Open 99: Mayo Clinic (Game Over!) before 703

[Stef]

So.. you say we should leave ALL the game to be completely random for the town ( except the two vigs ) and take it out of our hands without making ANY decision of our own? The vigs will be shooting blindly, the SK will kill.. whatever, scum will be following an agenda, and you say that the town shouldn't have any calculated move? That's just anti-town.

Yes there's the possibility that we lynch the wrong person. That's the same in ALL the games. Mafia's got one kill/night, SK has one and we have two. That makes our nights fairly balanced so it shouldn't change the way we hunt in our game during the day. You further and further increase my suspicion on you.

And regarding the FOS and the threat to vote charter.. it's not my place to defend him but it's an attack on you so.. what reasons mentioned before? All i can see is "I did think it was strange he went against it.".

If your argument against him is your case for the No Lynch then how come don't I look suspicious to you?

[Stef]

EBWOP: simuposted.. anyway.

8 town 3 scum and one SK. It's favorable cases over possible cases so it's 4/12 which is 33% of nailing scum. You say these are bad odds for D1? Wtf? Is this your first game?

[GnKoichi]

This is my first forum game, yes. Hence my propensity for what is apparently too much thinking out loud. It seems no matter what I say, I make someone suspicious of me. Still, I can't leave questions unanswered

My suspicion of charter was two-fold. He was the first to jump on a double-vote, making it a three-vote very early in the game. Secondly was his odd stance on the night thing. He says there's unlikely to be a death tonight, which is completely untrue (we're likely to have between 1 and 3 deaths tonight) yet when I suggested avoiding a lynch to keep deaths even lower, he was against that. Contradictions tend to seem scummy.

Which brings me back to me. Yes, I've had different ideas through out this topic. Like I said, I was looking for reactions. I also tried to give a lot of my reasons for things as they came. It is my first game, and I didn't want to appear random (which would likely make me seem suspicious) instead of what I actually am, which is experimental.

Also, on the odds thing, it may be better than other mafia set ups, but it's still not in our favor. I suggested that we make some kind of protection plan (as had been mentioned by others first) so that we had something to analyze on day 2, and just do a No Lynch to lower the amount of deaths before we have some solid info.

[Wall-E]

Comedic timing is ruined by now, but...

Sorry 66% chance to kill one of our own. Still not good odds.

ARE YOU KIDDING ME STALLONE?!

Those are AMAZING odds! Those are odds with tits and beer on tap!

Shit, buster, on those odds I'd whip out an uzi and mow over half the town D1, giggling while I did it, just trying to randomly win ON ACCIDENT! I would strap a chainsaw on each arm and leg and CARTWHEEL OF DEATH through EVERY. SINGLE. ONE of you, randomly chopping off heads, arms, and peckers on the OFF CHANCE I'd win with those spectacufuckinglar odds.

I'm trying to say no, but you already know you're a newbie, so there's no call for such HOLY CRAP I WOULD MARRY THOSE ODDS admonishments.

Now, back to something we're all not focused on: Scumhunting.

I read Gonk town and Plum town... I didn't like how doublePuta chastized Plum's participation. It felt like stretching for something to attack.

Stef: I think your case on Gonk is based more upon a moment of bad logic on his part than strictly scummy logic. Just my impression.

[Wall-E]

ODDS FROM THE LOINS OF JESUS

[Stef]

Bad logic is one thing. Being explained that his thinking is simply failing and him keeping on about how what he thinks is right... that's just too much.

[Wall-E]

It's not strictly bad to be hard to convinced of things. The world needs stubborn people. Try putting your explaination into simpler or more anecdotal forms, maybe? IDK. I get a town read off the kid, 's all I'm sayin'.

[Nameless]

GnKoichi, the most important part of determining who is scum is

not

analysing night results but analysing posting and voting.

Sorry Plum. The Lynch thing for you was a poor joke.

I don't like this, though. If GK tries to take back anything else as a joke, it may warrant further attention. (Alternatively, GK, make it clear when you are joking [joke]OR I WILL SHOVE LIVE, HORNY RODENTS UP YOUR NOSE[/joke].)

Stef, you seem to be jumping awfully hard on a newbie player. Easy target, hmm?

Plum, your post (above this one) makes me a bit nervous, you seem to like to put in in our face that you are all for scumhunting/doing the best for town and it comes off a bit fake. "basic strong scumhunting" sounds wrong to me..it's just a gut feeling now, but tiniFoS.

IMHO, this interpretation of Plum's post seems rather a stretch. Given that and that it IS just interpretation (and thus there's not reason for Plum to respond) you have to wonder why Puta Puta would bother mentioning it except to add empty suspicion on someone.

[Mirth]

"There seems to be a lot of bickering and negativity going through the ward. Maybe we need to schedule a group meeting with someone who'll make you all feel better."

VOTE COUNT

Nameless - 2 - [TonyMontana, charter]
Stef - 2 - [Kiro, Puta Puta]
GnKoihi - 2 - [Mana_Ku, Stef]
Charter - 2 - [Nameless, Wall-E]

Wall-E - 1 - [Kmd]
Kiro - 1 - [orangepenguin]
No Lynch - 1 - [GnKoichi]

Not Voting - 1 - [Plum]

[Kmd4390]

vote: NO LYNCH[/b]

No Lynch on Day 1? That is NEVER a good move.

Maybe charter wants to avoid a No Lynch since a lynch would mean the likelihood of us killing one of our own docs (50% chance of this happening).

FoS: charter

.

You FoS charter for making a good point. At night, docs will probably die, and vigs are eventually exposed. Where does a no lynch help this? We have 0 chance of killing the mafia or SK without lynching. At night, sure, maybe the vigs will kill scum, but a no lynch right now gives them almost no help finding anyone. Basically, no lynch is bad and suggesting it is enough for a:

Vote GnKoichi

However, I do think we can get more info out of the night stage than this part of the scum hunt.

Are you seriously trying to say that a No Lynch gives us MORE information?

Sorry 66% chance to kill one of our own. Still not good odds.

That's normal for any mafia game and most people will agree that no lynching on day 1 is bad. Also, that's the same as the odds you give a vig with a no lynch. Look at this from the point of view of a vig. So, hypothetically, you are a vig. We no lynch. With the information we have now, are you prepared to make a kill? There are 11 possible targets, 4 of which are scum. As vig, you have a 4/11, or 36%, chance of hitting scum and a 6/12, or 50% chance that your target is someone who the town is protecting. Also, assume that the mafia doc protects scum. That leaves 3 scum, 1 being protected. You have 2 possible targets who could be mafia and aren't protected by the mafia doc. Now, including SK, you have 3 good targets, and have to hope none of the 6 docs protected them. Odds are not good for our vigs. We need our lynch and some discussion to get anything done.

It seems no matter what I say, I make someone suspicious of me.

Try scumhunting instead of suggesting that we no lynch and put the entire game in the hands of vigs who know nothing vs. SK who doesn't need to know much and mafia who are going to be planning everything they do.

[Kmd4390]

Shit, buster, on those odds I'd whip out an uzi and mow over half the town D1, giggling while I did it, just trying to randomly win ON ACCIDENT! I would strap a chainsaw on each arm and leg and CARTWHEEL OF DEATH through EVERY. SINGLE. ONE of you, randomly chopping off heads, arms, and peckers on the OFF CHANCE I'd win with those spectacufuckinglar odds.

This made me laugh.

[Mana_Ku]

@MK, is that vote serious?

A vote based upon the fact that you can't hear a smiley. Of course, it's serious. It's the biggest scumtell ever .

Serious answer: Of course

Actually, would the vigs claiming be all that bad? If two of them claim, then we know that they are confirmed town. If three claim, one is either the SK or scum, and two are real, if four claim, we'll be doing pretty good. Five, not going to happen.

So that the scum knows who the vigs are and can concentrate on all the docs? If every killing player hits a doc while all the docs are protecting the vigs, we would lose half of town.

I think players should be forced to claim targets each day starting tomorrow morning. Thoughts?

If you were a vig, what would you give as answer? Say which of the dead players you targeted so that everybody knows you're a killing player or lie about it and perhaps get caught in it. Is this good for town?

If two people claim vig, and everyone else says they are not a vig, then we have two confirmed innocents, which will be nice.

Not entirely true. I hope you will see for yourself why.

Another point of note. I think it might be very likely we go a few nights with no kills without the massclaim, which seems like pushing the game towards nightless, which is much better for the town.

I have to think this over.

For now, I would advocate basic strong scumhunting.

Agreed . The setup discussion is only distracting.

Sorry Plum. The Lynch thing for you was a poor joke.

For either bad excuse or weak joke.

I'm not liking GnK's posts.

Follows much, doesn't he?

I would be suprised if we have a kill tonight

Why?

GnK, should the percentages impress me? How many times isn't a lynch a gamble at the beginning? And even when a player is lynched, it's still hoping that you were right.

He was the first to jump on a double-vote, making it a three-vote very early in the game.

That's even scummier than your Smiley theory

Secondly was his odd stance on the night thing.

It really does bother when you follow someone and then you're the only one who stays behind.

Contradictions tend to seem scummy.

See? Contradiction is scummy.
*hint* Think back at his theory about hearing a smiley

I suggested that we make some kind of protection plan

Want to propose your own idea or are you going to follow someone again?

Those are odds with tits and beer on tap!

Sure couldn't be better

I read Gonk town and Plum town

It's called SCUMhunting.

The world needs stubborn people

Look who says it

If GK tries to take back anything else as a joke, it may warrant further attention.

Well done mentioning

Stef, you seem to be jumping awfully hard on a newbie player. Easy target, hmm?

Or scummy. What do you think of GnK?

[Stef]

I built a case against him. I didn't pick an easy target. I picked the scummiest target there was. I tried explaining he was wrong. He kept going with anti-town strategies. I am not going to dismiss him on the count that he is a newbie. I will pursue this issue until something makes me change my mind. Such a thing hasn't happened yet. Why are you defending him?

[Kiro]

Well, didn't like GnK's answer. As a group, Town should always take a pro-active approach. We work towards a correct lynch, but can't be afraid of making mistakes. Our numbers allow us to do so. Everything above is just a rehash of the same concerns over GnK so no sense repeating it all again.

Unvote: Stef
Vote: TonyMontana

Paging TonyMontana, please report to the thread. Coffee break is over. We have a curious situation in the ER that requires your input.

[GnKoichi]

Okay, so, I never said that the 66% percent odds were bad in terms of other Mafia set ups. I just said it wasn't in our favor (by definition, if the odds are 51% against us or more, we're more likely to kill one of our own). But if it's sort of established that this is what you deal with on day one, perhaps killing one of your own and using what people have said as information to fuel the night kills, then I'm happy to withdraw my point.

unvote: No Lynch

Also, my point about charter was not that he didn't want to No Lynch, it was that he didn't want to No Lynch after making that misleading post about wanting to keep deaths low. He said there would likely not be any deaths at night, which is completely untrue (we are likely to have about two deaths tonight) and he was the first one to suggest this was a good thing (keeping deaths low overall to give us more time to gather info). I got railroaded for believing the latter and questioning the former, though I see now I should have questioned both. So:

vote: charter

That's all.

[Kmd4390]

You vote for charter because you misinterpreted what he said?

[Mana_Ku]

Are you blaming Charter for your actions?!

[GnKoichi]

I didn't misinterpret. He said something that was misleading, I think purposefully. Why would you say Night Kills are likely not to happen? Why would you say that this was a good thing, since everyone is telling me now that deaths are a good way to get information? Why did no one jump on Charter for saying this, but did jump on me for believing it? And I had a suspicion aimed at Charter before because he jumped on a three vote really early, when most people spread the votes around. This is more like mafia behavior (seeing an early lead against someone they want gone, and adding to the vote) or the serial killer (seeing ANY vote total go up quickly is a good thing).

[GnKoichi]

By the way, these are the quotes I'm referring to:

Another point of note. I think it might be very likely we go a few nights with no kills without the massclaim, which seems like pushing the game towards nightless, which is much better for the town.

I thought about no lynch, but in all honesty, I don't think it's the right option. I would be suprised if we have a kill tonight, so no lynch would put us right back where we are now (in all likelyhood).

[Kmd4390]

Ok, first, are you trying to say that charter intentionally tried to make you suggest a no lynch?

Second, in those quotes, he mentions how it would be like nightless, which does nothing with a no lynch. Also, he clearly says he doesn't think no lynch is the right option.

[GnKoichi]

Yes, I'm aware of that. I wasn't trying to blame charter for setting me up. That was my own misinterpretation and I've withdrawn it. It has been explained to me why No Lynching is a bad idea, and it makes sense.

What WAS misleading was that we're extremely far from being night kill free. We are likely to have two kills tonight, maybe more, possibly less, but still at least 1 is extremely likely to get through our protection. This is extremely easy to figure out (we can protect about half the players, leaving half the kills to go through). So why would he say, TWICE, that we shouldn't worry about night kills? Maybe he doesn't want us to make any plans that would help us!

[Kmd4390]

I didn't misinterpret.

That was my own misinterpretation

He said something that was misleading, I think purposefully.

I wasn't trying to blame charter for setting me up.

[GnKoichi]

Thanks for taking my words out of context.

I didn't misinterpret what charter said. I admitted to misinterpreting the established rules of mafia (in regards to no lynching on day 1).

He did says something misleading, but I am not blaming him for my No Lynch mistake. I AM blaming him for trying to mislead the group, though apparently I've acted as the perfect smoke screen to prevent people from seeing this.

[Wall-E]

Can everyone take some time away from harrassing the newb (not that I disapprove) to scumhunt? Or do you all want to lynch the newb and train him up for the next game he's in?


MK's last post consisted of , sardonic comments about everyone else's comments, and generally added nothing valuable to the discussion (possible exception: I agree with MK that we're not scumhunting right this second, and the two comments about my own comments were spot-on). MK: Do you have a suspect for scum aside from Gonk?

[Kmd4390]

What did you do to "act as a smoke screen" following his posts. You voted no lynch. If you think he was trying to mislead us, you are blaming him for your no lynch vote.