I don't want to explain this fully, but if that is all the mafia do against the mass claim, we are in a very, very good position.Gorrad wrote:Ok, I still don't like the idea of a mass claim, but Guardian, maybe you can clear this up for me. If the mafia lynched the priest or the inspector, what's to stop the Godfather from going into that spot?
Yeah, this is where I don't want to explain this fully for the mafia, but it would not be extremely pro-mafia -- also the mafia had only a 1/7 chance of getting one of these roles, the cop of which is much, much more important.Gorrad wrote:They would be one of the 'confirmed' positions y'all are so keen on, and could 'inspect' the goons, putting them in the clear too. I'm not quite willing to risk the game on that 1/6 chance, especially given what IH has been saying.
Erm, Firstly, I'm not scum, and I've seen no reasonable case on me. Secondly, why do YOU think CoolBot is scum?Gorrad wrote:I agree that CoolBot is quite possibly scum, but I doubt that he and Guardian are in it together at this point. So, I'm going to keep my vote where it is, but keep aFoS: CoolBotup. If Guardian isn't, CoolBot is.
-Gorrad
. 
. I don't like this. If it's so great a strategy, why would a scum support it? Sure it would make them seem pro-town, but if it catches them, what's the point? This gives distancing vibes to me. Also, I reread and it seems I was a bit unclear. Guardian, I am by no means CERTAIN you're scum, however, this seems like the position a scum would be setting up, especially if inspector or priest was killed. Also, I think that we should be allowed to point out holes in plans such as this. CoolBot is right that the scum are probably not idiots. If there's a hole, one of them will likely find it and exploit it, and I'd rather we fix the problem than have that happen.Guardian wrote:I would not be terribly shocked if MoSisscum and is supporting mass claim to look good because of how greatly pro-town and anti-scum mass claim is.
You haven't really explained WHY, but OK...Gorrad wrote:Yeah, Guardian, you're not being mean, just scummy to me
To look pro-town. Think about why scum "bus" their teammates and lynch them -- scum lynch other scum to look townlike because that is what townies do. Similarly, because someone supports this strategy doesn't mean that they are pro-town, they are just doing the pro-town thing.Gorrad wrote:I don't like this. If it's so great a strategy, why would a scum support it?Guardian wrote:I would not be terribly shocked if MoSisscum and is supporting mass claim to look good because of how greatly pro-town and anti-scum mass claim is.
It doesn't catch them. It gives us a better chance of catching them. Just like busing hurts scum (because they lose a partner) and helps scum by looking townlike by supporting the bus, supporting this strategy hurts scum but makes them look townlike when they support it.Gorrad wrote:Sure it would make them seem pro-town, but if it catches them, what's the point?
Distancing from who? MoS? That is silly. What is unclear?Gorrad wrote:This gives distancing vibes to me. Also, I reread and it seems I was a bit unclear.
If the inspector was killed, that is really unlucky. Even so, it still is better for us us to mass claim.Gorrad wrote:Guardian, I am by no means CERTAIN you're scum, however, this seems like the position a scum would be setting up, especially if inspector or priest was killed.
The only potential "holes" scum have are good ONLY IF THEY COMMUNICATE AND WORK TOGETHER. There are multiple strategies scum could use for the mass claim, and if they are all on the same page will they be more successful.Gorrad wrote:Also, I think that we should be allowed to point out holes in plans such as this. CoolBot is right that the scum are probably not idiots. If there's a hole, one of them will likely find it and exploit it, and I'd rather we fix the problem than have that happen.
This is the attitude that's so grating. There are legitimate objections being brought up in regards to the mass claim. Yet it's proponents, instead of addressing the objections, are characterizing the objectors as stubborn idiots or scum sympathizers. If they were really so sure about their plan, they'd be able to convince us instead of just trying to railroad us.Guardian wrote:I feel you are just arguing because you got it in your head that mass claim is bad. Stop being difficult for being difficult's sake, mass claim is the play here...
How so? We'd never lynch him if we follow your plan.Guardian wrote:If the inspector was killed, that is really unlucky. Even so, it still is better for us us to mass claim.
I fell your pain, but we have very strong legitimate objections to discussion your (legitimate?) objections.CoolBot wrote:This is the attitude that's so grating. There are legitimate objections being brought up in regards to the mass claim.Guardian wrote:I feel you are just arguing because you got it in your head that mass claim is bad. Stop being difficult for being difficult's sake, mass claim is the play here...
I am not at all interested in talking scum strategy here.CoolBot wrote:Yet it's proponents, instead of addressing the objections, are characterizing the objectors as stubborn idiots or scum sympathizers. If they were really so sure about their plan, they'd be able to convince us instead of just trying to railroad us.
We are informed with lynches and vig kills. So if a scum counter claims a power role, if we lynch one of them, we know who was telling the truth.CoolBot wrote:In particular, I haven't seen anyone address why we shouldn't care if scum counter claim a power role. Without being informed of roles after deaths, we'd have to lynch bot the be sure, right?
The inspector has to provide us with investigation results every day. If his investigation results are ever proven wrong, we know he is scum. There are several reasons that he cannot provide wrong answers that I can go into if you and others absolutely insist that I must.CoolBot wrote:How so? We'd never lynch him if we follow your plan.Guardian wrote:If the inspector was killed, that is really unlucky. Even so, it still is better for us us to mass claim.
But you're certainly willing to let possible loopholes remain open.Guardian wrote:I am not at all interested in talking scum strategy here.
With regards to lynches, I don't see anything in the rules post that says this is the case. Why do you think that's true?Guardian wrote:We are informed with lynches and vig kills. So if a scum counter claims a power role, if we lynch one of them, we know who was telling the truth.
And scum will obligingly give us wrong results? How can we assume this will happen when the Miller is the only result they don't know ahead of time?Guradian wrote: If his investigation results are ever proven wrong, we know he is scum.
And scum will obligingly give us wrong results? How can we assume this will happen when the Miller is the only result they don't know ahead of time?[/quote]Guradian wrote: If his investigation results are ever proven wrong, we know he is scum.
Kinetic wrote:Also, remember both Priest and Inspector results are not binary. Certain roles come up differently from both and mafia don't know exactly what everyone is.
There are no **** loopholes. There are good and bad scum strategies. That is all. What you and others are suggesting is like suggesting that everyone not claim what their result is in Dethy, because the scum can claim in a good way.CoolBot wrote:But you're certainly willing to let possible loopholes remain open.Guardian wrote:I am not at all interested in talking scum strategy here.
Because the roles doesn't say that it is NOT the case. I assume that only scum NKs are corpse ripping, as that.. um... makes sense, and is standard.CoolBot wrote:With regards to lynches, I don't see anything in the rules post that says this is the case. Why do you think that's true?Guardian wrote:We are informed with lynches and vig kills. So if a scum counter claims a power role, if we lynch one of them, we know who was telling the truth.
If the scum killed the cop, claim cop, and then give us all correct results (as they would pretty much have to do) then that is fine -- even though the cop is scum and we have to deal with lynching him later, we *still* get a real investigation result every day.CoolBot wrote:And scum will obligingly give us wrong results? How can we assume this will happen when the Miller is the only result they don't know ahead of time?Guradian wrote: If his investigation results are ever proven wrong, we know he is scum.
ok will wait 3 more days then will ask for prods..ShadowLurker wrote:Mod disagrees as per the rules. The minimum of time that must elapse from now before the mod automatically gives out prods is five days. Please request specific prods.
Standard? The standard is all roles are given when they die. We already know the game is different from the standard, and assuming the exact way it's different without any evidence seems dangerous to me. And IME, it's usually an all or nothing thing anyway.Guardian wrote:Because the roles doesn't say that it is NOT the case. I assume that only scum NKs are corpse ripping, as that.. um... makes sense, and is standard.
Why do you think that this is not true?
The issue isn't the quality of the results - at least not directly. If I understand your plan correctly, we mechanically lynch the claimed townies one by one. At what point to we decide to lynch the claimed power roles that may or may not be scum? If we wait until all the townies are dead, that leaves a maximum of five players (assuming doc claims town). If one of them are scum, how do we decide? What if the Inspector and Priest are pointing at each other?Guardian wrote:If the scum killed the cop, claim cop, and then give us all correct results (as they would pretty much have to do) then that is fine -- even though the cop is scum and we have to deal with lynching him later, we *still* get a real investigation result every day.
But a real one nonetheless.Guardian wrote:And you realize you are worrying about a 1/14 chance, right?...
It is a mafia corpse ripping game. This means the mafia rip the corpses with their NK, but not otherwise.CoolBot wrote:Standard? The standard is all roles are given when they die. We already know the game is different from the standard, and assuming the exact way it's different without any evidence seems dangerous to me. And IME, it's usually an all or nothing thing anyway.Guardian wrote:Because the roles doesn't say that it is NOT the case. I assume that only scum NKs are corpse ripping, as that.. um... makes sense, and is standard.
Why do you think that this is not true?
We will still scum hunt -- just we will know for certain that certain players are definitely town. Knowing for certain that ~1/3 of the players are town = very good thing.CoolBot wrote:The issue isn't the quality of the results - at least not directly. If I understand your plan correctly, we mechanically lynch the claimed townies one by one.Guardian wrote:If the scum killed the cop, claim cop, and then give us all correct results (as they would pretty much have to do) then that is fine -- even though the cop is scum and we have to deal with lynching him later, we *still* get a real investigation result every day.
When the priest/cops reports back that they liedCoolBot wrote:At what point to we decide to lynch the claimed power roles that may or may not be scum?
. This assumes mafia counterclaim at all, which they may or may not. I am not going to say which I think is better, and you shouldn't either.Hmm? This sounds like paranoia/reemphasis -- I don't get what further discussion you are trying to spark here.CoolBot wrote:If we wait until all the townies are dead, that leaves a maximum of five players (assuming doc claims town). If one of them are scum, how do we decide? What if the Inspector and Priest are pointing at each other?
If that did happen, it is not as much of a problem as you think it is if they get the inspector. If they get the cop, and the cop never fails to give us a correct result, we will eliminate 2 or 3 scum and be at a point where we think "HMM, maybe the cop is scum".CoolBot wrote:And don't say that's a long time away and we'll address it when and if we get there. If scum happened to hit the Investigator or Priest, we're pretty much guaranteed to end up there and we should discuss it before sending us down that tract.
Real, but have you ever heard of action state outcome logic? There is a 13/14 chance of not hitting the cop. 1/14 chance of hitting the cop. So, 13/14 times, we benefit greatly, and 1/14 we benefit only a little.CoolBot wrote:But a real one nonetheless.Guardian wrote:And you realize you are worrying about a 1/14 chance, right?...