I think you mean “less information than they usually do”, as Scum receives more information than Town in both of your examples.
:smack: Yes this is exactly what I meant.
yasee, and maybe i don’t play enough. i have never played as a scum where a Night action was attempted and we were told “the doc protected your chosen victim or you were blocked”. all i am familiar with is whether the action was successful or not. and i see and also understand that the last part of your observation was kind of catty wapus. now there has been color that might lead to supposition at times but more often than not it’s just that it didn’t work for whatever purpose (i.e. the door was locked or the person wasn’t at home or whatever).
Also, the town would (assuming there was 0 kills) have information in that they know that no kills were performed, but they don’t know why not.
The Not-Killers would also know that only 1 kill was performed. They know who they targeted but they again don’t know why they failed (block or Doc).
The successful killer gets no extra data. Everyone gets his knowledge- the identity of who they just killed.
And the town also has 2 members that now have small points of data- if they see 1 kill, they can take the assumption that whoever they targeted may have been protected/the killer based on their actions.
So for the Doc, that’s like a quarter data point, and a quarter for the RB.
The RB now has a suspect (he can try multiple blocks over several nights, in hopes that perhaps he has caught the SK (or sadly the Vig) or a Mafioso that’s continually elected to NK (highly unlikely), and the Doc has a potential person who he believes was the target of a kill though he will not know WHO attempted to kill that person, it is still a data point, esp. if a Vig tries to point out they attempted to kill X but it failed on such and such night (though scum could try to claim the same thing. Easiest thing to do in that case is let that person live a night and see if “loose ends” don’t just take care of themselves- perhaps the real vig would attack the false claim?
-But that’s only viable in the early game probably. Once numbers diminish i doubt the town can do such cavalier actions as sparring a potential killer (though again with a false vig claim, perhaps the real vig can step up and then at least we know where we are in the game- with the idea that this risk of losing 1/3 of their members in a 50-50 would not be appealing for scum to desire to false claim? And probably disastrous for the SK).
Basically to sum up, I don’t even see it as 0-1 against the town, but more like .1 for the town vs. 1 for the scum in the information trade.
Though the fact that there is a scum RB could totally mess with everyone’s head as then an RB could assume they have done something when they simply were Role blocked and nothing occurred or a doctor may think the same, but i think that goes along with the territory.
That’s the problem- scum seem very powerful here in that as long as they have a full team- they have the means to easily kill off a Self-protecting Doctor.
But I still think Data points are gained by actions- the town is not completely ignorant every morning on a blocked or missed kill, it’s just that the MAJORITY of the town may not have full data, but there are some members who can try to see if they have more information than others.
<snipped>
and of course my math skills have gone to hell over the years. but it sure seems that if someone is able to eliminate a possibility that another person is unable to eliminate that the first person would have more information than the second.
i mean if we were given a multiple choice test where the answer could be randomly any number of choices but one person was then taken aside and told btw it will never be x that that person would have more information than the other person.
ymmv
Yes, but if Person B is taken aside and told btw it will never be x or y, then person B will have even more of an advantage.
The scum in this game are Person A. The scum in games I’m familiar with (though I acknowledge now that it may not be the norm) are Person B.
Thus, boon.
Guys- the amount of time we’re spending over this is mind blowing. This is not an important point to get stuck on- hell, it won’t even matter much until D2. I’m not sure where this discussion went downhill, but I sense a scummish influence behind it, and keeping it going. FOS Pede, Peeker, Toejam, and everyone who keeps this game theory mess going.
That said, I thought Malahoth responded to Peeker’s pressure vote (at least, I assume it was a pressure vote?) pretty well- he didn’t really seem to get over excited and defensive. Unlike some of you, who seem to get your hackles raised awfully fast over Peeker’s aggressive style of play.
I can’t tell yet if what’s happening there is new players being startled by that kind of thing, or scum getting over defensive, like Red referred to:
I’d say it’s more scummy, because aggressiveness is not really a scumtell at all.
Also, in response to this:
I’d find it more scummy for him to make a stink and not vote after that. This early in the day, you can put someone on the hotspot and watch them squirm, and see what comes up.
The only reason I’ve been keeping this going is because:
a) Peeker said that I was scummy for making this point
but
b) peeker clearly doesn’t understand my point.
So I’ve been continually arguing with him in order to get him to change his mind or, failing that, demonstrate to you all that his accusation was inaccurate.
I agree, though, that the point itself is minuscule.
Was this an ironic joke vote? Seems like you are making seemingly innocent, potentially smearing inferences about his seemingly innocent, potentially smearing inferences? (Shit, now I’m doing it. :smack:)
I commented on this exchange earlier, but I didn’t think it through. You agree with killing the miller? Who said anything about miller lynch policy, was this an automatic reaction to the word miller? This exchange is sending up alarms for me.
Care to shed some light on what’s going on here, in case I’m reading it backwards or something?
You might be able to accuse me of smearing him if I didn’t put his name down in blue in the same post, but I did, so neener neener.
Just checking in. I thought the game started tomorrow, but never mind.
Still, I haven’t got my PM for some reason (I checked my CP and the option was on… as it always has been. So I PM’d to see whether I was able to send PM’s).
I had a heavy weekend, so I’ll be checking in during the week.
Well, peeker said he was for lynching the miller and I agreed, I guess not having read carefully enough that there were no millers, then he jumped down my throat because there were no millers. I have no idea why he even brought them up then! Was he setting a trap so he could say, “SEE, you’re not paying enough attention?” I really don’t get why no one’s saying it’s dumb that peeker brought up the lynch the miller and everyone’s acting like I brought it up out of nowhere!
What would you prefer to talk about while the game hasn’t even really “truly” started yet? We’re still missing quite a few people from confirmation votes, as most people expected this game to start on Monday (as **Diggit **proved).
I think it’s better to get these silly things over with right now, and when the day starts I’m sure new topics will be brought up. But to simply ignore a majority of the current discussion because it is wasting time, well that seems silly and foolish.
Your comments seem a bit of an over-reaction. Relax, good sir, and don’t get your rins all in a twist.
Hee! It’s ma’am, my dear jammer of toes.
If we were pregame, I think I might agree with you. But the day has started. Special ed started it in post 71. And so this stuff counts, it’s not pregame chatter. I know we’re missing some people (heck, I was startled a bit when I saw the game up and running) but we’re playing, for real, regardless.
So with that in mind, I find a lengthy discussion of what essentially boils down to game theory to be unproductive at best, scum driven at worst.
Except **peeker **wasn’t talking about lynching a miller, he was talking about lynching a player who tries to sow confusion by talking about exotic roles when there aren’t any. He simply used ‘miller discussion’ as an example.
Hoo boy, you’re pretty worked up about this. People are questioning you because a) it’s mafia, that’s what you do and b) that was a really confusing exchange.
Confirminatin’. Sleeptime, will be back tomorrow with coherent posts.
Confirming, somewhat belatedly.
In strategy terms, I’m thinking that the scum’s strongest role is their Roleblocker. In fact, I think that for scum to win, their Roleblocker has to outlive at least one of the Doc and the Cop. If we nail the Roleblocker while both those town roles are alive and unclaimed, we’re in a very strong position: the Cop can claim, get protection from the unknown Doc, then reveal their results and start buiding a masonry/outing scum. Even if the scum get incredibly lucky at that point, the Cop will get at least one more result while the scum hunt the Doc, plus however many results he/she has to date. The Roleblocker is the only one scum role who can stop this.
Now, unfortunately, there’s no way we can particularly hunt for the Roleblocker as opposed to any other scum role, but if the above analysis is right then there are a couple of points that follow:
- If the Cop finds the scum Roleblocker, they should probably claim with this info right away.
- Scum will always have an instinct for self-preservation, but this will be particularly marked in the case of the Roleblocker. If we get close to him/her we should provoke some sort of team defense, possibly sacrificial.
- We obviously don’t want to out our own power-roles. However, this should in no way stop us from pursuing people we find suspicious - we can’t be jumping at shadows. What I would ask is that if the Doc or Cop find themselves getting votes, they try to argue their way out of it before reaching for the claim option. Obviously however, the important thing is to stay alive.
/Snipped
While I agree that these discussions may not help us find the scum and SK, I’m not sure what else we can talk about so early in the game. At least the comments and counter-arguments on roles (#114), strategy (#91) and game mechanics (#129) help us newbies (or at least newbies to an open setup) to have a clearer understanding of what to expect in this game.
FWIW I’ve found Peeker’s comments so far to be pretty valid and coherent and, compared to Day1 in screamers, pretty much run of the mill for him.
I hope to have something consistent to add to the discussion soon!
sorry about that. The PM is sent now