Open 248: Two of Four - Game Over

[Thor665]

Verily doth I confirm.

[Thor665]

Vote: CommieX

He's trying to muscle in on my hammer racket.

(hullo smashbro and charter)

[Thor665]

Unvote: CommieX
Vote: BlakAdder

I see no anagrams, but I hate snakes and like wagons.

If I was a miller I would have already claimed it. Jora is being silly, but I support the plot and him.

[Thor665]

Unvote: BlakAdder
Vote: }|{opa

I like }|{opa or CommieX as the lynch today.

[Thor665]

unvote: Charter
vote: Thor for reckless bandwagoning

Either I'm dumb about what's going on in this game, or you aren't seeing the strategy. Since I'm really full of myself I'll go with the latter rather then the former. Read my below response to see if you have an opinion about this question.

I'm confused. Thor, do you fully understand that CommieX is claimed Miller?

I do understand that. Do you understand that you specifically asked to go last on the Miller claim?

EBWOPreview: *sigh* Okay, maybe I'm the one not being opaque enough - here's how I see it.

}|{opa requests Miller claims. Also requests that he goes last.
This is rather pointless unless he is either the Miller himself or is scum looking to get onto a Miller claim.
You claim Miller.
(though this is a new development - he now hasn't counterclaimed you)
Why would he want to claim last if he wasn't the Miller hoping to catch scum?
Solid scumtell at this stage.
You're on the line because all Miller claims need extra attention.

[Thor665]

EBWOPreview: *sigh* Okay, maybe I'm the one not being

opaque

enough - here's how I see it.

Freudian slip for the win!

[Thor665]

Why did you wish to claim last then?

Your avoidance of the question and attempt to quick dismiss my accusation is noted in my little black book of scum, I shall title it "How I caught }|{opa".

Do you actually believe CommieX is strong town tell? You initially almost seemed more bewildered that I pointed him out as a second suspect then you were that I targeted you with a vote. What's up with that?

[Thor665]

@edmund.angles - terrible vote is terrible.

@}|{opa - why the vote on charter? Do you agree with edmund's "logic" for voting charter?

I'll admit I like how }|{opa was willing to and able to explain why CommieX was likely town. I'm a little concerned that he understands that sort of role interaction logic and seems utterly baffled by my case on him.
CommieX is town.
charter is about what I'd expect charter to be - will advance a slight townish vibe thus far but that might just be because he's agreeing with me and I'm easy to appease .
BlakAdder is talking a lot but is actually not saying much yet. Need more before read forms.
}|{opa is newbie. Not certain on whether he's newbie scum or town yet. Leaning scum still, his defense is odd and a bit of a mish-mash and he's lashing out at everything right now - hard to get clear reads.
edmund is pretty anti-town already, and acts proud about it, would be willing to consider his lynch.

EBWOPreview - charter is in my brain, stealing my ideas and posting them before I can.

@}|{opa - you really don't think that if the very last person to claim said 'Miller' that town wouldn't be a little suspicious of that one? You have logic, but it's not that great. Why not just let the Miller claim on their own? Why did you try to set up the Miller claim in a fashion which placed you as the final claim?

[Thor665]

I will also note that }|{opa is at L-1 right now.

Because late arriving players "accidentally" hammering is no fun for anyone.

Prepare to be tunneled if you do.

@BlakAdder - what are your thoughts on smashbro's play thus far?
@}|{opa - if you think I'm reckless then be prepared for true, full acceleration, no regard, Mafia when you play with some of the actually reckless people on this site.

The word you're looking for isn't 'drifting'.
It's 'following'.
On this site people often call it 'sheeping' or 'being a sheep' because it suggests the person is following the herd without thinking for themselves.

BlakAdder actually didn't follow onto the vote wagon I started and charter sheeped onto, so why do you see him as suspicious enough to be a lynch today? By your logic his unvote of me was weak, but you think I'm more likely to be town so scum wouldn't have a lot of reason to quickly unvote town for a weak reason, would they?

[Thor665]

@}|{opa - what is it you didn't say?

Here's where you suggest BA as a lynch option for today.

I say that it'll be the best for town to vote for one of the pair (BlakAdder, charter) and check (if we have a Cop or Blocker) one of the pair (edmund.angles, smashbro_of_the_SSS) or to do exactly the same but in a reverse order.

Here's where you call me more likely town.

So, let's return to our muttons. I assumed that Thor665 too bold for a scum .

Here's where you not how BA's unvote of me is suspicious.

BlakAdder doing apprehensive play. And I highly suspect him from the moment when he unvoted at the post 26. The manner of that was so hastily and seems so scummy.

Why is his unvote of me suspicious if you think I'm likely to be town?

[Thor665]

You and Thor (calling me "anti-town") can't tolerate people not accepting your logic.

I called you anti-town for setting up a policy lynch system in your first post. It had nothing to do with whether or not you agree with me about my scumtells.

edmund is pretty anti-town already, and acts proud about it, would be willing to consider his lynch.

@Thor: Do you truely have two people you are willing to lynch on page 2? And why do you alert scum to who you could be convinced to lynch.

Yes, I have two people I'm willing to lynch by page 2. I also had two people (counting myself) that I wasn't willing to lynch. Take issue with my logic for those conclusions or don't - but taking issue with the *speed* of them? I'm pretty sure scum are capable of figuring out who will or won't be a mislynch possibility. Also, if I don't talk about who I suspect then I'd be hiding my reads. I consider hiding reads to be more scummy then announcing them so scum can read them.

And I am also suspicious of people who talks a lot but don't put down votes

What about people who continually put down votes while clearly stating it is for policy reasons and not saying whether or not they find the people they are voting to be scummy?
Also, not voting for people they consider scummy and instead policy voting someone they don't call scummy...
I want everyone to remember this maneuver if }|{opa flips scum - I will.

I'll add edmund to my definitely willing to lynch today pile. I think he or }|{opa are looking like prime material. Does anyone have any meta knowledge on edmund? His wiki link is gakked up)

Those of you I don't have a read on yet should get in here and claim scum or town to speed things up.
CommieX - you're almost assuredly town, we need more input from you.

[Thor665]

@charter - your read on edmund?
@BA - why would you rather lynch }|{opa then edmund?
@smashbro - what's your current case on edmund?
@edmund - what's the current case on charter?

Prior to a hammer I'd like to hear back from CommieX at least once and would like to hear my above questions answered - we have a lot of players who've only commented on the }|{opa wagon thus far, I'd like to spread the love around slightly.

[Thor665]

Now if I my ask you a counter-question, why do you think

edmund's argument

}|{opa's plan

for the miller massclaim was so supsicious? You and I both went along with the idea until CommieX claimed miller, then you suddenly thought the plan was highly scummy. Penny for your thoughts?

Made an adjustment to your post to reflect what I think you were actually asking and will answer the question as it now stands. If I'm wrong then please rephrase the question.

I went along with }|{opa's plan because at the time he first announced it the logic was he was either Miller or scum, a 50% chance that he was a town power role meant he was well worth supporting in the initiative.
As soon as CommieX claimed Miller it recast the entire situation of why }|{opa had suggested the plan the way he had.
I sort of feel this was already made clear last time I explained it.

As a general note about edmund - I have no desire to see him lynched for either buddying with }|{opa or having issues with my scum tell on }|{opa. I want to lynch him for being open with anti-town policy and setting up a scum smokescreen for his later use.

[Thor665]

First of all: suspicious=scummy in my vocabulary.

The way you used them seems to suggest you weren't using them as synonyms to me.

opa is

scummy

, mostly because he was willing to lie, but he is already at L-1.
And I am also

suspicious

of people who talks a lot but don't put down votes,

Were you using suspicious instead of scummy just to use some different words in the post? It looks like you intended them to mean different things - that's why you used different words.

I consider hiding reads to be more scummy then announcing them so scum can read them.

True, but announcing two people you are definitely willing to lynch at the beginning of the day is taking the disclosure too far IMO.

Haven't you done the same thing with BlakAdder and }|{opa and maybe charter? That's three people.
Where are you drawing the distinction between stating suspicion and stating willingness to lynch?
It's not scummy to announce willingness to lynch players - that's how the game is played.

Thanks for the meta - will look it over.

[Thor665]

Bleh - edmund's "I like to lynch lurkers" strategy is obvious in his most recent game and equally ingrained in his early first game. Withdraw suspicion on that point though I will add to edmund that I believe the open declaration should come out of his meta right now - that's terrible meta to have for your town game and is only helpful for a scum game. Handle lurker policy lynches on a case by case and don't pre set-up a 'LOL, I'll lynch lurkers' excuse for end of day - if for some reason you need to vote a lurker at the end of the day just say so *then*.

Edmund goes back to neutral for me with some scummish vibes, there's still some oddities with his BA vote and I couldn't find meta to justify them.

[Thor665]

I thought your plan was to wait till 9 unless someone requested you not to - which I sorta explicitly did.

[Thor665]

}|{opa - do you see edmund as town for any particular reason?

Why do you think charter or smashboro are partners to BA?

[Thor665]

First off, your avatar immediately under mine creeps me out for the similarities.

Second off, if you are town that was sloppily done and I am not fond of it. It wasn't a good pro-town play.

[Thor665]

Hmmm, interesting play.

What do you think we've learned from it?

Also, you really didn't answer either of my last questions.

Okay, well now you did. Not that well, but you did.

[Thor665]

@Thor: Could you explain a little better why you thought my vote was anti-town play?

BA: Imma hammah soonz unless someone sez different!
Thor: Oh n0ez! Need readz on more playhas, wait till they answer these pl0x!
BA: Vote: Hammah!
Thor:

What part of stifling the conversation and not doing what you said you'd do strikes you as pro-town exactly?

[Thor665]

Is that sarcasm or are you being serious? It doesn't translate well in written form.

If it's sarcasm I will note that you are the one who asked me to delve into why it was anti-town, either address the points or accept the ding - sarcasm is just an avoidance technique in this situation.
If it was an actual apology ::shrug:: just learn from it. I don't actually need or wish for an apology.

[Thor665]

The more I think about it the more I support massclaim today.

We're actually in the day before LYLO already.

We have two confirmable town in the game. Gives everyone who isn't a PR (3 townies) a 50/50 of hitting scum today. Does anyone see any logic as to why this isn't a good idea?

[Thor665]

As }|{opa just pointed out..

and actually he earns a

Unvote: }|{opa

for this as we discuss it.

...but as he pointed out our best case scenario is a cop who claims a guilty result tomorrow - but all scum needs to do is have either member declare cop and suddenly we're in a 50/50 chance to lose the game tomorrow.

We can pretty much get a 50/50 today to lynch scum via having two confirmed townies. The RB's power is still just as useful via action resolution. Doc is, in this setup, now just a weak roleblocker. Basically I think two confirmed town is stronger then possible power role antics tomorrow.

[Thor665]

That's two against massclaim, and I'll note that I tend to think they're both being silly. We already have one PR revealed and the gain of one confirmed town now will be more potent then the possible gain of a cop investigation or roleblock tomorrow as it will also preclude scum WIFOM antics around those claims which, if we mislynch today, is exactly what will happen.

For massclaim

Thor
BlakAdder
}|{opa

Against massclaim

CommieX
edmund

@ }|{opa - Seriously, a self hammer? You better be scum running a gambit or I'll never want to play with you again.

[Thor665]

Yeah, and?

Tell you what, how about you explain to me how you voting for a player you know is town is helpful to the town and then I'll bother explaining why self-votes are anti-town.

[Thor665]

And if you're bored enough to want out of the game request replacement - that's what replacements are for.

[Thor665]

@ }|{opa - if you're angry and want to be lynched - why do you want the person who is going to hammer you to wait five hours?

[Thor665]

Meh, I guess FMPOV a massclaim pays off if opa flips town, but not massclaiming turns out better if he flips scum.

I would actually phrase it - no massclaim is *dangerous* if he flips town, and it's fine if he flips scum.

Power roles in this setup, in my opinion, are most powerful as confirmed towns - we don't really have enough days to make the "value" of their various powers shine through.

[Thor665]

Another way to look at it - we have a town power called massclaim - it will confirm two town roles but only if used day one.

Why wouldn't you use that?

[Thor665]

@}|{opa - seriously dude - play to the win condition. You acting like this because of the shocking and strange situation that is getting lynched in a game of mafia is really weird. Replace out if you aren't having fun, and if you are having fun play the game to help your team win. You've even expressed support of massclaim but at the same time are moping around and trying to get yourself hammered. That is weak.

Tell you what, after massclaim I'll come and hammer you - promise. Now please be quiet or replace out.

[Thor665]

We're actually in the day before LYLO already.

Btw. I think this is could be a scum slip.

...do you know what an open setup is?

[Thor665]

We in LyLo if we lynch a town today. Where you get that I'm townie from? IIRC it's been you who first sayed that I'm a scum.

Oh, my bad, I didn't realize I had to be 100% certain before I voted for someone and called them scum. Won't make that mistake again.

[Thor665]

@edmund - the best massclaim can get us today is a 1/2. Basic brain power should get us a 1/3 all by itself. We should have done the claim yesterday when it would have been really useful.

I'm fine for a massclaim today, but frankly unless anyone wants to claim a PR there's no real point for it being 'Mass' at this stage.

IF WE HAVE ANY OTHER PR's PLEASE CLAIM NOW, THAT'S ALL THAT MATTERS.

CommieX is town
I'm town.

BA, charter, and edmund have two scum amongst them. I'm not really surprised that they're all the votes for the lynch yesterday. I sorta suspect BA and edmund the most just since they were the conversation squelchers on the massclaim discussion. I want to re-glance at that BA/}|{opa "hammer" from yesterday, as that was a little odd.

@BA - Is there more to the charter 'case' other then he was quiet?

[Thor665]

@charter Re: massclaim - I don't think you understand the value of a confirmed townie today - which is what massclaim would give us. If smashbro had declared today he wouldn't have been a confirmed town because scum would have counterclaimed and we would have a 50/50 flip to lose. I'll begrudgingly accept that as a cop he was potentially more useful, but the RBer and doc would have been useless and easily CCed.

Re: me getting off }|{opa wagon - I take it then that your presumption is Thorscum got off it in order to get town points for not being on a wagon I started?

We definitely have a decent option in front of us with charter/BA as a choice. For me and edmund we *have* to understand that one of them is scum because we know we aren't and we know CommieX isn't.

charter or BA is the vote for today.

At the moment I'm leaning charter town for reasons I already noted about BA earlier. I still haven't done my re-read yet (I'm lazy - will do it sometime between now and Thursday evening)

[Thor665]

@edmund
@CommieX

Shouldn't need to say this, but let's chat about the options in front of us before anyone votes.

[Thor665]

@Thor: Why the switch from edmund to charter?

Because with charter and BA voting each other they can't both be scum (or they are - and that works out fine as well)
Given that I have three suspects (edmund, charter, BA) having two of them prove they're not partners (charter and BA) lets me know as a fact that there is at least one scum in the pair.
A 1/2 is better then a 1/3.
Therefore we don't lynch edmund today, we lynch either charter or BA since one will be scum and if we lynch wrong it won't matter what edmund is. If we lynch correct we can debate edmund tomorrow.

[Thor665]

@Thor: Why the switch from edmund to charter?

Because with charter and BA voting each other they can't both be scum (or they are - and that works out fine as well)
Given that I have three suspects (edmund, charter, BA) having two of them prove they're not partners (charter and BA) lets me know as a fact that there is at least one scum in the pair.
A 1/2 is better then a 1/3.
Therefore we don't lynch edmund today, we lynch either charter or BA since one will be scum and if we lynch wrong it won't matter what edmund is. If we lynch correct we can debate edmund tomorrow.

I've got to admit, the more I'm thinking about this the more insane and stupid it becomes - simply because it means edmund is the 'gotta be scum' since the only way he's not scum is if BA and charter are buddies.

Vote: edmund.angles

[Thor665]

@CommieX - I am disinclined to vote, because the only way my vote is dangerous is if the scumteam is BA/charter and I don't really believe that pairing is very likely.

In response to edmund's two points about my case;
1. Actually, I didn't ignore this, when you quote me talking about it I'm proven to have considered it - not ignored it. When I voted you I explained my belief on the question. Also, if you think I'm now scum and deserve a vote, then you should AGREE that both of them aren't scum and that should make you unwilling to unvote me since I'm then obvious scum, just as you are to me.
2. ...is this even a scumtell on me or a damaging of my case? My chances for hitting scum are irrelevant? Bwuh?

I'll happily debate the massclaim question with you and charter in post game. Your duality of opinion is noted for consideration tomorrow. In more seriousness, I've explained why I believe it to be a good reason and now because you two disagree with me suddenly it's a scumtell? Meh, by the sheer fact you agreed with it yesterday it ought to be an equal scumtell on you - hell, by you noticing and reversing your previous position I don't understand why it should make you look any better/worse then me. Also, the first person to bring it up was the now confirmed vanilla townie, which means that massclaim talk was a null tell.

[Thor665]

EBWOP - disinclined to *unvote

[Thor665]

So as a town player your only concern should have been whether your vote made it easier for CommieX to hit scum.

Well...or that I was voting scum, because with all due regard to CommieX I'm not planning to sort of shrug and walk away and go 'he's our only chance, may God guide his vote well.'

Quite the contrary, it had the chance of immediately costing town the victory, had you been town.
Furthermore it fuddles discussion because we now have to consider all players again.
Your vote was anti-town.

I was the one that "narrowed" the choices so we weren't considering all players. Argueably I've narrowed it even more now, since I only wish to consider you.
Why no commentary on charter who is still voting BA? If my vote for you is so anti-town why not mention his continued vote on BA?

Finally - why do you think I'm scum? If it's not the massclaim thing, and it's not your muddled mumblings of narrowing choices why did my vote clarify me as scum to you exactly? Why does this scumtell not apply to BA and/or charter?

[Thor665]

Dude...

Unvote: edmund.angles

Okay, so now we get charter to unvote and...what? Do you have any particular angle of conversation you really want to get going here? Do you really believe that the scum team is charter/BA? Do you think the scumteam is Thor/edmund? Those are the only ways either vote is risky. If you don't want to advance a lynch yet then please advance a conversation angle that's worth having - otherwise I'm wondering why we're unvoting.

[Thor665]

By the way, scum team is obviously not Thor/edmund as otherwise we would have already hammered on charter's vote of BA as we were both on and talking at the same time while that vote was out there. One possible combo down.

[Thor665]

^^^

This means charter's vote on BA is "safe" as the scum team now is obligated to include either charter and BA or one of them - which means it's a vote by scum or a vote on scum or is both.

[Thor665]

Frankly I agree with charter - I think someone on the scumteam noted the potential PR slip. It's the only way to justify not killing you.
I'm not sure how that makes me feel about charter. I know he noticed it.
I think edmund would notice the slip.
My gut feel is that BA wouldn't.

[Thor665]

Remember, FMPOV, you're not clear

Even if I'm not clear, you know I'm not edmund's partner - which means my partner is either BA or charter. The logic is sound from your perspective and was written as such (I hardly need to convince myself I'm not edmund's partner, after all)

[Thor665]

@charter - do you always try to lynch Pie is Good when you play with him?
What's your read on edmund? You said you'd work on that.
Having two of three people unvote is arguably good since, by definition, one of us was wrong in our vote. I have zero issues with you holding your vote since I know one of you and BA is scum.

Why do both you and edmund want CommieX to decide the lynch for today? Yeah, he's proven town - all that means is we don't vote him, it doesn't mean he's gained mystical insight into who is most likely scum. You're being silly.

[Thor665]

It's not a bad strategy. They had to either kill you or the other PR. They certainly couldn't afford to kill anyone else.

@edmund - confirmed town is strong in lylo by limiting choices and being known town votes. Confirmed town is not the magical and only possible way to find scum in lylo.

[Thor665]

How did we get into the BA or charter choice again? To my mind the real question edmund and I should be pursuing is - are BA/charter the scumteam? If we come up with the answer to that our votes are easy to make.

@edmund - you seem to believe both BA and charter are scum, why do you need to hear a response to a case in this situation?

@charter - people are acting as though you've made a case on BA - I agree with him that your case appears to be 'he voted me' if that's a case everyone but CommieX is already guilty of the scumtell. How do you define it as working for him but not being applicable to the other three players?

[Thor665]

And we also know that at least one of BA/charter is scum, but what I want to discuss is since I know my alignment why we shouldn't also be discussing the Thor/edmund angle. If we can clear or indemnify one of Thor/edmund it's as good, if not better than, the BA/charter choice.

I don't think it's that likely, that's why I voted edmund. I've already said this.

[Thor665]

I will admit the more I consider it we (and by we I mean I, though edmund could flip his name for mine) do have this situation;

(charter, BA) edmund

Wherein there is a guarantee of <0 scum within the parenthetical making a choice of charter/BA 50% accuracy whilst the choice of edmund is 33%.
I was applying the logic of 0% chance for <1 within the parenthetical to equate to 100% accuracy for an edmund choice, but I'll admit that's a bit of a gamble.

[Thor665]

Hey, COmmie, if you're around how about you unvote and we still talk more, my presence here and lack of vote helps clarify things even more.

[Thor665]

I'll admit edmund's little list 'o questions twings my towndar - I'm just still so 'meh' on his "Oh guide us ye mighty confirmed townie" thing I'm still a little unsure of him.

@Thor: Tell us who you would prefer to lynch of BlakAdder and Charter and why.

Hard to call. I consider your listing of the reasons either of them are scum to be pretty functionally inclusive, but I think your reasons to clear charter are pretty weak on the whole.
I'd sum up my list more simplistically.

charter is more suspicious because he clearly picked up the smashbro PR hints.
BA is more suspicious because of his awkward hammer attempts yesterday.

I'd probably lean BA as the preference slightly as I think the 'tell' on charter is weaker.
I'm antsy on this one because your lists seem preconceived to paint BA as scummier then charter and I'm not sure how I feel about you yet.

[Thor665]

Sonnuva!

Guess I'll be hopping out of the airlock next. Though maybe now I'll learn if charter was serious about thinking massclaim Day 1 was a terrible idea.

[Thor665]

I will admit maybe the massclaim should have just been "I'm a PR" for optimal town play now that I consider it more, but I still think Day 1 was the time to do it.

[Thor665]

@Thor: I'm a bit confused about what you hoped to achieve by massclaim. Why should we go back on the opa lynch (claimed VT) just because we had 2 confirmed townies. And we(scum) could just kill the PR without any chance of missing.

Well, actually I was coming around to }|{opa being town by the end of Day 1 and wasn't so strong in wanting him lynched.
Massclaim was to help focus town. 2 confirmed townies would have dramatically increased town's chances of lynching scum and the confirmed townies could not have been so functional Day 2 due to scums ability to counterclaim at that stage - hence Day 1 was when we had to do it.

Thor665 - overall good pro-town play, exept vote on me (:roll:) and "lets

vote

for claim" (however "hey, PR, do claim!"-thing good).

I agree that the vote for a PR thing was rough...only took me a few RL days to figure out the better option.
I also puzzled out your townishness, but with 2 scum on you they only needed to convince 2 town, and to be quite honest you were not being as townish as I think you believe you were being. At least for me, when I voted you and for the period I believed you were scum it had *nothing* to do with how active you are, and let me assure you that I have played with very active scum. Personally I'd avoid the angling at maybe false claim play in the future - though I will admit I tend to negatively react towards lying from non-PR town players.

Bah. Oh well, that one was my fault. I should have thought through my actions better before making them. My apologies to the rest of the town.

Most of your actions were fine from my perspective except your overeagerness around the hammer. The near hammer of }|{opa Day 1 was really sketchy looking. You'll get better at explaining your opinions as you play the game more, that's just a newbie aspect that will change with time. Also, just as advice, don't be too excited about being "right" about charter - I was "right" about edmund - but neither of those things mattered because we couldn't get other people to realize we were right. 100% accuracy is meaningless if you can't explain and get others to agree with the read.

@fenchurch - I really liked the compressed play in this game. 2 mislynches and lose is rough for town, but the almost instant acceleration into lylo was really beneficial to me as an education tool. If you run this or similar to it again please consider me /pre-in.

[Thor665]

@edmund - worst I had you doing was two things.

The worst was pretty much noted in my last post - you cases against BA and charter were points I agreed with, but your "clearing" of charter reasons were terribad and that's what got me twigging on you again. Of course, you might have felt the reach was worth it because Commie apparently had such a strong town read on you.

The other thing was I felt awkward about your stated desire to not massclaim Day 1 but to encourage massclaim Day 2. Thing is, that was easily just a opinion difference with no alignment connection so I really wouldn't have pressed too hard on it by itself.

I think the trick with this setup is for PRs to claim PR, but not specific roles - that would make town lynch Day 1 much more accurate and provide scum a risk when it came to Night 1 kills and that would strongly balance the 2mislynch -> lose aspect. Too bad I was only smart enough to figure that all out by about midway through Day 2 - herpy derpy..

[Thor665]

I can see the argument against PR claims, but will note that pointing out how smashbro wasn't likely to be lynched was functionally irrelevant to the idea as I presented it. What if BA had been the PR? scum would have killed either BA or Commie and then we'd have townie feeling smashbro in there which would have been annoying around charter but would have solidified me on edmund.

The advantage I see in the claims is to give a theoretical seven player base a 2/5 chance (or 2/4 for the vanilla players) on Day 1 to hit scum. Scum would then kill a PR (and if the PRs didn't claim he better pray there is either no Doc or that he targets the Doc) This would leave town in a 4:1 situation with one confirmed town, giving two vanillas a 50/50 to hit scum correctly and the PR (if cop or RB) in a position to clear or damn a player.

I actually disagree with some of Pie's theories, but in a game with seven players getting two confirmed town is more powerful in my mind then getting a night or two out of the available powers (especially since cop is the only one that might be more valuable then confirmed town - RB in this setup is almost a liability with the potential cop or Doc role, and the Doc is a weak PR anyway.)

I think PR claim Day 1 is optimal town strategy for this setup.

Anyone see where I'm being stupid?

[Thor665]

@charter - that's the logic I disagree with (the counter claim threat - I do consider it)

I was comfortable with scum fakeclaim Day 1 - because that's 1/3 chance to lynch scum which is excellent odds.
Mislynch puts you at a 1/2

If massclaim is delayed till Day 2 you have the 1/3 choice at that stage - not so hot.

You have a solid point that once the Miller was outed that massclaim became less functional.