Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[schadd]

Vote Count 4.1

Robz888 (1): SpaceAnemone
SpaceAnemone (1): Robz888
No Lynch (1): Calamitas

Not Voting (3): Calamitas, teamlyle, mcmcsalot

With 5 alive, it takes 3 to lynch. Day 4 ends Jan 13 at noon forum time.

[Calamitas]

<b> @Mod: How is the game going to be called if everyone is dead? </b>

[Calamitas]

@Mod: How is the game going to be called if everyone is dead?

[SpaceAnemone]

Eevee' flip meant eevee lied, we are positive that eeve lied.

We are talking about the beginning of D3.

But the massclaim was today. I seriously don't understand your point at any level.

I get it, it got confused because Space brought up that I suggested massclaim on Day 3, I thought she was talking about the massclaim I just suggested today, and then WW got confused, and bleh.

But it wasn't weird for me to suggest it yesterday, as Space implied.

Saying it wasn't weird for suggesting it is not the same as explaining how it's not weird! You wanted to out non-existent PRs when you yourself are claiming to be a vig. If you had been a vig at that point, you'd have felt ridiculously exposed, knowing that either you had to claim, thus allowing scum to RB you for the rest of the game, or to lie about it and claim VT (which was something I was considering at that point) in order to stand a chance at shooting again.

I was super-suspicious of Robz trying to get claims out early in D3... notice how he was trying to make a big deal about getting it all mediated by teamlyle and not at all interested in the part of the discussion where it was a terrible idea. That was absolutely a vig-fishing expedition by scum!

[SpaceAnemone]

@Calamitas: I don't think we can even reach that situation with me outed and scum in possession of a role-blocker :-( I tried asking whether a last lone RB scum can simultaneously RB and kill, in the hope that it might be a one-or-other thing.. I haven't received a response yet, but actually looking at the collection of PMs faust posted, it seems like they can do both in one night.

[Witherweaver]

This reminds me of my first newbie Mafia game.

[Calamitas]

@Calamitas: I don't think we can even reach that situation with me outed and scum in possession of a role-blocker :-( I tried asking whether a last lone RB scum can simultaneously RB and kill, in the hope that it might be a one-or-other thing.. I haven't received a response yet, but actually looking at the collection of PMs faust posted, it seems like they can do both in one night.

Right, I was speaking bullshit. In case we no-lynch we are guaranteed a 50% chance of victory. Don't lynch now please.

[Calamitas]

@Calamitas: I don't think we can even reach that situation with me outed and scum in possession of a role-blocker :-( I tried asking whether a last lone RB scum can simultaneously RB and kill, in the hope that it might be a one-or-other thing.. I haven't received a response yet, but actually looking at the collection of PMs faust posted, it seems like they can do both in one night.

Right, I was speaking bullshit. In case we no-lynch we are guaranteed a 50% chance of victory. Don't lynch now please.

*except scum is still in possession of the switch

[SpaceAnemone]

Wait, Unvote, could there be two?

Two vigs? Nope, not possible in conjunction with an RS and a JK.

Also, what motivation would you as vig have to come into D3 proposing a massclaim when the overwhelming likelihood is that there are no other PRs out there and still three scums?

BBKKV leaves one more letter. There were several categories, we could have had one more letter there, another PR, and then that person would be an IC.

You were explaining here your motivation for coming into D3 proposing a massclaim.  An upshot of the massclaim is that BBKKV{I} had been claimed so far, so any other PR claim means lie or Eevee lied.

Though I just realized, V was public knowledge there, so your perspective would not have been different than anyone else's.

Sure, BBKKV were common knowledge by that point, meaning we know that scum is as powerful as it's possible for them to get, including having a RB. We know that there's a living vig, and that at best there could be a low chance of another minor PR, if we assumed at that point that Eevee was lying. Now, early in D3, Robz was encouraging people to believe Eevee and still wanted a claim.

If he'd really been a vig, that's just too much to lose. Was seriously expecting to come out as an un-counter-claimed vig and just act as an IC for a round till scums picked him off? And with so many scums left (three at that point), is it worth it for town to lose its one PR in a head-to-head if a scum decides to counter-claim? Before Eevee's scum-slip, town wasn't in a strong enough position for that trade to be worthwhile, which is precisely why Robz, as scum, was hunting for PRs there.

[SpaceAnemone]

@Calamitas: I don't think we can even reach that situation with me outed and scum in possession of a role-blocker :-( I tried asking whether a last lone RB scum can simultaneously RB and kill, in the hope that it might be a one-or-other thing.. I haven't received a response yet, but actually looking at the collection of PMs faust posted, it seems like they can do both in one night.

Right, I was speaking bullshit. In case we no-lynch we are guaranteed a 50% chance of victory. Don't lynch now please.

*except scum is still in possession of the switch

Do you mean "if scum is still in possession of the switch", or do you have some reason to think they still are?

I think chances are that they used it last night to block my kill on Robz, otherwise Robz would have been targeting me much more directly, rather than casting about looking for a way to out the vig.

[Calamitas]

@Calamitas: I don't think we can even reach that situation with me outed and scum in possession of a role-blocker :-( I tried asking whether a last lone RB scum can simultaneously RB and kill, in the hope that it might be a one-or-other thing.. I haven't received a response yet, but actually looking at the collection of PMs faust posted, it seems like they can do both in one night.

Right, I was speaking bullshit. In case we no-lynch we are guaranteed a 50% chance of victory. Don't lynch now please.

*except scum is still in possession of the switch

Do you mean "if scum is still in possession of the switch", or do you have some reason to think they still are?

I think chances are that they used it last night to block my kill on Robz, otherwise Robz would have been targeting me much more directly, rather than casting about looking for a way to out the vig.

I don't have any evidence that suggests they still have it, but that scenario is the only one without a 50% chance of winning.

[SpaceAnemone]

@Calamitas: I don't think we can even reach that situation with me outed and scum in possession of a role-blocker :-( I tried asking whether a last lone RB scum can simultaneously RB and kill, in the hope that it might be a one-or-other thing.. I haven't received a response yet, but actually looking at the collection of PMs faust posted, it seems like they can do both in one night.

Right, I was speaking bullshit. In case we no-lynch we are guaranteed a 50% chance of victory. Don't lynch now please.

From my point of view, we up that to a much higher percentage if we take out Robz tonight, and a slightly higher percentage still if we can take out his accomplice, assuming that's more likely to be the RB.

[Calamitas]

@Calamitas: I don't think we can even reach that situation with me outed and scum in possession of a role-blocker :-( I tried asking whether a last lone RB scum can simultaneously RB and kill, in the hope that it might be a one-or-other thing.. I haven't received a response yet, but actually looking at the collection of PMs faust posted, it seems like they can do both in one night.

Right, I was speaking bullshit. In case we no-lynch we are guaranteed a 50% chance of victory. Don't lynch now please.

*except scum is still in possession of the switch

Do you mean "if scum is still in possession of the switch", or do you have some reason to think they still are?

I think chances are that they used it last night to block my kill on Robz, otherwise Robz would have been targeting me much more directly, rather than casting about looking for a way to out the vig.

I don't have any evidence that suggests they still have it, but that scenario is the only one without a 50% chance of winning.

*except either robz or SA is the rb. But I think it is highly unlikely since the chance of one of them getting killed today was tremendous which would have given the vig another free shot.

[SpaceAnemone]

I don't have any evidence that suggests they still have it, but that scenario is the only one without a 50% chance of winning.

How so? I can't vig any more because they can always RB me, so having the switch or not is irrelevant.

[SpaceAnemone]

*except either robz or SA is the rb. But I think it is highly unlikely since the chance of one of them getting killed today was tremendous which would have given the vig another free shot.

Um, so is your asterisk followed by an assertion meant to be a caveat, but just doesn't have an "if" for some reason?

[Calamitas]

@Calamitas: I don't think we can even reach that situation with me outed and scum in possession of a role-blocker :-( I tried asking whether a last lone RB scum can simultaneously RB and kill, in the hope that it might be a one-or-other thing.. I haven't received a response yet, but actually looking at the collection of PMs faust posted, it seems like they can do both in one night.

Right, I was speaking bullshit. In case we no-lynch we are guaranteed a 50% chance of victory. Don't lynch now please.

From my point of view, we up that to a much higher percentage if we take out Robz tonight, and a slightly higher percentage still if we can take out his accomplice, assuming that's more likely to be the RB.

The accomplice (whether yours or robz') is almost certain to be the rb here.

[Calamitas]

*except either robz or SA is the rb. But I think it is highly unlikely since the chance of one of them getting killed today was tremendous which would have given the vig another free shot.

Um, so is your asterisk followed by an assertion meant to be a caveat, but just doesn't have an "if" for some reason?

Jep, thought the if wasn't necessary because of the "except" implying it.

[Calamitas]

Now again, but a bit more concise now:
Currently it is public knowledge that {Sa, robz} contains exactly one scum and exactly one vig.
Additionally it is known that {Calamitas, mcm, WW} contains 1 scum.
The scum in the latter group is overwhelmingly more likely to be the rb since scum wouldn't want to give the vig a shot if the fakeclaimed vig gets lynched today.
In case of a no-lynch, scum must reduce either playerpool.

There are two options then:
- The vig gets killed.
- Someone out of {Cala, mcm, WW} gets killed

In case of the first scenario we know the other one to be scum. We lynch him and are faced with a 2 player lynchpool.

In case of the second scenario, we lynch out of the two survivors out of {mcm, Cala, WW}. We have a 50% chance of hitting scum there. In case we hit the real scum, we have most likely hit the rb. In that case, if scum doesn't possess the switch anymore, the surviving vig kills the last scum (that one is confirmed) and the game is won.

[Robz888]

Wait, Unvote, could there be two?

Two vigs? Nope, not possible in conjunction with an RS and a JK.

Also, what motivation would you as vig have to come into D3 proposing a massclaim when the overwhelming likelihood is that there are no other PRs out there and still three scums?

BBKKV leaves one more letter. There were several categories, we could have had one more letter there, another PR, and then that person would be an IC.

You were explaining here your motivation for coming into D3 proposing a massclaim.  An upshot of the massclaim is that BBKKV{I} had been claimed so far, so any other PR claim means lie or Eevee lied.

Though I just realized, V was public knowledge there, so your perspective would not have been different than anyone else's.

Sure, BBKKV were common knowledge by that point, meaning we know that scum is as powerful as it's possible for them to get, including having a RB. We know that there's a living vig, and that at best there could be a low chance of another minor PR, if we assumed at that point that Eevee was lying. Now, early in D3, Robz was encouraging people to believe Eevee and still wanted a claim.

If he'd really been a vig, that's just too much to lose. Was seriously expecting to come out as an un-counter-claimed vig and just act as an IC for a round till scums picked him off? And with so many scums left (three at that point), is it worth it for town to lose its one PR in a head-to-head if a scum decides to counter-claim? Before Eevee's scum-slip, town wasn't in a strong enough position for that trade to be worthwhile, which is precisely why Robz, as scum, was hunting for PRs there.

No, I was hoping some other claims would emerge and it would narrow it down to "this person is lying or this person is lying". I'm of a generation that generally massclaims at LYLO, I just sort of thought it was the time for that to happen.

[SpaceAnemone]

*except either robz or SA is the rb. But I think it is highly unlikely since the chance of one of them getting killed today was tremendous which would have given the vig another free shot.

Um, so is your asterisk followed by an assertion meant to be a caveat, but just doesn't have an "if" for some reason?

Jep, thought the if wasn't necessary because of the "except" implying it.

I'm finding it confusing, because it reads as an assertion that you're adding as an afterthought. But then it's 0245 here at the moment, so I should be asleep.

I am finding it frustrating that you're not going back and re-reading things. The 50% assertion plays the game like it's some kind of Markov system, when in reality we can do an awful lot conditioned on past events. Since I was fully convinced that Robz was scum yesterday, I feel that you and WW should be able to see something there.

[Calamitas]

*except either robz or SA is the rb. But I think it is highly unlikely since the chance of one of them getting killed today was tremendous which would have given the vig another free shot.

Um, so is your asterisk followed by an assertion meant to be a caveat, but just doesn't have an "if" for some reason?

Jep, thought the if wasn't necessary because of the "except" implying it.

I'm finding it confusing, because it reads as an assertion that you're adding as an afterthought. But then it's 0245 here at the moment, so I should be asleep.

I am finding it frustrating that you're not going back and re-reading things. The 50% assertion plays the game like it's some kind of Markov system, when in reality we can do an awful lot conditioned on past events. Since I was fully convinced that Robz was scum yesterday, I feel that you and WW should be able to see something there.

There is no way I would ever want to lynch either of you today. In that case we will be faced with another "two-player-lynchpool-LyLo" and I will never be 100% sure about either one of you. I much prefer just one of these, with an almost guaranteed win afterwards and the same situation with more info in the worst case.

[SpaceAnemone]

No, I was hoping some other claims would emerge and it would narrow it down to "this person is lying or this person is lying". I'm of a generation that generally massclaims at LYLO, I just sort of thought it was the time for that to happen.

So you're saying that if you had been a vig, you'd have been willing to entirely give up any chance of shooting again and marked yourself for the next kill on the off-chance that there was a scum who'd make things easier for you by pretending to be another PR? And you'd have done that because it was the "done thing", without having considered how awful it was in your particular position? That just doesn't seem like plausible play from a player as strong as you.

@Calamitas, WW, mcmc and teamlyle, does Robz really seem like a person who was actually thinking like a vig in that situation to you?

[Robz888]

Now again, but a bit more concise now:
Currently it is public knowledge that {Sa, robz} contains exactly one scum and exactly one vig.
Additionally it is known that {Calamitas, mcm, WW} contains 1 scum.
The scum in the latter group is overwhelmingly more likely to be the rb since scum wouldn't want to give the vig a shot if the fakeclaimed vig gets lynched today.
In case of a no-lynch, scum must reduce either playerpool.

There are two options then:
- The vig gets killed.
- Someone out of {Cala, mcm, WW} gets killed

In case of the first scenario we know the other one to be scum. We lynch him and are faced with a 2 player lynchpool.

In case of the second scenario, we lynch out of the two survivors out of {mcm, Cala, WW}. We have a 50% chance of hitting scum there. In case we hit the real scum, we have most likely hit the rb. In that case, if scum doesn't possess the switch anymore, the surviving vig kills the last scum (that one is confirmed) and the game is won.

I don't understand why the scum in the Cala/mcmc/WW set is more like to be the RB. Based on the analysis you just laid out, it would be smarter for the RB to counterclaim me, force this standoff, follow your plan, and at worst get the non-RB lynched.

It could even be you, in fact!

This explains the belated counterclaiming of me, really.

[Robz888]

Now again, but a bit more concise now:
Currently it is public knowledge that {Sa, robz} contains exactly one scum and exactly one vig.
Additionally it is known that {Calamitas, mcm, WW} contains 1 scum.
The scum in the latter group is overwhelmingly more likely to be the rb since scum wouldn't want to give the vig a shot if the fakeclaimed vig gets lynched today.
In case of a no-lynch, scum must reduce either playerpool.

There are two options then:
- The vig gets killed.
- Someone out of {Cala, mcm, WW} gets killed

In case of the first scenario we know the other one to be scum. We lynch him and are faced with a 2 player lynchpool.

In case of the second scenario, we lynch out of the two survivors out of {mcm, Cala, WW}. We have a 50% chance of hitting scum there. In case we hit the real scum, we have most likely hit the rb. In that case, if scum doesn't possess the switch anymore, the surviving vig kills the last scum (that one is confirmed) and the game is won.

I don't understand why the scum in the Cala/mcmc/WW set is more like to be the RB. Based on the analysis you just laid out, it would be smarter for the RB to counterclaim me, force this standoff, follow your plan, and at worst get the non-RB lynched.

It could even be you, in fact!

This explains the belated counterclaiming of me, really.

It* being the scum in the Cala/mcmc/WW set. Good strategy for your RB to survive, it it's Space.

[Robz888]

Calamitas, I definitely see what you're saying: it IS better to do your plan, if the RB is in the you/mcmc/WW set, rather than the me/Space set. But given that, there was nothing to prevent the scum team from doing it the other way around. And there's a 50% chance you, the person making this claim, are on the scum team anyway!