When I originally pointed out the ‘slip’ to Sangaman, I wasn’t actually accusing him of PIS; rather I was pointing out to him that such precise statements can be quite dangerous around here (I specifically had the Evil Dead II/Romanic incident in mind). I was actually more interested in the fact that he completely misstated the chances of a potential Wolf Healer having already been killed. The odds it actually being PIS are probably close to 50/50. I plan to look back over his other posts to see if anything shifts those odds. I am interested in his reaction to the votes against him…he hasn’t posted since making that statement.
Askthepizzaguy, do you actually plan to reveal the identities of “Player A” and “Player B”, or are we just supposed to guess?
I’m not a Pogger, but it was mentioned in the very early parts of the game that there are at least a few folks that registered over here with different names than they have on 2+2. I didn’t keep track, since it wasn’t relevant to me, but hopefully one of your brethren can come along to fill you in.
a wolf called out the wolf mason and got him lynched, it was retarded of him
but there was a role that got hints to the game mechanics which should have theoretically helped anyway
I can never remember which games were which. My theory started after it popped up two games in a row, or close to that, IIRC. In the second one Rysto was Scum and pointed out a PIS slip early in the game. I voted him and picked up a bunch of votes for it, but survived. Rysto turned out to be Scum, I was Town. Cecil Pond, maybe? If anyone remembers which one that was, it would be great. I’d love to go back and look at old games and see how it shakes out each time, but I don’t have time to write a Master’s Thesis on this. Just wanted to let the new-to-us folks know about this crazy idea I have. Most of the locals know it–hell, it’s come up in games I wasn’t playing in.
And yes, I was making a suggestion to potential investigators. They can follow it or ignore me as they see fit. For all you know, I’m one of them, and am attempting to cleverly hide my tracks. 
I agree it’s quite bad and disappearing makes is worse
It’s hard to say for sure but it’s a somewhat common slip I’ve seen wolves make
OK, so “almost all..” and “a majority” boils down to a couple of somewhat memorable occurrences.
Yep. Just like you were “sure” enough on Inner Stickler to try to lynch the guy. :rolleyes:
Yeah, just like how you vote people without being sure. :rolleyes:
Sure, because as a scumbag I like poisoning my buddy Mahaloth, exposing myself to the entire group on day 2, and inviting investigation, block, or vig kills on myself.
BZZZZZZZZT Incorrect answer. I think I’ll keep poisoning you until you die.
That’s a real shame.
Maybe if you had responded correctly to my case.
Now I’m arguing that they definitely should not.
Good, more excuses.
Yeah, you could have done better.
Well sure, I could always keep poisoning Brewha. Or I could target some lurkers. Or whoever is number 2 on the lynch list if we hit a townie, just so scums can’t escape their fate by bussing a townie; they’d have to bus two of them.
Yes and I plan on doing it today.
[ul]
[li]What did I say though? Give me a list of your top three suspects everyone. BEFORE I release the data.[/li][/ul]
Maybe a liiiiiiitle bit of the brewha vote.
I’ve gone back and reviewed sangaman’s slip. It’s more egregious than I had remembered, which is one of the pitfalls of reading at work. Maybe that should make me less suspicious of you, but your response still reads “off” to me. I know that isn’t fair, because you can’t truly defend against a gut feeling.
I’d still recommend caution on the sangaman wagon, for now. Lots of other goings-ons to investigate. I won’t be voting for him, but it also won’t break my heart if he gets lynched.
Something else I’d like to address:
Pizza, I don’t believe this is as useful as you think. Scum will lie, or tell the truth, or do whatever they need to do to appear townie. Their lists will be pure WIFOM. Townies, however, are handing scum a list chock full of who they need to kill. Lots of townies have another townie as their top suspect? No need to nightkill them, scum can look elsewhere. Townie starting to zero in on scum? Time to take them out, or use powers on them to prevent them from investigating their suspicions in some way.
I will not be providing a list of names. I’d rather see people concentrate on building cases and acting on their suspicions.
You just explained why this is extremely useful. :dubious:
Thanks. Couldn’t have done it better.
Are you claiming wolf, then? Because I presented a series of hypotheticals that are helpful to wolves.
Scum will lie: Scumbags will say that they think a townie is guilty. Not only that, maybe even three townies. If every one of those townies OMGUS votes this scumbag, they’re already in deep shit. This is very dangerous for scumbags.
Scum will tell the truth: Revealing PERFECT INFORMATION SYNDROME AND MAFIA ESP.
How, mister Pizzaguy? Because the scums aren’t going to murder each other. So when the scumbag accuses 3 people and one of them is guilty, then contestant number three on their list who is a scumbag is going to continue to exist, round after round after round. Now, when person making the prediction flips scum, and 5-6 rounds go by, and this other person on their list continues to survive, then we look at this person and go “why don’t the scumbags want to kill this person?”
If this person survives to the final round, maybe you think about examining their voting history and seeing if anyone blocked them or investigated them or whatever. Try to use the information town gets on their own, combine it with the WIFOM information the scumbags give us, and work from there.
They can only lie or tell the truth, which means we only have a maximum of two scenarios to look at; there were no scumbags in their list, or there was a scumbag in their list.
[ul]
[li]Scumbags naming 3 townies is dangerous for them, because the 3 townies they named will go “Hey, that’s not right”. Now they’re on 3 people’s radar instead of one.[/li][/ul]
[ul]
[li]Scumbags naming their own partners is also dangerous.[/li][/ul]
bows with great flourish
No, I’m claiming townie, and I also believe strongly that I’m the poisoner.
This is for any of those um lie detectors out there.
And I’m going to keep poisoning people and explaining why until the scumbags understand that murdering me is worthwhile.
And when that happens, there had better be a townie watcher looking at me, so they have a list of names of potential murderers.
There’s been talk that there might be a role to “heal” poisoned people. If so, why in the hell would they give that kind of role to scum? I seriously wouldn’t understand it. Scum want to try to kill people, not heal them (unless they’re healing themselves).
So I surmise either:
-
There is no healer; in which case, you COULD be the poisoner.
-
There is a healer; in which case, my bet is that it’s a Town power, which means the poisoner is probably a scumbag or third party.
Since there IS a poisoner that we know of, I’m betting it’s not 1.
So since my money is on 2, my money is also on the assumption that the poisoner and the healer will probably not be on the same side, because what would be the purpose of that? They would sort of cancel each other out.
So…if 2 is right, I would say:
- Either you’re not the poisoner or
- …if you are, you’re scum.
Also, to the backup vigilante who picked up the previous vigilante’s gun and took out Inner Stickler “before seeing he was a cop” (as it said in the color):
[ul]
[li]Please examine vote records before you pull the trigger.[/li][/ul]
Blaster Master flipped scum. I also was going to poison Inner Stickler but I saw that Blaster and others made Inner Stickler the number two candidate to save him. That means either both were guilty, or a townie Inner was being thrown under the bus to save a scumbag.
Let’s work together from now on, your vig-kill and my poisoning. Let’s give the number two candidate the benefit of the doubt if the lynchee was scum, my suggestion.
You know, with everyone giving us 3 suspects to work with instead of one, we might have a democratic plurality-based reason for taking them out.
It’s like three lynches instead of one.
Wait, I forgot, this whole three suspects thing doesn’t lead to anything useful. 
Ah well it was worth a shot.
@ Pizza: It also gets townies in trouble. Consider this hypothetical: You list player X as your top suspect. Player X is town. You lead a healthy mix of town and mafia players to vote for him. He dies. Oops. Player Y votes for you as a result. Player Y is also town. A healthy mix of town and mafia players vote for you. You die.
Are we any closer to finding scum? Did they have to do anything to drive two mislynches?
Meanwhile, they’ve been handed a blueprint for every townie’s suspicions, and they’re free to game town by eliminating people they deem most tactically wise. Right now, killing townie Z is a crapshoot for them - they don’t know Z’s power, Z doesn’t know Z’s power, and they don’t know what cases Z might try to make in the future. For all they know, player Q (really shoulda planned this alphabet naming thing out better) would have been a better lynch, because the next day he leads a case on scum R.
Do you see what I’m getting at?
Could be an excellent cover role. I’ve given scumbags the ability to revive fallen townies before, just to look innocent.
Someone is the poisoner even if it is not me. And they hit two people I suspected in a row, who I targeted.
Not necessarily.
A town doctor and a town vigilante are on the same team, with opposing powers.
A town poisoner and a town healer are on the same team, with opposing powers.
Like the doc and the vig.
Well, I’d suggest putting it to a vote then. I’ve done enough good that I can die with a smile on my face.
But that is some shabby logic.
And Scumbags naming 3 people who have cases against them just like a Townie is likely to do helps us how? There very well could be a Scum or two in their list, or there might not be.
What exactly are you thinking the Scum will do?
To take it a step farther
[ul]
[li]If a Townie names 3 Town, they'll go "Hey, that's not right". Now they're on 3 people's radar.[/li][li]If a Townie names 2 Town and a Scum, they'll go "Hey, that's not right". Now they're on 3 people's radar.[/li][li]If a Townie names 1 Town and 2 Scum, they'll go "Hey, that's not right". Now they're on 3 people's radar.[/li][li]If a Townie names 3 Scum, they'll go "Hey, that's not right". Now they're on 3 people's radar. And their name is Bill[/li][li]If a Scum names 3 Town, they'll go "Hey, that's not right". Now they're on 3 people's radar.[/li][li]If a Scum names 2 Town and a Scum, they'll go "Hey, that's not right". Now they're on 3 people's radar. (as far as we can tell by how they act)[/li][li]If a Scum names 1 Town and 2 Scum, they'll go "Hey, that's not right". Now they're on 3 people's radar. (as far as we can tell by how they act)[/li][li]If a Scum names 3 Scum, they'll go "Hey, that's not right" and pretend to be Town[/li][/ul]
Or maybe you're counting on the Scum to slip somehow?Shabby, my ass. It’s not unlogical (is that even a word?) to figure they might be opposite roles.
I see your point about the Doc and Vig…but those seem to be separate roles, whereas poisoner and a healer (who heals poison) seem to be two linked, connected ones.
No idea what to think about it any deeper than that. I know it’s time for bed for me when it starts to hurt to think. : p