Print

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

[Captain_Frisk]

Qvist - that is called "OMGUS'

[Voltgloss]

Before replying further, I'd like to hear everyone's take on my case and Qvist's response.  Most of all, I'm interested to hear from ash.  (I realize that means we need to wait for the timezone difference, but, as they say in Witches' Brew, So be it!)

[Qvist]

Qvist - that is called "OMGUS'

And by "that" you mean my or his comment!?

[Captain_Frisk]

So - to look at Voltgloss / Grujah:

1. Did nothing day 1.
Day 2
2. Wanted everyone to weigh in on yuma.
3. Has been harassing Axxle all through day 2.
4. Got pissed about lurking.
5. Asked Eevee to clarify the case on joth.
6. Did not rate joth in my scummy 5 game.
7. Votes Axxle AFTER i prompt him for being the only person not voting.
8. Ranks joth as #3 out of 9 in post 883 (eevee #6)
Day 3
9. Starts massclaim theory

So - after harping on qvist super hard for ignoring joth... he almost completely ignored the joth situation on day 2.

I do think I agree with him on mass claiming.  I think we can hit scum today, and claiming should guarantee that we get an investigation off.

[Captain_Frisk]

Qvist - that is called "OMGUS'

And by "that" you mean my or his comment!?

When someone puts together a case / vote / casts suspicion on you - and you immediately vote them back, its called an OMGUS vote (Oh my god you suck).  I don't know that its scummy, but it certainly has less credibility than a normal case, because you're likely fueled by irrational rage at the person who's voting for you (because they are wrong, in which case you're pissed, or because they are right, in which case you're pissed)

[Qvist]

Ah ok, I see. Thanks for clarification.

[Voltgloss]

It's fair of Frisk to point out that I didn't say much about joth on Day 2.  Reason being:  I doubted (and still doubt) that both ash and joth could be scum, given their near-identical behavior in piling on my yuma vote.  Throughout Day 2, I considered ash scummier than joth, and so when I thought about "who might be scum on the yumawagon" ash always took precedence (and joth did not). 

As I mentioned earlier this Day, the reverse of this thinking is why joth's flip has now reduced my suspicion of ash.

[TheMunch]

My short list for the last 2 scum is CF Qvist ash volt

[Captain_Frisk]

It's fair of Frisk to point out that I didn't say much about joth on Day 2.  Reason being:  I doubted (and still doubt) that both ash and joth could be scum, given their near-identical behavior in piling on my yuma vote.  Throughout Day 2, I considered ash scummier than joth, and so when I thought about "who might be scum on the yumawagon" ash always took precedence (and joth did not). 

As I mentioned earlier this Day, the reverse of this thinking is why joth's flip has now reduced my suspicion of ash.

But you were never voting for ash?

[Voltgloss]

It's fair of Frisk to point out that I didn't say much about joth on Day 2.  Reason being:  I doubted (and still doubt) that both ash and joth could be scum, given their near-identical behavior in piling on my yuma vote.  Throughout Day 2, I considered ash scummier than joth, and so when I thought about "who might be scum on the yumawagon" ash always took precedence (and joth did not). 

As I mentioned earlier this Day, the reverse of this thinking is why joth's flip has now reduced my suspicion of ash.

But you were never voting for ash?

Because I found Axxle scummier than either of them.

[Insomniac]

Vote Count 3-2

Captain_Frisk (2) - TheMunch, Axxle
Qvist (2) - yuma, Voltgloss
Voltgloss (1) - Qvist

Not Voting (2) - Captain_Frisk, Ashersky

With 7 alive it takes 4 to lynch

Deadline: December 12 2012, 8:20am PST (11:20am forum time)

[Captain_Frisk]

@yuma - what are your thoughts on mass claim?

[Captain_Frisk]

And Axxle - I'd love to hear an explanation on why explaining why Volt's idea won't work is anti town.  If you explain why it won't work - then we won't do it, and thus its no different than just regular scum hunting right?

[Captain_Frisk]

I was going to say I disagree but it might just work.

Vote: Captain_Frisk

I have to go with my reads here.

@Axxle - what happened in these 5 minutes?

[Voltgloss]

I'm also open to the massclaim variant where everyone claims "Cop" or "not Cop."  Frisk mentioned this in an earlier post.  I haven't run the maths yet as to which variant is best for town, but I can see this as a potentially workable alternative:

1.  Say only 1 person claims Cop.  He is then confirmed town.  Of the remaining 6 players, we have a 50% chance of lynching scum even with a pure random lynch, assuming the Doctor claims if he is about to be lynched.  (And even if scum fakeclaims Doctor, that just puts us right back at 50% if the real Doctor counterclaims.)  Lynch scum, and we go into Day 4 with Cop + investigation vs. 1 scum, and could have the Doctor still alive if he successfully stayed hidden Day 3 and if the scum don't pick right with their nightkill.

2.  Say 2 people claim Cop.  One is town, one is scum.  50% chance of lynching right, and if we do, we're again into Day 4 with Cop + investigation vs. 1 scum with a possibly still-alive Doctor.  Lynch wrong, and we lynch the faker Day 4 and go into Lylo Day 5 - but with the possibility of a Doc blocking the Night 4 kill.

Again, I think our reads will help us bump those raw random-50% numbers up to even better likelihood of victory.

[Captain_Frisk]

Munch, are you against all claims in every game?

Actually I was just recently discussing this with Shraeye while we were taking out the trash.  I think part of the problem is when I think of claiming I think of unsubstantiated claiming.  Claims that only have the players word to back them up.  I would say there are reasons to come out with your role at the time when it is most opportune to do so.  I mean, cop might have to come out with the fact that hes cop in order to share game winning investigatory information.  But in precisely these situations, there are people who can substantiate the players claims.  There are also some setups that can be broken by massclaims, but those usually involve a great degree of flavor.

In this game, with no PRs actually being able to use their role, except doctor most likely last night, everyone has at best unsubstantiated claims.  With 1 mislynch I would rather leave this game up to reads than a "greater than 50% chance to win."  I'm not going to flip a coin when I'm pretty sure I know where scum is.

So - in this game I would argue that everyone's claim is substantiated by the open nature of the setup.  This isn't like some other game where I claim to have day-vigging powers.  (good times!)

We know there are 2 remaining town PRs.  A cop and a doctor.  If a claim is not counter claimed - then we treat it as truthful - because you can be damn sure that if I was the doctor, I'd have called Joth out on his bullshit.  (I think its rather clear from my reaction to Joth's claim that I'm not)

If you're about to die as a PR - you generally claim - because you getting lynched is bad for town, and it gives town a 2nd chance at a lynch + information about your wagon.

In this game, if we follow volts plan of a generic claim and we get a scum lynch we have a chance at getting into a "follow the cop" setup, which is AMAZING for town.

I'd love to call you and Axxle scummy for opposing, but I think you just haven't thought about it, and Axxle (as town) is someone who voted on a plan that was going to result in him getting night killed in MIV, so he's not high on my mafia theory leaderboard.

[Captain_Frisk]

I'm also open to the massclaim variant where everyone claims "Cop" or "not Cop."  Frisk mentioned this in an earlier post.  I haven't run the maths yet as to which variant is best for town, but I can see this as a potentially workable alternative:

1.  Say only 1 person claims Cop.  He is then confirmed town.  Of the remaining 6 players, we have a 50% chance of lynching scum even with a pure random lynch, assuming the Doctor claims if he is about to be lynched.  (And even if scum fakeclaims Doctor, that just puts us right back at 50% if the real Doctor counterclaims.)  Lynch scum, and we go into Day 4 with Cop + investigation vs. 1 scum, and could have the Doctor still alive if he successfully stayed hidden Day 3 and if the scum don't pick right with their nightkill.

2.  Say 2 people claim Cop.  One is town, one is scum.  50% chance of lynching right, and if we do, we're again into Day 4 with Cop + investigation vs. 1 scum with a possibly still-alive Doctor.  Lynch wrong, and we lynch the faker Day 4 and go into Lylo Day 5 - but with the possibility of a Doc blocking the Night 4 kill.

Again, I think our reads will help us bump those raw random-50% numbers up to even better likelihood of victory.

I really wish I wasn't so nervous about you.

[TheMunch]

Munch, are you against all claims in every game?

Actually I was just recently discussing this with Shraeye while we were taking out the trash.  I think part of the problem is when I think of claiming I think of unsubstantiated claiming.  Claims that only have the players word to back them up.  I would say there are reasons to come out with your role at the time when it is most opportune to do so.  I mean, cop might have to come out with the fact that hes cop in order to share game winning investigatory information.  But in precisely these situations, there are people who can substantiate the players claims.  There are also some setups that can be broken by massclaims, but those usually involve a great degree of flavor.

In this game, with no PRs actually being able to use their role, except doctor most likely last night, everyone has at best unsubstantiated claims.  With 1 mislynch I would rather leave this game up to reads than a "greater than 50% chance to win."  I'm not going to flip a coin when I'm pretty sure I know where scum is.

So - in this game I would argue that everyone's claim is substantiated by the open nature of the setup.  This isn't like some other game where I claim to have day-vigging powers.  (good times!)

We know there are 2 remaining town PRs.  A cop and a doctor.  If a claim is not counter claimed - then we treat it as truthful - because you can be damn sure that if I was the doctor, I'd have called Joth out on his bullshit.  (I think its rather clear from my reaction to Joth's claim that I'm not)

If you're about to die as a PR - you generally claim - because you getting lynched is bad for town, and it gives town a 2nd chance at a lynch + information about your wagon.

In this game, if we follow volts plan of a generic claim and we get a scum lynch we have a chance at getting into a "follow the cop" setup, which is AMAZING for town.

I'd love to call you and Axxle scummy for opposing, but I think you just haven't thought about it, and Axxle (as town) is someone who voted on a plan that was going to result in him getting night killed in MIV, so he's not high on my mafia theory leaderboard.

You are free to call me whatever you like.  I have thought about it, although Volts most recent cop/notcop is a little more interesting and I would have to think about that one a little more.  Just cause I disagree with YOU on theory doesn't make me scum, nor does it make me wrong.  It just makes me someone that disagrees with you.

I had had a hard time with this concept in my first game, XI (God damn that game needs to finish) but I was butting heads a ton with eHal who was town on how to scumhunt.  It is very easy to go: My idea is right and thus pro-town, therefore people who disagree with me are inherently anti-town.  I think this is a flawed premise.  People can disagree and still think they are doing something pro-town.  I might not like it, but disagreeing on theory is far from a nail in the coffin in my books.

Thats why currently I am trying to separate the theory of Volts particular claims from the conspiracy of: Volt is scum who is trying to push a reasonable sounding plan that is somehow going to benefit scum more than it helps town.

[Captain_Frisk]

I had had a hard time with this concept in my first game, XI (God damn that game needs to finish) but I was butting heads a ton with eHal who was town on how to scumhunt.  It is very easy to go: My idea is right and thus pro-town, therefore people who disagree with me are inherently anti-town.  I think this is a flawed premise.  People can disagree and still think they are doing something pro-town.  I might not like it, but disagreeing on theory is far from a nail in the coffin in my books.

Generally frowned upon to talk about currently running games.  Not quite "editing posts" level illegal, but a smackable offense.

[Captain_Frisk]

Thats why currently I am trying to separate the theory of Volts particular claims from the conspiracy of: Volt is scum who is trying to push a reasonable sounding plan that is somehow going to benefit scum more than it helps town.

Well - you already said it won't work - but you haven't explained why.

[TheMunch]

I had had a hard time with this concept in my first game, XI (God damn that game needs to finish) but I was butting heads a ton with eHal who was town on how to scumhunt.  It is very easy to go: My idea is right and thus pro-town, therefore people who disagree with me are inherently anti-town.  I think this is a flawed premise.  People can disagree and still think they are doing something pro-town.  I might not like it, but disagreeing on theory is far from a nail in the coffin in my books.

Generally frowned upon to talk about currently running games.  Not quite "editing posts" level illegal, but a smackable offense.

I only feel comfortable mentioning it because we have both been dead for over a month +?

[TheMunch]

I had had a hard time with this concept in my first game, XI (God damn that game needs to finish) but I was butting heads a ton with eHal who was town on how to scumhunt.  It is very easy to go: My idea is right and thus pro-town, therefore people who disagree with me are inherently anti-town.  I think this is a flawed premise.  People can disagree and still think they are doing something pro-town.  I might not like it, but disagreeing on theory is far from a nail in the coffin in my books.

Generally frowned upon to talk about currently running games.  Not quite "editing posts" level illegal, but a smackable offense.

I only feel comfortable mentioning it because we have both been dead for over a month +?

Yeah I died Oct 8th, he died the 26th.  I'm talking about arguments I had with him almost 2 months ago...

[Captain_Frisk]

I had had a hard time with this concept in my first game, XI (God damn that game needs to finish) but I was butting heads a ton with eHal who was town on how to scumhunt.  It is very easy to go: My idea is right and thus pro-town, therefore people who disagree with me are inherently anti-town.  I think this is a flawed premise.  People can disagree and still think they are doing something pro-town.  I might not like it, but disagreeing on theory is far from a nail in the coffin in my books.

Generally frowned upon to talk about currently running games.  Not quite "editing posts" level illegal, but a smackable offense.

I only feel comfortable mentioning it because we have both been dead for over a month +?

Yeah I died Oct 8th, he died the 26th.  I'm talking about arguments I had with him almost 2 months ago...

Sorry - totally not aware of game state in that behemoth.

[TheMunch]

Cool, yeah I dont mean to blatantly break all the rules but there are limits...  Its just the glaring example I had in my head of: I had a disagreement with someone which made me think that they were being incredibly scummy, and I was wrong.

On further reflection though, I dont like even the cop/not cop case.  Axxle is hesitant to state reasons why these are bad and I had a tendency to agree with him, however I dont know why.  If it is a bad idea to claim it should be the people who know why a scheme is bad for claiming, unless it gives away other information, should let people know.

Lets say only cop claims cop, everyone else claims not cop.  Each individual is hunting for scum amongst the 5 players not themselves.  All we've done is outed the cop, which is terrible when there is a 4/6 chance to fail to hit scum for our lynch.  The way that we improve that is if doctor claims too.  That puts the chance at hitting scum at 2/5.  We have traded both our power roles for a 40% chance to hit scum.  So if it is random, more likely than not both scum is alive, they can keep doc off, kill the cop.  Easy for them.  We have now mislynched and our down a cop, potentially with a revealed doc.  The next day we are at 2 scum, 3 town and no cop.  This seems bad to me.

[Captain_Frisk]

Lets say only cop claims cop, everyone else claims not cop.  Each individual is hunting for scum amongst the 5 players not themselves.  All we've done is outed the cop, which is terrible when there is a 4/6 chance to fail to hit scum for our lynch.  The way that we improve that is if doctor claims too.  That puts the chance at hitting scum at 2/5.  We have traded both our power roles for a 40% chance to hit scum.  So if it is random, more likely than not both scum is alive, they can keep doc off, kill the cop.  Easy for them.  We have now mislynched and our down a cop, potentially with a revealed doc.  The next day we are at 2 scum, 3 town and no cop.  This seems bad to me.

So here's where you're wrong.

Cop claims.  If unclaimed - he is confirmed town.  That leaves 2 scum among 6.  (2 scum among 5 from my perspective)  We won't actually lynch the doctor out of that group - because the doctor will claim.  So now we're down to 2 out of 4 - hence the 50% that Volt is seeing.  There's a 40% chance to hit scum straight up without even getting into the doctor, and then another 10% chance of exposing the doctor.

Today - we want to lynch scum AND make sure the doctor knows who the cop is - so the doctor can protect the cop and we can get an investigation result for tomorrow.  You could argue that the cop wants to know who the doctor is so that he doesn't waste an investigation on him.

If we mislynch - then the power roles don't really matter because we're boned anyway.