Oh, and since we’re talking about false claims, two points:
1: In this game, I don’t intend to lynch any claimed Town power role, until and unless there’s a counterclaim (or countercorpse, of course). septimus is not yet verified; he may well be lying. But if he is, then eventually, the real EMT will show up. And we can decide then, if it happens, who we want to trust, and who gets the noose.
2: It is almost never a good idea for Town to lie, and it is always a good idea to lynch anyone who’s caught in a lie. If, for instance, someone claims to be vanilla, and then a watcher catches them taking some action (and the watcher is confirmed), then the claimed-vanilla dies, no ifs, ands, or buts. If it turns out that the claimant is a Town power role and was lying to try to keep the Scum guessing, then it’s their own damn fault for lying to the Town. If you want to keep the Scum guessing, then the right way to do it is to not say what your role is.
Oh, and back to the question of third parties claiming: It might or might not be to their advantage to do so, but on thinking about it, I think it’s definitely to Town’s advantage. So I think we should force their hand. I think everyone in the game should state for the record whether they are or are not third party. In addition to possibly finding third parties and letting us evaluate their claims, this will also bind the Scums’ hands: It’s been pointed out already that the only false claims which won’t be counter-claimed are vanilla and third party, and forcing the Scum to choose now will prevent them from tailoring their lies to their situation.
true. My post would have been more accurate if I had said *not on the officially posted record of votes
*
or some such
I am not in a position at this time to track such data for myself and with the talk of vote switches near EOD I was reminding humans of the difference ( as much for me as anyone.)
in any game-double in a game this size- it is wise to do so ( unless/until the numbers are down to where it is impossible for them all to be correct)
I have seen a town player use it to Towns advantage- but I still think it is poor form for Town to blatantly lie - I would join you in that lynch
that last bit I need to think on before commenting on your conclusions. I will say I am NOT third party, I am Town. But I wager that will be the only response you will receive from any who participate.
Pretty sure everyone in the thread will say it, but I’m Town. Not Wolf, not Mafia, not whatever 3rd party happens to be floating around out there.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I’m on record as saying that the vote for the Colby “slip” wasn’t a good one, but damn if that post 946 wasn’t scummy as all get out. So telling the thread that you’re going out of town is worth a vote now? It’s like he has a power that triggers upon lynch. That’s one way for the Patsy to claim, I guess.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I agree. The Slip was a terrible basis for a vote, but his reactions to the votes do seem very scummy. Colby and Mahaloth always seem scummy to me. And I always find myself voting for them. And am usually wrong. If mahaloth was playing this one, I’m sure I’d be thinking about voting for him too.
I did see the soft claim before voting, but are you saying that a soft claim is enough to unvote (or not vote)? A soft claim can’t be tested or countered. If all scum have to do to escape the noose is suggest that they are a town power, then we are not going to get very far.
Not “your town”. It was when he referred to town as “your team”.
It looked odd to me, as “your team” is not “my team”. It looked like the sort of thing that someone on a scum team would think about the town. I asked him about it, he explained, and other people said that the wording was fine. So I concluded that not everyone speaks like me.
Incidentally, I don’t see how a single comment on it constitutes “harping”.
My interpretation of the bolded remark is that only scum would vote based on a slip. I found that strange.
[/QUOTE]
No, not that only scum would vote for a slip, but that scum will be included among the voters. It’s an easily justifiable vote for scum to make. Even if it’s a teammate, scum will want to be on there for town cred.
First I will say that I am Town and if I ever claim 3rd party in this game everyone can stop whatever they are doing and lynch me.
But what I really want to say is …huh?
Chronos, you probably don’t know this, but if I had to say I had a mentor in Mafia, it would be you. In my first game a year and a half ago, we were co- masons with Mahaloth. Early in that game we hatched together a claiming scheme that took advantage of the tie breaker and my role as 1st Mason/ ultimate tie breaker. While the plan was never implemented, it did I think influence the game positively (sorry **septimus **!) Anyway, the game was fun, Town won, and after that first game I was hooked.
But because you were a co-mason I got to listen to your game theory early, and could trust it because I knew you were Town. One of the things you said then was that you tried to play an identical game whether Town or Scum. You would be giving out mega-advice, analysis and game theory regardless of your affiliation. Since that game I have had many opportunities to play as Scum (with varying degrees of success) and I have always followed that advice as best I could. I have also read other game theory and puzzle posts of yours at the SDMB. You know your stuff.
But I find myself very suspicious of you this game. The Thing Fish supposed Scum slip makes little sense. All it says to me is **Thing Fish **is probably not the Understudy. There were 14 pages of roles. Why would a player be more likely to remember the details of this one role over others. I’ve had to go back and read them several times just to maybe get it all straight. Compared with **Thing Fish **'s very pro-Town sounding posts, I can’t see how this unlikely slip should lead to a vote. Of course **TF **could be playing a great Scum game. He is quite capable of it I am sure. But I think the positive sum of his posts far outweigh this supposed slip. (Compare to Colby, who has not exactly been tearing it up since his possible slip.)
And now this scheme about Third Parties. Maybe I am missing some of the details, but I have been thinking about it the last few hours and it makes little sense. What incentive has a third party to tell the truth here? If I was third party who could still win with Town, I’d just say so later. So what if I lied? It’s not as if 3rd party has allegiance to Town…else they’d be Town.
In addition, we’ve got 15 to 20 players who we can barely get to post at all. What makes you think we could herd these cats? Can we herd the other very strong-willed participants in this game? Seems unlikely to me.
All in all this sounds more like a scheme created by someone who thinks they are expected to create schemes as Town. It doesn’t quite ring true.
In that first game a year-and-a-half ago you said you did not trust your gut as far as you could throw it. But I am going to trust mine. Though I feel bad about unvoting a relatively non-participating player for a participating one: