I don’t think we are saying the same thing at all. I want to coordinate the two investigators so that there is no overlap in investigations. The negatives of my plan are minimal. Overall I assert that the scheme **helps **the town.
You have stated your belief that the investigators should target strong-scum and strong-town. I feel such an action is deterimental to the town as these players are more likely to be dunked and nightkilled. Overall, your suggestion hurts the town.
Yes, we both gave suggestions, and yes we both use the words, let them decide for themselves, but your suggestion is a **bad **one. Now I’m willing to concede that you might *think *that your suggestion is town helpful. Could you explain your reasoning for wanting the investigators to investigate strong-scum and strong-town? I think I have been been painfully upfront about the reasoning for my suggestion, and was quite careful to minimize scum benefits.
It’s not that you defended against storyteller’s argument that gets me, it’s the way you phrased it. You could have disagreed with storyteller without explicitly defending Captain Pig. Saying things like, “I’m not getting a scummy vibe” are what catch my eye.
I just can’t seem to please you. It’s the first 24 hours of the day. I posted a lighthearted post and pissed you off. Then I had nothing serious to post and that pissed you off.
Many players have commented that the Oracle and the Apprentice should decide who to investigate with benefit of orders from the town. Any decisions made for them are providing information to the scum, which doesn’t seem to concern you.
Yeah, that’s always been a shaky premise to me as well. Hell, Clockwork Jackal found suspicion with Zeriel for this post and I came to his defense. Yet, no FOS my way for it. Maybe it’s because defending someone can simply be a matter of pointing out errors in logic.
Either way, unless someone is standing on the temple roof screaming “I know this person isn’t scum!”, I’d say the defense post isn’t indicative of very much.
Unvote MadTheSwine Vote sachertorte
I can ignore FlyingCow and USCDiver, since they may not have seen my warning before posting. But, you are responding to a post made afterwards, one that even explicitly recognized my threat. Thus you cannot reasonably claim you didn’t see it.
At this point, I’d think I’m agreeing with the camp that says we’ve said enough about the Oracle and Apprentice. If someone has a different plan or modification thereof, then maybe they should speak up, but now that people are going to start finger-pointing over it, it seems even more counterproductive to discuss it.
The only thing we know for sure about the Oracle and Apprentice is that they’re both dopers–by definition, they’re both smarter than the average bear and will be able to pick out a good strategy without too much debate from the peanut gallery.
I get that. To be fair I was saying I didn’t think Mad’s mistake was scummy, something I think is different than saying that I don’t think Mad is scummy.
But… but… but. Oh dear.
You can’t say the Apprentice has a 0% chance of being investigated. There is a 50% chance that the apprentice has a 0% chance of being investigated. There is **also **a 50% chance that the apprentice has a 1 in 15 chance of being investigated! That’s *why *statistically it’s a wash. Oh Nairu, what have I done?!
Who’s pissed off? What did I say that makes me sound pissed off? This is what I wrote in Post #354:
How does that constitute pissed off? I’m *suspicious *of you; that’s all. You know, the type of thing that happens all the time in this game. Now I’m **more **suspicious of you.
Sorry again, Pleo, but sachertorte is asserting things that I strongly disagree with, and I have to respond to his question.
You’ve decided that your plan helps the town, but that is only your opinion. I think your plan is harmful to the town. Is either of us right? Who knows. I certainly would never assert anything that isn’t fact.
I would love to explain my reasoning. I’ve already stated that I feel the role is useless at this point in the game. Unreliable information is worse than no information. Let’s say the Apprentice investigates a Cultist, but gets a wrong result. He’ll most likely show up as…Believer. That’s a very dangerous gamble to take. We cannot rely on the Apprentice’s investigations. That’s why I don’t care about overlap. In my mind, the Apprentice’s investigations don’t count for anything, so there isn’t any overlap.
The Oracle would obviously not investigate players that are likely to be lynched. That’s just common sense. I’m not saying he should investigate players that are widely held to be suspicious. I’m saying he should investigate players that HE finds scummy. It makes more sense to me to investigate a player that is acting scummy than to just randomly choose targets. I think that doing so increases the chances of finding scum. And what’s the worst that could happen? The Oracle finds a confirmed townie. That’s actually REALLY helpful. Regardless of the outcome of the investigation, the town gains valuable information. Sure, it would be most beneficial to find scum, but it’s almost as beneficial to confirm townies. If the Oracle can breadcrumb his findings, we’ll potentially have a great deal of information to help us. AND, this strategy doesn’t help the the scum, because they already know who the townies are. One thing the Oracle should not do is reveal specific roles. THAT would be giving information to the scum.
If the Oracle isn’t feeling scummy vibes from anyone, it’s still helpful to investigate someone with a townie vibe. Like I said, any information is good information. My plan has the advantage of not being a plan…it’s a strategy. We want to give as little information to the Cultists as possible, and I just think it’s a bad idea to outline a plan.
Again, these are my suggestions. The Oracle should do as he or she sees fit. All I’m trying to do offer a suggestion for consideration. I’ve explained myself to my satisfaction, and I won’t be discussing the Oracle any further.
I wasn’t planning on posting this until tomorrow, but I’m going to be computerless for the next 24-48 hours. My company is taking back their laptop for some servicing and updating, which I thought was scheduled for tomorrow. Imagine my surprise when I just got a “why aren’t you in the office today?” e-mail (I telecommute).
So, whoops…going to have to run to the office on my lunch hour and hand over my PC. Be back at some point before the weekend.
Blaster Master said that there is at least one of each role in the game. From there I looked at the allegiance of said roles and came up with the least number of pro-town Believers/Non-Believers present.
**Hal **already said it but I thought you might want to hear my explanation as well.
Cookies already answered it: she was voted for, during at least two of the past 4 games, during the first Day. Most of those votes made a reference (tongue firmly planted in cheek) to her name and her obvious allegiance to the Dark Side.
I saw an early vote for someone else and made a (bad?) joke. I retracted my vote because I have no real reason to vote for her.
Pleonast unvoted me because of comments made by Scuba_Ben. That’s what he meant when he said he got us confused. You’re misinterpretting what Pleonast said and taking his comments out of context.
No, neither of you really need to continue discussing this. It’s seriously not good for the Town. At least pretend you’re on the Town’s side. I’d vote for you too, Flying, if I could vote for more than one person.
If you feel the urge to discuss numbers and power roles, think about some of the scummy roles. Does the Town need to take precautions against the Avatar? How should we handle recruitment by Prophet?
Forget Pleonast, I voted for FCOD, of course a response is warranted. I don’t really see Pleonast as the gatekeeper of discussion anyway. Go ahead and vote for me, I don’t mind. I think our discussion is important, and I need to learn what other people are thinking, because *obviously *they aren’t thinking the same way I am. And part of the reason I brought up the entire strategy was because I thought it would provoke good discussion. Which I think it did.
I appreciate your caution regarding the Apprentice. However, I hold the investigation result as better than nothing. Furthermore, multiple investigations by the Apprentice on the same target will yield actionable data. I’m not sure if it’s better to target the same person more twice or just once, but it’s an option.
I read your suggestion as stating exactly that. I still think that someone the investigator has with a strong-scum vibe will likely have a strong-scum vibe with the rest of the town, but I think we see sort of eye-to-eye on this now.
We’re actually not that far off from each other. I agree that finding believers is just as good as finding scum. My point is only that by investigating a player that is acting scummy is more likely to be useless as the acting scummy player is more likely to get dunked. ‘randomly’ (as you put it) selecting investigations minimizes the risk of losing the benefits of the investigation by death.
Well, plan and strategy are pretty much the same thing, I don’t see how you’re drawing a distinction, and I don’t see how a plan that targets scum-vibe people and town-vibe people is incompatible with coordination of disjoint sets. Also, I don’t see any problem with investigating someone with no vibe at all.
I’m satisfied with FCOD’s explanation. I mostly disagree, but I no longer feel the *intent *is anti-town.
Unvote FlyingCowOfDoom
Let’s see if I can summarize the current list of things that might get you voted for (in no particular order):
discussing opinions or trying to build consensus regarding what the Oracle and Apprentice should do with their investigative powers, assuming that either of them would consider such suggestions
defending players
voicing suspicions based on posting style/fluffyness
To me, the playing field sure seems to be filling up with land mines that discourage conversation. Isn’t it a bit early to have to hold our breath and tread so cautiously?
Picking up a couple of votes here and there doesn’t necessarily equal the kiss of death, but can’t some good old-fashioned FOSing get the same sort of point across?
No offense, but I don’t see who made you boss of discussions. I also don’t see how our discussion is detrimental to the town. Someone voted for me and I think I should be allowed to discuss the reasoning behind it. Your reason for voting for sachertorte is pretty weak, if you ask me.
On preview, I see sachertorte and I agree on at least one point
So in a game where votes count dearly you chose to use this power as a joke? And then, with no explanation, retract that vote as you had no reason to vote for her? All of this in the midst of an argument about random voting?
I don’t want to make a big deal out of 2 seemingly random votes that were then quickly rescinded with explanations provided (however weak or strong) but IMO its a bad play regardless and I keep my FOS pointed.
On preview:
Huh, USCDiver? How did I misinterpret what Pleonast said? As I showed he said he was randomly voting for someone. That someone was you. Then he unvotes you, because he thinks Scuba Ben is you. Scuba Ben had thought it was odd that Pleonast had randomly voted for you and had FOS’d pleonast in return. This is where Pleonast became confused. Pleonast stated that his vote for a waterperson was completely random. He then gets confused after Scuba Ben FOSes him in return, and unvotes you.
This does nothing to explain the logic behind randomly voting for someone to generate discussion, another playing calling into question this move, a debate begins about the play of random voting, the person who Pleonast thinks he voted for (but who in actuality is just another water related name) FOSing him because of his actions, Pleonast immediately unvoting player after FOSing him and calling said player to task for a “revenge vote” which must have been done by a “newbie townie”.
How did this vote generate any discussion from or about the actual player? It didn’t.
