. Weak doctor is an investigative role more than it is a protective role. There is no point in not hypoclaiming it.

[Yosarian2]

Hypoclaiming cop is pointless due to sanity issues and godfather. Weak doctor is an investigative role more than it is a protective role. There is no point in not hypoclaiming it.

Of course weak doc is an investigative role. The point in not hypoclaiming it is that when you hypoclaim it, it's unlikely it'll live long enough to do many investigations. The scum will be able to rule out a lot of possible weak docs by the hypoclaiming, and with that plus a role cop, they're likely to find and kill the weak doc very early if we hypoclaim.

[scotmany12]

Except it doesn't work in clearing innocents because of the godfather. And if we don't hypoclaim and the weak doctor is night killed or protects the scum before releasing any information, we lose all of that forever. Not hypoclaiming will hurt us if we have a weak doc.

[Yosarian2]

Except it doesn't work in clearing innocents because of the godfather.

(shrug) "Person X is either town or the godfather" is still a pretty useful piece of information, and it's all the information we're going to get from the weak doc anyway, hypoclaim or no, unless the weak doc targets a scum and dies. Which the weak doc should be trying to avoid, in any case.

[farside22]

finished my reread of things. I have some questions and thoughts on things:
sajin post 7: why ask people what they would pick as mafia and not answer the question yourself.
Leech post 11: you state that GF is a standard role if there is no cop or vig. How can you say that with the idea that a weak doc or mason basically can believe they are town if targeted?
scot post 16: How is RB worse the GF in regards to messing with roles?
anon post 18: I really prefer scum to be able to hit a power role instead of having a scumbag hidden in fake confirmed status. Interestinly enough I noticed you never voted on anything
scot post 21: You realize the only way vengeful works is if we do have a vig in the game.
cooldog pst 26: After reading the roles your still in favor of vengeful but did you actually read the comments in the game discussing the theory?
sajin said: Weak doctor can still find a godfather, etc. 2nd choice.
Disagree:
Godfather wrote:
You are a Godfather. Any cop investigations against you will show the opposite of their expected result, and any nightkills against you will fail. Further, if a masoniser tries to recruit you, they will succeed, in the same way they would if you were a protown player. Lastly, you have the option of allowing a weak doctor to protect you and still survive; you can use this on any night by PMing me.

Ort post 39: Why do you feel vengeful is an obvious choice to give the mafia?
chamber post 48: just regurgitates what he said earlier and not offering anything else to the convo.
cooldog post 50: contradicts his post 26 and backtracks a bit
RBT post 53: post is meh just nothing to really back up with an actual POV
yos post 56: I found this too in my thoughts about GF/RB and didn't like that combo at all.
cooldog post 58: feels like a weak post with a me too kind of feel.
poro post 59: doesn't want GF but doesn't offer any alternative.
por post 60: did you read pyp3? Did you really think that BAM was the only reason that role worked well for the scum?
RBT post 63: Why the need to ask others for their pick on roles given? Why withhold your thoughts on what works best?
cool post 73: I really don't like this post he is asking about rc with ven or RB talk about a horrid combo
scotmay post 82: Not sure why you had to give it more thought as you stated earlier you were coming to terms with it. Care to explain?
chamber post 85: I get what he's saying her about the rc vs rb but I think having a rb/gf just messes more with investigations
cooldog post 144: This post really confuses me.
RBT post 146: How do you think that chamber answering the question helps the town?
poro post 164: Did you think cool was the only person to have a happy stance in the talks earlier?
RBT post 165: Who claimed scum?
Leech post 173: Did you not that cooldog is saying this off of RBT's comment that someone claimed scum?
ort post 174: excusing people based on meta is not something I'm a fan of.
I should be saying the same thing to scot on this and I don't get why people defend others using meta.
cooldog post 181: Is it just me or is this just not making sense. see the chamber doesn't explain stuff to the town and acts like this alot but leaning chamber scum based on pregame talks Huh?
scot post 199: Who do you think is scum?
yosi post 207: I have to say this is my concern with the hypo claiming but I can see not doing it doesn't help the town either. It's a double edge sword.


So far things that just strike me as scum. cooldog seems to be latching onto things for weak reason (see post 181) things like this just make no sense.
RBT saying chamber is scum for not answering questions. I don't get this case at all and his intial post after the pregame looks like rolefishing.
scot had some decent pre-game comments but so far today all I have seen from him is questions with no follow through or scum hunting involved.
poro bothers me for some reason I can't put my finger on. Part of it was it delayed I disagree with GF comments. I wish I could explain further I will just leave this with gut for now.
As for yos I can't say we agree with each other on the subject and I still feel he is using the well you had a worse combo then mine just seems like someone brushing a case off of themselves without having to go further into it.

My top 4 scum picks are: RBT, cool and scot at the moment. With yos as someone I find highly questionable thus far.

unvote:
vote: RBT

[scotmany12]

scot post 199: Who do you think is scum?

So you missed my post where I voted leech for his horrible vote on Cooldog and then voted for him, which also said im suspicious of ortolan?

scot post 16: How is RB worse the GF in regards to messing with roles?
scot post 21: You realize the only way vengeful works is if we do have a vig in the game.

I very much expect the scum to have given us the vig as its a double edge sword so to speak. And I hate scum roleblockers from a town perspective.

scotmay post 82: Not sure why you had to give it more thought as you stated earlier you were coming to terms with it. Care to explain?

Coming to terms with it does not mean I came to terms with it. I'm still not that happy with the godfather due to how it affects whatever investigative roles we might have.

I should be saying the same thing to scot on this and I don't get why people defend others using meta.

If chamber's play is that he doesn't give reasoning, regardless of his role, then its a null tell when he does it. Meta's are very valuable. Some people do the same things as scum and town, some people play both extremely different, etc.

[farside22]

@ scot: Sorry I missed the vote. I think I looked at one page and saw no vote from you and blink it's there.

If chamber's play is that he doesn't give reasoning, regardless of his role, then its a null tell when he does it. Meta's are very valuable. Some people do the same things as scum and town, some people play both extremely different, etc.

If it's a null tell how does it get why does it seem you are excusing his behavior in this comment:

First off, chamber doesn't like reasoning. I haven't played with him a lot but I'm pretty sure he doesn't give a lot of reasoning. Also, no one ever called you scum, just that your post was scummy. People think you are scummy because you are confident that one of chamber and farside is scum off of literally NOTHING.

[scotmany12]

I'm not sure what you are trying to say. It's his playstyle. I don't like it, but it isn't scummy for him to do it.

[farside22]

I'm not sure what you are trying to say. It's his playstyle. I don't like it, but it isn't scummy for him to do it.

I'm asking if he is this way all the time isn't it a null tell then? Why are you excusing it if it is a null tell?

[scotmany12]

I'm not sure what you are trying to say. It's his playstyle. I don't like it, but it isn't scummy for him to do it.

I'm asking if he is this way all the time isn't it a null tell then? Why are you excusing it if it is a null tell?

You are literally making no sense right now.

[Leech]

Leech post 11: you state that GF is a standard role if there is no cop or vig. How can you say that with the idea that a weak doc or mason basically can believe they are town if targeted?

Because at the time of posting that, I hadn't paid enough attention to the roles offered. Also, when I see "Weak Doc" I really don't see that as an investigative role. The only way it works, is if everyone does a hypo claim, which I really don't see the benefit of, as in my eyes it could cause more confusion. Someone's mentioned that tactic nailed scum in a previous game, but how often does that happen? Let's look at it, if everyone does a hypo-claim, obviously someone's going to die in the night, baring a lucky doc proection, which would mean that a weak doc would have two deaths. Add in a potential Vig, and the weak doc could have died from protection, mafia hit, or a Vig kill.

I see the use of that role being better served as a pure protection, rather than an investigative in this game. Also, as someone noted, if one of us does hypo-claim that we'd protect scum, and we survive, that narrows down who the weak doc actually is. I don't like that idea at all. It may have worked in the past, but that doesn't mean it won't backfire on us this time.

Leech post 173: Did you not that cooldog is saying this off of RBT's comment that someone claimed scum?

That may have been what he said, but I highly doubt that's what he meant. Obviously no one claimed scum in this thread. I'm pretty sure more than one person would have noticed that. Much like how you wrote "not" instead of "note" I'm pretty sure he meant "if someone claimed scum". I actually find it interesting how many people are pushing that issue when I see it as a clear mistype.

[farside22]

I'm not sure what you are trying to say. It's his playstyle. I don't like it, but it isn't scummy for him to do it.

I'm asking if he is this way all the time isn't it a null tell then? Why are you excusing it if it is a null tell?

You are literally making no sense right now.

how am I not making sense?
You say it's his play style. I take that to mean no matter his allignment he plays the same way so isn't that a null tell?

[scotmany12]

I'm not sure what you are trying to say. It's his playstyle. I don't like it, but it isn't scummy for him to do it.

I'm asking if he is this way all the time isn't it a null tell then? Why are you excusing it if it is a null tell?

You are literally making no sense right now.

how am I not making sense?
You say it's his play style. I take that to mean no matter his allignment he plays the same way so isn't that a null tell?

Yes, that's what I have been saying.

[farside22]

I'm not sure what you are trying to say. It's his playstyle. I don't like it, but it isn't scummy for him to do it.

I'm asking if he is this way all the time isn't it a null tell then? Why are you excusing it if it is a null tell?

You are literally making no sense right now.

how am I not making sense?
You say it's his play style. I take that to mean no matter his allignment he plays the same way so isn't that a null tell?

Yes, that's what I have been saying.

Okay well I thought I read your comment as excusing his behavior to RBT in regards to his lack of comments.

[chamber]

Sorry about being abscent, try to not let that happen again.

I'm not sure what you are trying to say. It's his playstyle. I don't like it, but it isn't scummy for him to do it.

I'm asking if he is this way all the time isn't it a null tell then? Why are you excusing it if it is a null tell?

You are literally making no sense right now.

how am I not making sense?
You say it's his play style. I take that to mean no matter his allignment he plays the same way so isn't that a null tell?

Yes, that's what I have been saying.

Okay well I thought I read your comment as excusing his behavior to RBT in regards to his lack of comments.

How are "treating it like a null tell"(paraphrased) and "Excusing my behavior" not the same thing? I think that's where Scot was having issues. It's certainly where I'm having issues.

[farside22]

Sorry about being abscent, try to not let that happen again.

I'm not sure what you are trying to say. It's his playstyle. I don't like it, but it isn't scummy for him to do it.

I'm asking if he is this way all the time isn't it a null tell then? Why are you excusing it if it is a null tell?

You are literally making no sense right now.

how am I not making sense?
You say it's his play style. I take that to mean no matter his allignment he plays the same way so isn't that a null tell?

Yes, that's what I have been saying.

Okay well I thought I read your comment as excusing his behavior to RBT in regards to his lack of comments.

How are "treating it like a null tell"(paraphrased) and "Excusing my behavior" not the same thing? I think that's where Scot was having issues. It's certainly where I'm having issues.

I don't see how it's the same thing.
I see this in my mind: Say I say the following. Chamber is like this no matter his alignmentt (this i see as a null tell) it's hard to say how to read him.
When I see this from scot in regards to RBT concern:

First off, chamber doesn't like reasoning. I haven't played with him a lot but I'm pretty sure he doesn't give a lot of reasoning

I see this as an excuse for his behavoir. Not a reprimand more like eh what are you going to do about it type thing

[scotmany12]

Is farside really trying to argue semantics right now?

[Sajin]

EBWOP: Of course no two people should protect the same person.

What is the reasoning for this?



@Yossiran- a vengeful would kill a protown person 66 percent of the time? Uh....

1- You brought up doctors protections as a reason to not have one, and then you do not factor them in when your talking about it again.

You do not consider Vig kills nor the fact that 2 kills happening on the same night (when town knows its about to happen too!) increases chances for a successful protection as well.

Your clearly using the facts that benefit the one small point your trying to make at that particular moment. I am debating whether or not I should find this a scum tell for you or if it is just shrewd arguing. Care to enlighten me?

66% of the time just meant that there was a 1/3 chance that the vengeful scum would be the last scum person left, and therefore wouldn't get a kill.

It's not really that likely that he gets either vigged or doc protected; the odds of a doc or weak doc stopping any given kill is quite small (There has to be a doc who's still alive at that point, the scum has to not target the doc, and then if there's, say, 9 people left it's still just a 1/8 chance) and the idea of counting on a vig that might not even exist to kill one specific scum before we lynch that scum sounds like a really bad idea to me. But you're right, there is a chance he tries to kill and fails, or gets vigged, and that actually lowers the odds a bit. (not much, IMHO, but a bit)

Of course, there's also a chance he intentionally gets himself lynched at a key moment, doing a "jester strike" to get himself lynched instead of a scumbuddy or in lynch or lose, which then raises the odds again.

I'm really not sure why we're still arguing about this, considering that everyone already agreed that giving the scum vengeful was a bad idea and we already made our decision. Also, I'm not sure why you're grilling me on this when I've already explained all of this in exhausting detail back when we actually WERE making this decision. If you thought vengeful was a good idea, you should have made that argument BEFORE we picked the power roles, not now.

You completely dodged the point of my question.

Let me restate it so you do not do so again:

I am accusing you of manipulating the facts in order to get the town to vote a certain role.

To argue against the vengeful (as pointed out in the above mentioned paraphrase), you do not factor in doc protections (nor vig killing the vengeful). Yet earlier one of the main points you posted against the vengeful was:

We could get on "odd numbers" with:

-A vig
-A doctor
-or A weak doctor.

If a town role prevents a kill, or a vig makes a kill, then we end up on odd numbers.

The above shows that you thought town power roles could mitigate the effect a vengeful would have. In one case you used the existence of power roles to support your role choice and then later you do not factor them in.

I am saying that your changing your arguments about the potential effects of roles to benefit your stance. Do you agree or disagree?

unvote; Vote: Yosarian

Additionally:

I'm really not sure why we're still arguing about this, considering that everyone already agreed that giving the scum vengeful was a bad idea and we already made our decision. Also, I'm not sure why you're grilling me on this when I've already explained all of this in exhausting detail back when we actually WERE making this decision. If you thought vengeful was a good idea, you should have made that argument BEFORE we picked the power roles, not now.

Why should we not use that discussion now? Its all a mute point? No. I find your manipulation of the role choice scummy sir. You say everyone was against the vengeful? I was arguing pro vengeful in almost every post.

@Farsides direct questions. I did not post my thoughts in order to gauge everyone else's responses. I know I had reasoned out what choices I would have made as scum in addition to what I wanted to see the scum get but I wanted to see others discuss those. Doing so helped my reads. I posted my thoughts shortly after.

In other theme games when I started discussion about theme mechanics everyone just blindly agrees and its completely unhelpful for reads. Controversy and the ability to compare and contrast differences helps in the long run.

2nd question is obvious that I had not read the GF PM close enough.

[farside22]

Is farside really trying to argue semantics right now?

Not really it was just more of a question in regards to your actions and interaction with chamber.
things to point out, things I notice. Interactions that seem strange to me.
Is there a reason not to point out strange interactions between players?