Mini 1372 - Over

[N]

Micros are all mostly 9 players too, but they don't have to be approved for balance.

And newbies are one or two town PRs vs. mafia goon and rolecop. And I think that town wins newbie games most often.

[Slandaar]

Point.

Robb.

[Slandaar]

Newbies have Rolecop? always?

[N]

Pretty sure. I think it's just the town roles that are randomised.

[Slandaar]

N, be honest, have you read Sables walls?

[N]

Yes, I have. Is my reading comprehension broken somewhere?

Or is this a sneaky way to ask me if I believe Sable is jailkeeper? I'm not entirely sure; I've had a town-read on Sable for most of the game, but I'm not so sure any more.

It seems crazy that there would be three town PRs in a nine player game, but I don't see what benefit Sable would have gained from claiming that if he were scum; he was probably going to coast into lylo anyway.

The more I look at this situation, the more confused I get. Say Sable jailkeeps Dun and I die tonight; it's going to be pretty easy to convince Dun that you are the remaining scum (and vice versa, jailkeeping you). But this doesn't prove Sable's alignment; only that of who he jailkept. (Because if he was town, why would he lie about who he jailkept, and if he was scum he's the last one left.)

If Sable is night killed and flips jailkeeper, both whoever he jails tonight and myself will be confirmed town, making lylo really fucking easy.

If you or Dun gets killed tonight, it points straight to Sable being the last scum - because I'm pretty much confirmed town now (see above: if he's town why would he lie and if he's scum then good) and whoever was "jailkept" couldn't have performed the kill (unless Sable is lying, which see above again).

I think the most likely thing to happen is a no-kill tonight, which would not point to anything and we'll be going around in circles again.

[Papa Zito]

I have to get back to work. It's part of the wedding. No Sicilian can ever refuse a request on his daughter's wedding day.

Robbnva,

Town Vanilla

, was lynched Day 3.

Final Votecount of Day 3

1. Slandaar (0):
4. Sable Tip (1): Robbnva
5. N (1): Slandaar
8. Robbnva (3): N, Sable Tip, Dunhamganger
9. Dunhamganger (0):

Players not voting:

It is now Night 3. Actions are due by September 29 @ 11:59PM CST.

[Papa Zito]

It seems in today's world the power to absolve debt is greater than the power of forgiveness.

There were no deaths Night 3.

First Votecount of Day 4

1. Slandaar (0):
4. Sable Tip (0):
5. N (0):
9. Dunhamganger (0):

Players not voting: Slandaar, Sable Tip, N, Dunhamganger

With 4 players alive, it takes 3 votes to lynch.
Deadline: October 20th @ 11:59PM CST

[Dunhamganger]

Yuuuuuup. Makes sense. But only if Sable is scum.

Should we NL once first?

[N]

I agree no lynch is probably the best choice. There's not much else I can say at the moment; I pretty much said everything in my last post.

[Dunhamganger]

V/LA

for the next couple of days. In case we decide to go the obvious route,

Vote: No Lynch

. Make Sable pretend he targeted someone first.

[Sable Tip]

Yuuuuuup. Makes sense. But only if Sable is scum.

Or if you're scum. Or if Slandaar is scum and wants to make the two of us look scummy.

Should we NL once first?

Honestly, I don't really see that there's much point, but I don't have any issues with doing that.

I will be targeting Dunhamganger again tonight if we do No Lynch. If we lynch Dunhamganger or Slandaar and it turns out we hit wrong, I will target the other. We won't lynch N today.

[Slandaar]

Lets say I was scum.

How would me no killing make you look scummier than yesterday Sable?

[Sable Tip]

OK, let's have a look at what your options would be overnight, on the assumption that you are the scum.

You know I am jailkeeping Dunham, so there's no theoretical gain from attempting to kill him - it'll just fail.

If you kill me, I will flip Jailkeeper and, in doing so, essentially confirm Dunham and N as pro-town. So killing me is suicidal.

That means that the only options available to you are killing N and not killing at all.

If you kill N, I know for certain that you are the scum. Dunham is confirmed innocent, in this hypothetical.

If you don't kill, consider what effect this has on each player.

I see no kill overnight, and the most immediate conclusion is that Dunham is the scum and I have successfully blocked the kill. When looked at in-depth, it is clear that if you're the scum, you could have no-killed to produce that impression.

Dunham sees no kill, and the most immediate conclusion is that I have chosen not to kill to implicate him. Of course, it's also possible to say that you've no-killed to make Dunham think that I was trying to implicate him.

And N sees no kill. Again, as the only people with any degree of control over the night are me and the scum, and I announced that I was targeting Dunham, the most immediate conclusion is that one of the two of us is the scum. Again, it's also possible you chose to no-kill to produce this effect.

In other words, a no-kill would make it look like the scum must be either Dunham or me, which would take you out of contention. That's why it could make me look scummier, just as it could make Dunham look scummier.

All this is based purely on first-level analysis; any second-level thinking makes it clear that you're not in the clear. Of course, these lines of thought are based on the idea that you are scum; it's still very possible that Dunham is scum and I stopped him from doing anything last night.

[N]

No lynch is the obvious way to go, but I don't think we should rush into it.

If Sable is telling the truth, we need to figure out who should be jailkept tonight. I have a feeling we're not going to get anywhere, though, and scum will keep not killing and we'll keep no lynching.

Mod:

what's your rule on happily ever after?

[Slandaar]

That is quite the wall there Sable!

You think I look townier today then?

[Sable Tip]

That is quite the wall there Sable!

You think I look townier today then?

Technically the no-kill overnight is an indication that you're less likely to be scum, as there is the possibility that scum may not have the option of no-kill, and it's also eliminated the possibility that you're stupid scum who wouldn't consider a no-kill.

However, I think that the conversation from yesterday makes it highly unlikely that you would have failed to consider a no-kill possibility, and I feel that the odds of scum having no option to no-kill is lower than the odds that N is scum with a strongarm kill, so overall... no, I don't think you're any townier. The change in scumminess is but a drop in the ocean of the game as a whole, so it's negligible in my opinion.

Note that I don't think you are any scummier than yesterday. Actually, the whole night is pretty much a null read for me - it tells me basically nothing.

[Slandaar]

Or if Slandaar is scum and wants to make the two of us look scummy.

Actually, the whole night is pretty much a null read for me - it tells me basically nothing.

So, when I asked you how you would look scummier and you gave me a huge wall, you have now gone half circle and decided its in fact null but only when I ask you if you think I look townier.

You couldn't come to this conclusion in the huge wall? (that now is completely pointless)

Seems legit.

[Sable Tip]

Or if Slandaar is scum and wants to make the two of us look scummy.

Actually, the whole night is pretty much a null read for me - it tells me basically nothing.

So, when I asked you how you would look scummier and you gave me a huge wall, you have now gone half circle and decided its in fact null but only when I ask you if you think I look townier.

Wow, way to completely misunderstand what I said.

What I said, if you care to actually read my post (which is only the length it is because I needed to analyse each of the various options), is that a lack of nightkill makes you seem less scummy when it's put to a first-level analysis (ie, an analysis which doesn't look at "But what if he thinks that..." mentality) and could, therefore, make you seem less scummy at first.

However, I have looked a step further and concluded that it's not really a meaningful difference.

The only reason I even mentioned that a lack of nightkill could be you attempting to look less scummy is because it looked, at first, like it had worked on Dunham - since he stated that a nightless kill only makes sense if I am scum. I was using it to point out why it was null - because it makes sense for any one of the three of us to no-kill under the circumstances.

You couldn't come to this conclusion in the huge wall? (that now is completely pointless)

Seems legit.

Okay, this seems to make your misunderstanding more reasonable, as I did mention this..

All this is based purely on first-level analysis; any second-level thinking makes it clear that you're not in the clear. Of course, these lines of thought are based on the idea that you are scum; it's still very possible that Dunham is scum and I stopped him from doing anything last night.

My post explaining my logic is exactly that - me explaining my logic. I'm sorry if you don't feel it was clear enough that it was a neutral-viewpoint explanation rather than purely my opinion.

[Slandaar]

What I just don't understand Sable is how you havn't worked out that if I were scum and nokilled it would be to keep 2 suspects alive with me instead of going into 1v1 lylo.
(I would kill and go 1v1, but you wouldn't know this so etc)

It seems obvious to me that is why you would nokill as scum.

[Papa Zito]

Mod:

what's your rule on happily ever after?

mod, is there a limit to the amount of times scum can NK?

There's no explicit rule in the approved ruleset about mafia no-kills. If we get to a ridiculous no-lynch/no-kill cycle I'll threaten you guys with a nuclear explosion or something.

My theory is that if nobody is attempting to kill anyone else, then nobody is trying to win and thus everyone deserves to lose.

[Dunhamganger]

Okay, well in that case.

It seems disadvantageous to me for Sable to bother making another kill in this game. Especially since whoever he claims to be JKing that night will then be confirmed town.

So. Here are some reasons why Sable is the last scum.

Play-Based

: 1. Bussed Guppy hard at the start of D1.
2. Easily the least active player alive.
3. Posts mainly in walls and makes those nuisance-y lists.
4. Has thusly managed to avoid the attention of the very slapfight-prone townies, alive and dead.

Set-Up-Based

: 1. I cannot think of a scum PR that would single-handedly balance the game against a Tracker, Jailkeeper, and Neighborizer. It simply doesn't exist.

WIFOM Based

: 1. Spent the latter part of yesterday "confirming" N as town and then accusing Slandaar of being the scummiest player to the point of requesting that he claim before me. After learning that I considered Slandaar to be obvtown, decides to JK me instead of Slandaar without giving any justification. Note especially that he selected a formerly scummy player to clear that we weren't likely to lynch on the heels of his (N's) involvement in the Guppy lynch. (Clearing Robb, for instance, doesn't necessarily lead to N's lynch the way that clearing N more or less directly led to Robb's.)

I would still no-lynch for a night to see what kind of staring contest we could get in to. But the chances that N is a permanent strongman/used his 1-shot strongman on N2 for whatever reason or that Slandaar would have no-killed last night seem so infinitesimally small compared to the case against Sable that I can't imagine voting for anybody else.

[Slandaar]

Did anyone actually get neighboured by Ben?

Good case; the fact he has avoided all of us slapfighers while not being a townread of anyone is quite the feat. Sable was always just kind of there. Probably why Sable was bussing guppy; avoid the headlights of the aggressive townies while gaining towncred when Guppy was inevitably lynched.

His Jailing N 'because he seemed town' is just completely backwards; just like how his analysis today of the nightkills, he sounds intelligent but then takes way too long to come to the very obvious conclusion ie 419.

[N]

Did anyone actually get neighboured by Ben?

I wasn't, but I doubt anyone was. He died night 1, so if he did neighbourise anyone, they'd just get an empty qt in the morning. (Or does neighbourising happen at the start of the night?)

Mod:

what's your rule on happily ever after?

mod, is there a limit to the amount of times scum can NK?

There's no explicit rule in the approved ruleset about mafia no-kills. If we get to a ridiculous no-lynch/no-kill cycle I'll threaten you guys with a nuclear explosion or something.

My theory is that if nobody is attempting to kill anyone else, then nobody is trying to win and thus everyone deserves to lose.

So how many no-lynches/no-kills will we get before you declare it 'rocks fall; everyone dies'?

Sable, who do you plan on jailkeeping tonight?

[Slandaar]

He was a day neighbourizer so he could have used it.