I think that’s a decent plan to have Batman target me tonight. I’ll go ahead and switch my switch off.
The two things I could see foil this plan -
Mafia target me as well. Batman’s kill doesn’t go through, but I die anyway. It’d suck to be dead - but my alignment would be shown as vanilla townie. I’m being 100% truthful and transparent. At least my death will allow town to believe my statements.
Honestly, I don’t see scum targeting me though. My death proves my statements. They’d be better off to keep me alive and work to undercut my credibility.
and I need to dig up the role PMs to verify - but seems to me that there is a power role that is a global switch flipper. If a scum team member has the power to reset all switches to “on” then Batman kills me anyway.
If it’s past a certain point on Day 1, I haven’t read it yet. (I want to finish Day 1 later today). And do you mean ToeJam?
I feel there is a significant difference between voting for someone who participates little once they’re under imminent threat of lynch and voting for someone who is participating little in general. If colby11 had played the game, by commenting on other issues and making cases against other players, I never’d have voted for them.
Calling it skimming if you like, but I didn’t notice Johnny Bravo’s reaction the first time through. Note that I’m still suspicious of the votes on Johnny Bravo, but they don’t rise above my vote threshold at the moment.
There’s no information in saying that someone who does not read a secret board gains no information from it. That’s basic deduction: a player cannot know what’s on a secret board they haven’t read. And that deduction is completely independent of what’s on the board. Whether or not there’s information on the secret board, the player not reading it gains no information.
Thing Fish has implicitly stated something else: that a player who has read the secret board does not know a particular piece of information. How can anyone who has no knowledge of the secret board know this? The information gained from reading a secret board is extremely dependent on what’s on that board. The only possible conclusion is that Thing Fish has knowledge of what’s on that board.
This is a clear-cut case of perfect information. It’s probably clear-cut enough that we should leave it to the Vigilante to take care of, since we’ll gain little information from lynching a self-revealed scum. But it’s good for an early vote in the Day.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
On multi-lynching: I’m in favor of it. We get information from lynches and voting records. I am not in favor of forcing players to move votes to make it happen. Players must be responsible for their own votes.
For myself, when I put someone on my voting list, that means I’m willing to see them lynched. While I put my most suspicious vote first, I have no problems switching to anyone on my list. And that means you should hold me accountable for any vote on my list, even if it isn’t counted by the mods.
I think it’d be helpful for us if everyone did the same, but it’s non-productive to try to enforce it.
I agree with those who say that if we were to implement some sort of planned multilynch, that would be
very hard to control, and
potentially good cover for scum and 3rd party
But I don’t see any harm in doing at least the first aspect of it–voting and naming a second choice. I think this is pro-Town as it gets more information out and it forces us to play more deliberately, which seems good. If I list someone as 1 and someone as 2 but then drop 1 and go for someone unmentioned, I should have some argument to back that up.
That said, I don’t have one vote yet, let alone two.
Despite my nerves, I do see the argument that it’s better to have more Town-controlled deaths. I have this sense that we are already running as fast as we can toward a cliff, so strapping on jet packs is terrifying, but the logic of it is clear to me. More information sooner.
So I don’t think I’ll ever be comfortable with it, but I think I’m swayable.
Chronos’s Batman/switch/brewha plan makes sense to me. It might not reveal everything we’d hope it reveals, but it seems like this is our first chance to get some sort of info on the tantalizing issue of switches.
To return to the meta-game talk, for me the problem with meta-knowledge is twofold: accuracy and honesty.
Even if I think your analysis of someone else’s “normal” play is accurate, I have reason to doubt your honesty.
Even if I think your analysis of someone else’s “normal” play is honest, I have reason to doubt your accuracy.
So when someone says the equivalent of “trust me,” my reaction is that I have two reasons not to. And when someone doesn’t just say “trust me” but “trust me or I’ll vote against you” that doesn’t fill me with confidence.
Correct. I really don’t. The important record is the ‘unofficial tally’ as you call it, which would reflect that Bob pushed for Frank, not George. It would be public and for everyone to see just like ‘normal’ voting.
Not worried about this either. We have plenty of sleuthing for people trying to duck the vote record (e.g., FOS but no vote!). I don’t think we would be so stupid as to look at the ‘normal’ vote and completely ignore the ‘unofficial tally.’
That is a valid concern. I think we can overcome it. And of course attempts to rig the vote would be met with great suspicion and future Lynch pressure.
Here is the bottom line thought process. There is a second Lynch. If it doesn’t happen, fine, I guess. I absolutely think we need it because scum have two kills. Normally, one Lynch is balanced by one scum night kill. That is the very essence of basic mafia. Here we have two scum kills. If we limit ourselves to only one Lynch per Day, then we are out gunned already. The mitigating factor is cross-kills, so maybe I’m overly worried. So far cross-kills hasn’t been a factor in our favor though.
My other thought revolves around when the primary Lynch becomes obvious. For example, lets say we have an investigation that points out scum. Typically, we wind up piling on and have with nothing to talk about because the Lynch is clear. For this game, should a second Lynch be available we would be able to be productive that Day beyond the obvious Lynch. However, we would have the issue of who votes for the primary and who votes for the secondary. Those that vote for the primary can’t vote for the secondary. In other words, those that vote for the primary do not have a voice in the choice for the secondary Lynch. I consider this bad for many reasons.
Therefore, I think it best to conduct a ‘straw poll’ for the second Lynch and Lynch accordingly, so that everyones thoughts and vote records are clear.
From there, it isn’t much of a leap to apply this process to everyday multi-lynches.
The scum teams each have a role that can monkey with switches. Each is a one time usage thing, but I’m concerned about trusting a switch to save someone after all this public declaration. AU-Batman probably would be better served striking out on their own than in attempting to… what, verify that someone has a switch?
Chronos, what happened to your last scheme, the one where everyone was going to say whether they were third party or not?
I like schemes. Hell, I love them. But how could this **brewha **/Batman scheme work?
I think it highly probable that **brewha **is Town. **brewha ** as Scum making his switch claim makes no sense.
Batman would have to agree to go along for this scheme for it to work. That’s a big assumption. But ok, let’s say he or she does.
The other switch holder, if Town, would also have to agree, and hopefully not be among the 5 or 10 people not seemingly paying attention or not showing up to the game at all. If the other switch holder is Scum or 3rd Party, then **Brewha **likely dies. Perhaps we learn something about what happens to switches when a player dies. Perhaps we also give Scum or 3rd Party complete control over whether Batman’s future kills go through. Because if one switch holder dies, the other one controls the role switch until death of the power or death of the remaining switch holder, right?
4.Two Scum have the power to turn off all switches. One Town has the power to turn on all switches. Let’s hope they are all cooperating. Is there a master switch controlling 3rd party? Who knows?
Two Scum have the power to watch and see who targets a player. That puts a cooperative Batman in danger of being outed.
We give up any chance Batman actually killing any Scum tonight.
Maybe I am letting my deep suspicions of **Chronos **cloud my judgement. jsgoddess, you say you like the plan. Please tell me what I am missing?
For those of you who never have played in a game with switches, be sure to read storyteller’s Night 0, post#126. It gives a simple explanation, but is not easily found among the rules at the start of the thread.
Counter: this is very weak analysis, actually. The fact that scum doesn’t have perfect information doesn’t preclude a weak defense of everyone who ISN’T on their team. It would be interesting if, while doing so, they would by chance vote for someone on the opposing team.
But still, this defense pings me. Not enough to change my
If **brewha **is Scum I cannot see any reason for the claim. If he is Scum seeking Town cred, the other Scum may target him anyway. He has agreed to a scheme somewhat likely to lead to his own death. He is my biggest Town lean at this time.
Thanks, Biotop, for the link to this. I thought I had read this somewhere, but couldn’t find it. (If we ever do this again, could we have a mod info thread with all the rules, etc in one place?)
@Brewha, This doesn’t really look consistent with what you told us about your PM. It talks about simple toggles. Could you look at your PM again? Or perhaps post it?
**@mods
Do we learn about switches found in the possession of dead people? **
@Diggit Votes are in blue. Unvotes are in red. You might want to unvote and revote, if you want to make sure it’s counted.
I’m just saying that Chronos’s plan doesn’t really prove anything and in it’s worst case has the potential to waste a vig kill on a townie. In it’s best form it proves what? Not that brewha is town exactly. Possibly that brewha actually has a switch? Even then if the vig was targeted by a blocker or one of the one-shot “flip all switches” gets used the whole thing is moot.
It’s a rube goldberg plan with no very obvious benefit.
In other news, since none of the dead players showed up with a switch, it seems that we do not receive information about switches upon a player’s death. So even if a switch becomes defunct by death, the other switch holder doesn’t immediately know and would still be uncertain of how to control the switch. But if we claim, then surviving switch holders will know how to use their switch perfectly, which is only useful if scum cooperate or two townies hold a switch pair.
It looks to me that switch claiming is bad.
I think it is a terrible plan and am shocked that brewha is okay with it. I just don’t see the point.
I a have been on the move for the past 3 days and am having the crazy malware thing on my phone when I try to visit the dope. will be home tonight and catch up by tomorrow.
I don’t see any sense in paraphrasing. Here’s my Switch PM - word for word:
The switch PM came almost a day after my role PM.
I gotta wonder how much the other switch is like mine. Is it an on to off only switch? Or is it an off to on switch?
Not only is my PM not consistent with what Storyteller posted, it is also inconsistent with my Role PM which specifically stated that I had no other powers. I guess the switch PM after the role pm superseded this statement?
Doesn’t this create a situation where a lot of powers will be focused on ** Brewa **
Won’t that be a tidy corral for identifying and later killing many.