unvote Mahaloth
(Note: unvote is not an endorsement of the content of his post, merely an acknowledgement of it.)
Nope.
I’m satisfied with your explanations so far.
unvote Alka Seltzer
I haven’t yet decided how I feel about the response he did provide.
Can you elaborate on this please?
Snickers is arguing against N1 investigations not for D1 no-lynch. His arguments make little sense to me.
I would like to encourage our investigators to use their powers tonight based on the model that the first one named in the role list investigates someone between 1-6 on the player list, the second investigates someone between 7-12 and the third someone from 13-19. I disagree that scum would immediately try to take out those who investigate as town because when the dead town flips “town” that would semi-confirm his/her investigator. The problems involved with the cloak and a possible scum false claim of investigator will be with us until the end of the game.
In most previous games detectives could investigate every night. under those circumstances it makes sense to hold off claiming til later in the game. In this game with single use powers it makes no sense not to use them right away.
Note: I am not demanding or ordering any investigators do anything other than what they think best. I will not be willing to purposefully “mis-lynch” a player who didn’t act on my suggestion as someone previously suggested might occur. Now that I write that I’m going to go back and look at that post again.
vote Hal Briston
There’s a consistent pattern here: happy to talk about strategy, and potential scum tool choices; no effort at all to find scum.
Open spoilers to see all posts, quoted in full:
General Mafia strategy.
Two posts about choosing investigation tactics.
This joke is the nearest Hal comes to hunting scum. If he does genuinely suspect MHaye, he’s not following through on it.
Discussion about the Cloak and Spear. It’s all very hypothetical; it doesn’t even help us make good decisions, still less find scum. There’s also an element of “Look, I haven’t even thought about scum tools until now!” which is faintly disingenuous.
Between visorslash and Hal Briston, I’d currently lynch Hal. But I’ll leave a vote on **visor ** until I hear what **Hal’s **got to say.
Talking strategy is all about trying to find scum – or at the very least it’s setting the groundwork for it. Until A) a power role uncovers scum, B) we have bodies and a vote record giving us data, or C) there is a scum slip, then there isn’t anything beyond pulling info out of your ass with which to find scum. And C is the only one we that can realistically happen until toNight.
And I’m definitely calling you out for your mischaracterization of my comments about scum tools. I gave my opinions about what scum might do with them and what choices might be made, so it’s a flat-out falsehood, when I didn’t consider one aspect of a tool, to trying and paint it as if I said “I haven’t even thought about scum tools until now”. I clearly had been looking at their list of tools and trying to piece together what they might be using. It’s a load of crap to try and paint it any other way.
Sure thing. First as sinjin said, it was D1 investigations, not lynchings. I mistyped. If that’s all you were asking about, cool. But here’s a couple that caught my eye:
Snickers thinks that D1 investigations are going to be a waste of time. But the reasoning seems really off. First, he thinks that investigations won’t result in any scum showing up. In reality, the liklihood of a scum result from three D1 investigations would be (assuming we don’t bother to plan against overlap) 1- (15/19)^3 = 51%.
Second, he keeps going on about a strategy of multiple investigations against the same person, which wouldn’t work unless we REALLY winnowed down the players in the game and would be a complete waste of resources in this game when all investigations are a one-shot deal. Something Snickers should know, unless he’s trying to convince us to both delay and waste our time.
So yeah, these things pinged my radar a bit, and I’ve been mulling it over for a few days. That Snickers hasn’t posted any more means there’s nothing more for me to view that mitigates my initial impression.
When does day end, so I have an idea of when I can expect to die?
I’m dangerous? I’m flattered. It’s what scum would do, isn’t it? They would go out of their way to be aggressive and ‘anti-town’. (But, you say, what about the WIFOM, he could be doing that, to make himself seem unlikely scum! And tell me, how many times has it been sucessful? Zero? That’s what I thought.)
TexCat should be lynched, not me.
I honestly think you play this way so that when you eventually do become scum some game, nobody will be able to point to your behavior as evidence of it because that’s just “how you are”. It might be a fun and effective way to play for the long term, but it makes playing individual games with you very frustrating, at least in the beginning. But then again, I guess that’s the point.
You are dangerous, though.
Thursday between 1 and 4, I believe. Votes before 1 count for sure, and the day will end between 1 and 4 with the exact time unknown, in order to make last-minute vote changing more challenging. If you vote after 1 on Thursday, there’s a chance your vote won’t count.
Between 1 and 5, actually. Not sure what time zone though.
Visorslash (3): Stanislaus #98, Mahaloth #136, Tengu #138
Enderw24 (2): fubbleskag #128, Alka Seltzer #131No Lynch (2): TexCat #122, Tengu #138
Mahaloth (1): [del]Alka Seltzer #118[/del], Mental Guy #124, [del]fubbleskag #128[/del]
TexCat (1): Visorslash #20
KellyCriterion (1): fubbleskag #128
Snickers (1): Enderw24 #140
Hal Briston (1): Stanislaus #144
Suburban Plankton (0): [del]Visorslash #10[/del]
Alka Seltzer (0): [del]fubbleskag #128[/del]
Visorslash (3): Stanislaus #98, Mahaloth #136, Tengu #138
Enderw24 (2): fubbleskag #128, Alka Seltzer #131
No Lynch (2): TexCat #122, Tengu #138
Mahaloth (1): [del]Alka Seltzer #118[/del], Mental Guy #124, [del]fubbleskag #128[/del]
TexCat (1): Visorslash #20
KellyCriterion (1): fubbleskag #128
Snickers (1): Enderw24 #140
Hal Briston (1): Stanislaus #144
Suburban Plankton (0): [del]Visorslash #10[/del]
Alka Seltzer (0): [del]fubbleskag #128[/del]
How’s that working out? What suspicions have you developed?
As well as the point about the Spear, you had two questions for the mod aboit the cloak. The impression is of someone who’s only really thinking.about scum tools now.
Apart from the guy who is still trying to mischaracterize my comments, I’m leaning towards TexCat’s no lynch proposal. While I can’t recall a previous game where its been a good idea, this setup is unique. We have enough information about the setup laid out in front of us to make this a potentially wise play. The only problem is that there will be (as there probably should be) some players who won’t use their ability toNight.
Still, a mislynch toDay would definitely cause us to lose out on pro-town powers. I’m tentatively in favor of this plan. In fact…
Vote No Lynch
“Now”? As in, a few real-world days into Day 1 of the game? Why yes, that is when I’m taking a closer strategic look at the scum tools and trying to figure out which ones they’d have likely used. I looked at them in Night Zero, trying to figure out which I might take if I we’re picked as scum (anyone who didn’t wasn’t playing as smartly as they could’ve), and now that the game is on I’ve looked again now that I know my role isn’t being swapped out.
Your whole “you’re not talking about the tools except for all these times that you did talk about them” thing is seriously pinging me. You’re trying to build this all off the fact that there was one possible use of the Spear that I didn’t consider?
Not at all. Let’s go back:
I said I found you suspicious because you’d only talked about strategy and hypotheticals, but hadn’t tried to find scum. I also said:
I think it’s pretty clear that my suspicions are mainly aroused by the overall pattern of your posts, and that the tone I pick up from your conversation about scum tools only pings me, em, faintly. Nevertheless, that’s the part of my case you spend most time defending.
And you defend it first by saying that:
and then by saying that:
Let me clarify that when I said, "There’s also an element of “Look, I haven’t even thought about scum tools until now!” I meant “now that the Day has started” rather than “up until the very second I typed this”. Isn’t that accurate - that the impression I got off your posts of someone who hadn’t thought hard about the scum tools during Night Zero is exactly what you’re saying is the case?
The difference is that I think there’s a slight possibility that you created that impression deliberately.
I’ve never said that my suspicions were based on you not talking about the tools. They were based **mainly **on you talking about them rather than finding scum, and **partly ** on doing so in a way that highlighted that you were only seriously thinking about them now.
I understand that you think there are benefits to working out what tools the scum picked, but I don’t see it. Let’s say we agree that they picked the poison, spear and cloak alongside the knives: what do we with that? What decisions can we make to deal with those choices? As far as I can see, none.
Ender, I don’t want to go on too much more about it - I think I’ve probably said enough. My reasoning against all investigators investigating N1 basically boils down to these points:
There’s very little information available on D1 to guide investigators to targets. I really feel that they’re just shooting in the dark. Yeah, they’ll investigate whomever they feel is most scummy, and that’s a good thing, but I just don’t think there’s much to go on.
There’s not going to be any confirmation, unless two of the investigators accidentally double up on the same person. And you’re right - that’s a total waste of resources since they’re all one-shot investigations, and it’d just be stupid to try to get that confirmation. I was seeing too much of “but then we’ll know their alignment” as if the results of those investigations were iron-clad confirmeds, when they’re not. (Admittedly, I’m probably reading too much into it.)
There are a couple other factors in play (one of our investigators being scum, the cloak of lies) that make the investigations problematic. I think holding off on investigating to gather more info might help offset this. But as has been mentioned, these issues don’t go away the longer we play anyway, so this is probably worthless reasoning.
I do think I’m discounting how valuable the results will be for later days. Anyway, I don’t think I explained myself very well. Babale says things better than I could’ve in post 95 - I really like this post.
However, something I just noticed: Back in post 53, Stanislaus calculates the chance of one of our investigators being scum as 53%. Yet in post 146, you calculate the chance of our investigators revealing scum as 53%. I don’t speak math. Are the calculations of “what are the chances that one in three people are scum in a field of 15 good/19 total” and “what are the chances that one in three investigations reveal scum in a field of 15 good/19 total” really the same? (Worded like that, it seems they are.) Anyway, just seemed weird to me (and surprisingly high).
Whoa! NETA: There’s an error in my quoting. Ender calculates the odds of the investigations revealing at least one scum as 51%, not 53%. My bad. Clearly, I need to read more closely. Apologies.
Are these calculations valid? Should someone as math-challenged as me be trying to understand odds? And what’s for lunch, anyway?
I think I’m correct. But I’d be glad for the double-check. I went on the assumption that any investigator can pick any person. In that case, the odds of NOT hitting scum is 15/19. The odds of not hitting scum by three investigators is 15/1915/1915/19. Subtract that answer from 1 and you get 51%
Oh. That makes sense. And I’m sure your result is correct, but I have to nitpick your equation transcribing: that should be 1 - ((15/19)*3), not 1 - (15/19)^3 (as you posted). I was all, “raised to the third? What?” 