Print

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

[Tiruin]

<Posting here when I'm less than x__x and extend and sorry for my capricious activity and argh>

[Jim Groovester]

Did you not read my reasons?

Look here and here.

I hope my insinuations are obvious enough, but in case they aren't, he's scum because it's apparent from his RV answers that he's worried a lot about getting lynched, getting caught, incriminating himself, and that sort of thing. These are things that worry scum more than town.

Then, after I leveled my accusation, he spends the next nine hours and some sixty odd posts elsewhere on the forum. I think I may have rattled him a little, so there's that too.

Hm, I just realized, he forgot to answer one of my questions. He should probably get on that.

[notquitethere]

Princess Groovester, I can see how what Cado said was problematic, but he at first appeared to give a legitimate reason why a town player would want day kills over night kills in that town have an incentive not to be mislynched and so at first it would seem that being tracked while misfiring a vig-kill is a very easy way for a vigilante town player to get mislynched. However, now I've actually given it a bit more thought:

Princess Cado
In the vast majority of cases where a vigilante miskills a player at night and they're tracked by town, there'll also be a scum night kill. In such a case, it'd be easy and believable for the vigilante to claim vigilante. They're not going to be counterclaimed (as this would confirm the fakeclaimer as scum if the vig is lynched), so the worst that could happen is players believe them to be a serial killer (but the benefit of the doubt would probably be given if your scum hunting was otherwise sound). Essentially, your response did seem very unguarded. Could you expand on your thoughts here?

[freeformschooler]

((I am deriving much entertainment from this. Just wanted to pop in and say that. Sorry for the interruption. Carry on.))

[webadict]

Princesses Wuba and Griffion

No, I mean why did you unvote your previous target, but is there something about Ottofar that means you shouldn't vote him?

That's not the complete case though, you voted for me. I was under the impression that the "random" part of "random voting phase" was about who you focused on and started your pressure on, rather than just randomly throwing your vote around to seem to be doing stuff while you wait for a clock to tick down to day two. Why did you not care where your vote was and move on to a decidedly unpointed question to Lady Ottofar?

Hah, it's fair to say I actually get a bit too enthusiastic with throwing around the red vote. I never explicitly unvoted, it's more that I also put a red vote on Ottofar and by the rules of the game that counted as unvoting Griffionday. As I'll admit and as Ottofar says below, this probably isn't an effective strategy. Basically on a certain level I don't really believe an RVS vote holds weight, hence my over-casualness here. These initial flurries are just to get a conversation started until a plausible lynch candidate emerges. On further reflection, I have almost got mislynched a few times now by RVS votes that players have parked so I really should take them more seriously. Just because I don't think they're significant, doesn't mean others feel the same. In any case, now we're a few days into Day 1 I'll be much more circumspect. Pressure votes from here on in until we get to lynching votes. I believe in the weight of pressure votes.

But your vote doesn't hold any pressure, since there's no reasoning behind why you DROPPED it. All it shows to the next person is that they just have to answer one question in some manner that isn't stupid, and you'll drop the vote.

See, I just don't believe in those types of votes. If you're voting someone, it should be to lynch them. Because that's what it's there for. It's like a gun. You do not just point guns at people unless you're set on killing them. Otherwise, it's just an empty vote. How can we take you seriously?

[notquitethere]

Uh, Princess Wuba I think you misunderstood what I was trying to say. Let me be more explicit. I believe in the existence of three kinds of votes. First, there's RVS votes which are kind of pointless and hold no pressure and I don't take seriously. These are votes at the beginning of the game made without the serious intention of following through. Then there's pressure votes: votes which you make on people who have acted scummily, which you will keep unless they give you a good explanation for their behaviour. My last few votes on Princesses Cado and Groovester have been of this kind. Finally, there are lynch votes (which pressure votes can turn into), votes where you are fundamentally convinced that the other person should be lynched and you don't normally see the target being able to say anything to dissuade you.

This is a disputable taxonomy, but that's what I'm working with. So when I said 'I believe in pressure votes' I wasn't saying that all my votes in this game were pressure votes, far from it, but that purely random vote stage votes are without pressure, hence why I was comparatively careless in placing them. Now we're so close to deadline, we have left the random vote stage in any case.

So to take the current situation: my vote on Cado will stay unless he gives me a compelling reason to shift it, and the further the game progresses and the scummier players appear, the greater the weight of reason they'll need to shift a vote. I believe in trying to make the vote do some work. That said, I'm always learning and I'll bear your points in mind.

[RangerCado]

((All my questions to people will be at the bottom of the post))

Okami: ...Now thats just playing with my Emotions right there. Anyway, I think I would rather have a two-shot day kill than be a vigilante. I've never been too good at the night game and abilities that can be used during the day are quite useful, especially if your on the chopping block and you want to kill your top scum picks. Day- kills are also harder to track if you mis-judge your target. To put it short, I trust my Day game more than my night game, and I find a two-shot daykill more useful because of it being a day-kill.

What if it was a one-shot daykill?  Would that change your decision?

Jim: ...That was thoroughly taken out of context. Regardless, I see where your coming from. But lets look at it like this, if you get tracked by a townie killing someone, their are going to try and get you lynched. If your a townie when this happens, the town wastes a lynch on you, and Mafia get even closer to their goal than they already were when you mis-killed someone in the first place.

Why should you be afraid of someone tracking you?  Are you saying that you'd use a kill on someone even if you weren't confident that you could justify the kill to the rest of the town?  Why do you think using a kill on a hunch, rather than waiting until you have a reasonable amount of evidence, is beneficial Town play?

Okami: Having it a one-shot would not change my decision. I still find Day powers more useful than Night powers in a lot of cases.

And I would not kill on a hunch and I would gather evidence, but the likeliest outcome to me for how I think, would it would be a case against the player who I thought the least likeliest to get lynched on my scum list, despite evidence I found to support it. I have a confidence issue with things like that, I want to use the power correctly, but how can I justify it if I'm wrong when the person had less scummy activity than others, but wasn't holding up for me? To answer your question fully, killing on a hunch is not beneficial to Town in most, if not all cases. Those cases where its not, I have no idea.

Jim: ...That was thoroughly taken out of context. Regardless, I see where your coming from. But lets look at it like this, if you get tracked by a townie killing someone, their are going to try and get you lynched. If your a townie when this happens, the town wastes a lynch on you, and Mafia get even closer to their goal than they already were when you mis-killed someone in the first place.

No, what happens is that the town player who tracked you claims he saw you go to X player's house when X player died during the night. Then you claim that yes, that happened, because you're a vigilante. Then you state your reasons for your kills and everybody has a big discussion about how much they believe you. It is not an automatic lynch since vigilantes are potent town resources.

Your answers to various RVS questions posed to you indicate you're overly interested in how a role will bite you in the ass, and in some instances more interested in that than the sorts of opportunities the role affords you.

Getting caught, it seems, is a point of worry for you. I wonder why?

I also find it strange that your vote goes to me without any questions or further evidence. What else have I done that you find scummy?

Gotta start somewhere.

Jim: I, am a paranoid person in this game. I did something similar in Webadict's Magic Mafia where I acted really paranoid for most of the game. And like most people, I don't like it when I find out I'm wrong in my case against someone. And I thought we were talking about a Day-kill, why the sudden switch to the Vigilante example?

And you "gotta start somewhere" is by putting an admitted lynch vote on me and then not asking any questions till I called you out on it? I fail to see how that makes any sense.

Princess Cado
In the vast majority of cases where a vigilante miskills a player at night and they're tracked by town, there'll also be a scum night kill. In such a case, it'd be easy and believable for the vigilante to claim vigilante. They're not going to be counterclaimed (as this would confirm the fakeclaimer as scum if the vig is lynched), so the worst that could happen is players believe them to be a serial killer (but the benefit of the doubt would probably be given if your scum hunting was otherwise sound). Essentially, your response did seem very unguarded. Could you expand on your thoughts here?

NQT: See above to Jim about me being paranoid about roles a lot. This is not new behaviour for me, as was shown in my first few games as well. And I can only think of one time in my short time on this board that my scum hunting could have been enough to justify a kill to the other players. (And I was right too... though they were mod-killed by Wuba because of everyone dropping Magic Mafia)
Jim: Since your vote is a lynch vote, i'll ask you this. If I flipped town, how would you react with your current evidence? And may I ask why you only said you suspected I was scum with no further questions until called out on it?

NQT: Your vote is adding pressure because you wish for more information rather than going for a Lynch vote like Jim so i'll ask you this. In the other games you've played with me, how does my behaviour in those compare to now? And who else besides me seems scummy to you?

Lenglon: What lessons have you learned from previous games that you are trying to implement in this one? Do you believe their working in the different environment so far?

Tiruin: When your feeling better, who do you find most suspicious right now? How about least as well? ((Get well soon))

[Leafsnail]

Okami no Rei: You're mafia, and a non-mafia member claims to have received a guilty inspection on one of your teammates.  How do you react?

Princess Okami frowned.  She'd not been expecting such blatant discussion of assassination strategies.  What was this Princess Leaf's angle?  She set aside the notion for later consideration, then focused on the conversation at hand.  At least it wasn't more discussion of flowers and dresses.

Bus the teammate.  NK the cop.  If we're at five players, have team-mate counter-claim cop and bus me to "prove" it.  Teammate then NKs someone other than cop.  Three players left with a "confirmed" cop mean mafia win when the real cop is lynched.

What about if they're claiming a guily on someone who isn't your teammate?

This one's easy, she thought.  If one's enemy is about to throw himself on his sword, make no move to stop them.

Let them have their fun with the "guilty" inspection (I am here assuming a near guaranteed lynch with no counter-claim).  NK them that night (roleblock instead if available, unless a doctor has already died).  Thank them in mafiachat for outing themselves as third-party, for leading an easy lynch on an innocent miller, or for outing a rival third-party, as applicable.

That sounds pretty reasonable.  Unvote.

Princess Leafsnail
Are you planning on making a post before day's end?

Yeah.

Reactions, what else is there?

What reactions?  How would they help?  I'm pretty sure you were going for an under-the-radar strategy.

Why are you so jumpy about a substanceless RVS vote?

Princess Groovester, what makes Princess Cado scummy enough to lynch after so little has happened?

Princess Cado
In the vast majority of cases where a vigilante miskills a player at night and they're tracked by town, there'll also be a scum night kill. In such a case, it'd be easy and believable for the vigilante to claim vigilante. They're not going to be counterclaimed (as this would confirm the fakeclaimer as scum if the vig is lynched), so the worst that could happen is players believe them to be a serial killer (but the benefit of the doubt would probably be given if your scum hunting was otherwise sound). Essentially, your response did seem very unguarded. Could you expand on your thoughts here?

All three of these votes make no sense at all, notquitethere.  You go from thinking a line of reasoning is a joke, to thinking it's weak to the point of being scummy, to thinking it's a damning case.

Firstly, all three of these positions seem dumb to me.  Jim's vote was pretty clearly serious, but not a locked in lynch vote, so your first two positions were weird (especially because you've since acknowledged a middle ground between the two types of votes exists).  I also don't see much strength at all to Jim's case, so it seems odd that you'd switch to emphatically supporting it afterwards.

Secondly, I don't think you'd allow yourself to be smacked around this easily as town - I usually find you pretty stubborn and set in your reads.  I suspect you voted Jim in a panic, then regretted it reverted your vote back to Cado after you calmed down again.

[Ottofar]

Reactions, what else is there?

What reactions?  How would they help?  I'm pretty sure you were going for an under-the-radar strategy.

Any reactions and all reactions. They could help find the scum. Also, you would be wrong, then.

RangerCado, what's the proper way to work out a 6-player MyLo? What about a 4-player one?

If I understand the question right, your asking how to know if its MyLo or not. For this game, if we killed a single scum player and any harmful third-parties, but no one else, we would concievably be at 6-player MyLo when we got to 6-players. The same goes if we killed 2 scum players and harmful third-parties before we got to 4-players. This is all assuming that there are only 3 scum which seems a decent estimate given the number of players.

All right. How would you act in each scenario?

Extend

[Leafsnail]

I guess I'll have to admit I'm sortof impressed, I've never seen anyone fail to answer a question with so much conviction.  So your scumhunting plan boils down to

do anything -> something happens in response -> -> scum found

?

[Ottofar]

More like Do anything -> Something happens in response -> Interpret what happened, maybe follow up with more -> Scum/Town/Third party/Whatever found.

[Leafsnail]

Have you not considered replacing the first step with "do something likely to get a useful response"?

[Lenglon]

"Well, Lady Ranger, my list of things I've learned since the first time I made an appearance is rather long, tedious to list off, and would almost certainly be incomplete simply because I wouldn't remember it all. do you have something in particular you wanted to ask me about or maybe something more specific? anyway, I'm currently a little more interested in the vaguaries of Lady Ottofar right now. Lady Ottofar, isn't your list far to vague to be meaningful? Why are you refusing to give any details or examples? Your current explanation is so vague and nonspecific that it essentially contains no thought or meaning."

Lenglon: What lessons have you learned from previous games that you are trying to implement in this one? Do you believe their working in the different environment so far?

Ranger: too long to list, you asked me what every single lesson I've learned over the course of every single mafia game I've ever played was. if you have a more specific question, feel free to ask, but I'm not answering that one, I value my time and effort more than that.
Ottofar: why are you refusing to give details or specifics?

[webadict]

Okami no Rei: You're mafia, and a non-mafia member claims to have received a guilty inspection on one of your teammates.  How do you react?

Princess Okami frowned.  She'd not been expecting such blatant discussion of assassination strategies.  What was this Princess Leaf's angle?  She set aside the notion for later consideration, then focused on the conversation at hand.  At least it wasn't more discussion of flowers and dresses.

Bus the teammate.  NK the cop.  If we're at five players, have team-mate counter-claim cop and bus me to "prove" it.  Teammate then NKs someone other than cop.  Three players left with a "confirmed" cop mean mafia win when the real cop is lynched.

What about if they're claiming a guily on someone who isn't your teammate?

This one's easy, she thought.  If one's enemy is about to throw himself on his sword, make no move to stop them.

Let them have their fun with the "guilty" inspection (I am here assuming a near guaranteed lynch with no counter-claim).  NK them that night (roleblock instead if available, unless a doctor has already died).  Thank them in mafiachat for outing themselves as third-party, for leading an easy lynch on an innocent miller, or for outing a rival third-party, as applicable.

That sounds pretty reasonable.  Unvote.

Really? Nothing strikes you as off about that? All of that sounds reasonable?

Really???

[Leafsnail]

I misread his first answer as something that wasn't completely stupid.

ONR: there are two claimed cops.  Would you lynch anybody who isn't one of those two cops, and how do you think that relates to the first scenario