Print

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

[Voltgloss]

Phone posting today.  Another mod question:  If two+ players night kill same target, who gets the cannibal info?

[Voltaire]

Volt, what do you think about my point about nkirbit?

I read him more as "don't want to talk about this" followed by "town is missing something so I should talk about it anyway."

[Archetype]

Mod question: If a player is targeted twice in the same night by different players will the flavor the next morning reflect that?

That is will the flavor have something like, "2 bullet holes were in his chest"? Or will the player just be announced dead? Also will SK kills and mafia kills and vig kills have a different way of killing or are all kills created equal?

All deaths will be reflected as 'Player X, Player Y, Player Z were vaporized'. So nothing distinguishes between the different killers or how many killed the target.

If two+ players night kill same target, who gets the cannibal info?

It's in OP#2. But, anyone that kills them will get the cannibal info.

[Voltgloss]

Volt, what do you think about my point about nkirbit?

I read him more as "don't want to talk about this" followed by "town is missing something so I should talk about it anyway."

I hear what you are saying.  I think it is less compelling than you suggest because the quote you pulled was the third of nkirbit's theory talk posts.  He didn't chime in just to make that point.  He was participating generally after saying he wouldn't.

I do agree the point nk raised is valid.

[Archetype]

Vote Count 1.1

Jorbles (1) Voltaire
yuma (2) mail-mi, Eevee
nkirbit (2) Voltgloss, shraeye
liopoil (1) UmbrageOfSnow

Not Voting (6) ashersky, Jorbles, Robz888, yuma, nkirbit, liopoil
With 12 alive, it takes 7 to lynch. Day 1 ends August 17th.

[Voltgloss]

Robz, you out there?

[Voltaire]

Robz, you out there?

It's his birthday.

[Voltgloss]

Robz, you out there?

It's his birthday.

Ah.  Happy Birthday Robz!

[Voltaire]

I hear what you are saying.  I think it is less compelling than you suggest because the quote you pulled was the third of nkirbit's theory talk posts.  He didn't chime in just to make that point.  He was participating generally after saying he wouldn't.

I do agree the point nk raised is valid.

Fair enough.

Here's a potential disaster scenario:
We get 4 claimants.
We mislynch a PR.
The other two PRs are killed at night. We've given up all our PRs for 1 scum who then claims to be Vig and that he NKed the scum claimant so we're not even sure that he's scum and then the SK kills him at night so we never find out that he was scum all along.

What are the odds this happens? I can't figure out the WIFOM one way or another.

[UmbrageOfSnow]

What are the odds this happens? I can't figure out the WIFOM one way or another.

If we don't lynch the 4th claimant as I suggested, the odds are 0.

I think claiming is pretty stupid for scum in this setup if we did that, so by all means, let them do it.

[mail-mi]

Mod question: If a player is targeted twice in the same night by different players will the flavor the next morning reflect that?

That is will the flavor have something like, "2 bullet holes were in his chest"? Or will the player just be announced dead? Also will SK kills and mafia kills and vig kills have a different way of killing or are all kills created equal?

All deaths will be reflected as 'Player X, Player Y, Player Z were vaporized'. So nothing distinguishes between the different killers or how many killed the target.

If two+ players night kill same target, who gets the cannibal info?

It's in OP#2. But, anyone that kills them will get the cannibal info.

Hm. CAn someone rekill a dead player to get the info?

[mail-mi]

yuma's reaction to all this planning is the most interesting thing to me this far. he opposes it in a pleasant, sort of agreeable way. while I like everyone playing nice, I was expecting something different.

vote: yuma

Which is how he'd normally oppose a plan he disagrees with, at least for a while and then if it looks like town really wants to do it he says firmly that he won't participate. He normally starts out nice about it though. This reads like normal yuma for me (which is null for the record).

I think Voltgloss's update to the plan is better than the original proposed one, but what happens if we get 4 people claiming PR? Then we have a serious problem.

Here's a potential disaster scenario:
We get 4 claimants.
We mislynch a PR.
The other two PRs are killed at night. We've given up all our PRs for 1 scum who then claims to be Vig and that he NKed the scum claimant so we're not even sure that he's scum and then the SK kills him at night so we never find out that he was scum all along.

And another reason I don't like the plan much.

[shraeye]

Volt, what do you think about my point about nkirbit?

I read him more as "don't want to talk about this" followed by "town is missing something so I should talk about it anyway."

I'm really more concerned with what nkirbit has to say about it.  Or is he your partner, so you already know what he thinks?

[liopoil]

What the heck umbrage??? I have read the threadd AND the setup, which is saying something since I'm V/LA with occasional phone access only. I am fully aware of the no flip on NKs. D1 though, we can absolutely trust L-1 claimants if there is no counterclaim. guess what day we're on? D1.

[Voltaire]

I think claiming is pretty stupid for scum in this setup if we did that, so by all means, let them do it.

I agree, but we already have yuma, shraeye, and mail-mi registering disagreement, and that's already enough to scuttle it. Partial claims (or scum getting away with being one of 3 claims!) would just be the worst.

I'm really more concerned with what nkirbit has to say about it.  Or is he your partner, so you already know what he thinks?

Scumteams D1! Scumteams D1! Everybody's favorite. I mean, I'm interested in what nkirbit has to say about it too, but for me it's a null read from him right now. I just wanted to know everyone else's reasoning. I am assuming you agree with Volt now. I do not find either you or Volt scummy so for for this accusation. I would find people piling on further scummy.

What the heck umbrage??? I have read the threadd AND the setup, which is saying something since I'm V/LA with occasional phone access only. I am fully aware of the no flip on NKs. D1 though, we can absolutely trust L-1 claimants if there is no counterclaim. guess what day we're on? D1.

vote: liopoil for overreacting to one vote.

[UmbrageOfSnow]

however, our PR's can't be mislynched anyway, as long as we give them a chance to claim at L-1. sure, scum can fakeclaim, but they can do that in a massclaim anyway.

That's true today, but tomorrow it isn't.  The whole point of a massclaim (or the new, better 3 vague PR claims) is that scum can't fakeclaim without opening themselves up to being shot by the other scum faction.

Your reasoning is completely untrue tomorrow if we don't claim today.

The fact that this is D1 is irrelevant, since after Day 1 a massclaim is less useful, and becomes less and less so each day.

[UmbrageOfSnow]

I think claiming is pretty stupid for scum in this setup if we did that, so by all means, let them do it.

I agree, but we already have yuma, shraeye, and mail-mi registering disagreement, and that's already enough to scuttle it. Partial claims (or scum getting away with being one of 3 claims!) would just be the worst.

But if we have 2 claims or something, I think PR!Yuma (or whomever) letting a scum fakeclaim be one of the 3 claims, making scum an IC would also be the worst.

And frankly, I'd be willing to consider that possibility if we go several nights with claimed PRs left alive.

vote: liopoil for overreacting to one vote.

I'm with Monsieur Arouet on this one, that reaction makes me more inclined to keep it there.

[UmbrageOfSnow]

Also, Mail-mi's disagreement with the plan is agreeing with a worst-case that I already pointed out is impossible if play this smart.

Did you not read my posts on that, Mail-mi?

(Also, I'm increasingly getting the feeling that there is a subset of players who just ignore my posts.  Ashersky, and the great writer François-Marie Arouet read me, but other people seem to gloss right over.)

[Voltaire]

So far I have a town read on ash for his thorough thinking-through of claiming, and a smaller townread on Voltgloss for helping improve it, and the everytimeheseemsobvtown town read on UoS for more plan help. I see lio as slightly scummy for his reaction to UoS. And a whole lotta null on everyone else.

I don't believe his early claim was an accident, I think it was deliberate and planned.  Whether for good or ill is unclear, of course.  Could also just be for annoying Yuma for reactions or encouraging others to just jump in without thinking (again, whether this is town or scum behavior from him is debatable).  But I don't think it was an unthinking claim.

In case it wasn't clear, I do not think ash made a mistake at all. It was obviously a conscious choice.

There have been lots of weird posts in this game. Like these:

I'm reading it, but don't expect any contributions from me.

I really do not like this attitude. Scumhunt!

I think we need to work extra hard to create interactions and stuff so we get away of theory talk.

And then nothing. Scumhunt!

PPE: Posts.

[liopoil]

My reaction had nothing to do with the vote, it was to him scolding me about not paying attention, when in reality I'm more caught up than I really should be. so yes, if we don't claim today we can't trust claimants on later days - however, if we claim now, at least one, likely two of our PRs gets killed tonight. by D3 start all of our ICs will probably be gone, AND they didn't help us D1 because we couldn't lynch them anyway, so they were ONLY helpful on D2. I can see vig claiming because he will still be  able to shoot once, but cop claiming? nahh, his PR is too good, especially if vig claims.

[UmbrageOfSnow]

My reaction had nothing to do with the vote, it was to him scolding me about not paying attention, when in reality I'm more caught up than I really should be. so yes, if we don't claim today we can't trust claimants on later days - however, if we claim now, at least one, likely two of our PRs gets killed tonight. by D3 start all of our ICs will probably be gone, AND they didn't help us D1 because we couldn't lynch them anyway, so they were ONLY helpful on D2. I can see vig claiming because he will still be  able to shoot once, but cop claiming? nahh, his PR is too good, especially if vig claims.

I'm hard-pressed to disagree with this, as it was basically my argument last night.  What do you think of the NEW plan that Voltgloss put out there?

[UmbrageOfSnow]

My reaction had nothing to do with the vote, it was to him scolding me about not paying attention, when in reality I'm more caught up than I really should be. so yes, if we don't claim today we can't trust claimants on later days - however, if we claim now, at least one, likely two of our PRs gets killed tonight. by D3 start all of our ICs will probably be gone, AND they didn't help us D1 because we couldn't lynch them anyway, so they were ONLY helpful on D2. I can see vig claiming because he will still be  able to shoot once, but cop claiming? nahh, his PR is too good, especially if vig claims.

I'm hard-pressed to disagree with this, as it was basically my argument last night.  What do you think of the NEW plan that Voltgloss put out there?

Actually, I guess that is a response to the new plan as well.  I somewhat agree, but the alternative seems to me that we have to ignore PR claims as the days go by, which also keeps our PRs from helping.

[liopoil]

I think  VG's plan with PR's claiming generic PR is betterthan massclaim, but I still think there is too high a chance of losing our cop, and again, all 3 will probably be dead by D3 start. I'd prefer just the roleblocker+vig claiming to be a roleblocker/vig, though I'm unsure about that even...

[mail-mi]

Also, Mail-mi's disagreement with the plan is agreeing with a worst-case that I already pointed out is impossible if play this smart.

Did you not read my posts on that, Mail-mi?

(Also, I'm increasingly getting the feeling that there is a subset of players who just ignore my posts.  Ashersky, and the great writer François-Marie Arouet read me, but other people seem to gloss right over.)

I did, and i say that if we have a 4th claimant (if we even have 3 claimants) then we do leave it alone. I don't care much if we claim, but considering that there are others that won't, I won't unless everyone agrees.

[UmbrageOfSnow]

Also, Mail-mi's disagreement with the plan is agreeing with a worst-case that I already pointed out is impossible if play this smart.

Did you not read my posts on that, Mail-mi?

(Also, I'm increasingly getting the feeling that there is a subset of players who just ignore my posts.  Ashersky, and the great writer François-Marie Arouet read me, but other people seem to gloss right over.)

I did, and i say that if we have a 4th claimant (if we even have 3 claimants) then we do leave it alone. I don't care much if we claim, but considering that there are others that won't, I won't unless everyone agrees.

Fair enough.

So, why'd you post that that was one of the reasons you disliked the plan, AFTER I had refuted it, and never follow up with your thoughts on my point until I pressed you on it?