<snipped>
yep. read ragnorak Day four. shoot this attitude will get us fucked.
I wholeheartedly agree with sachertorte. With all due respect story, are you nuts? Day One lynches are invariably clusterfucks. On the rare occasion that we do catch scum on Day One, it’s always based on a thin case. Town’s goal in Day One is to get as much information as possible. Lynching scum is a bonus. Lynching two players today is almost certainly going to result in a double mislynch. What’s the hurry? What’s the benefit to Town in not delaying the second lynch until we have the information from the first lynch?
Vote total:
Spawn 9
peekercpa 2
storyteller0910 1
1: special_ed
2: ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies – Spawn (193)
3: Drain Bead – Spawn (191)
4: Oredigger77 – Spawn (194)
5: storyteller0910
6: Meeko – Spawn (182)
7: Mahaloth – Spawn (209), peeker (209)
8: Freudian Slit – Spawn (183)
9: USCDiver
10: Alka Seltzer
11: peekercpa – Spawn (186), story (186)
12: Natlaw
13: Zeriel – Spawn (204), peeker (204)
14: DiggitCamara
15: amrussell
16: KellyCriterion
17: Scuba_Ben
18: sachertorte – Spawn (202)
19: fluiddruid
20: TexCat – Spawn (198)
21: Rysto
I know that “let’s kill the good players because we can’t risk that they’re scum” is a surefire way to reduce town’s overall ability to win by killing all the good players. Frankly the silliest strategy proposal in a while.
storyteller has a good point on the count analysis. Early in the game, there’s less harm to a carefully considered effort to let the Spawn spawn, in favor of gathering information by trying to lyse Scum and cleanse the pond.
The key being, of course, carefully considered. If the Spawn get out of [del]hand[/del] pseudopod, the Scum win. Still ==
Spawn are known to be pro-Scum, that’s all the information we all have this early. It’s better than a random vote for now. So:
Vote Spawn
(And I note that since I have a better-than-random reason for one of my votes, Meeko is no longer fully at risk of a pseudorandom vote.)
I’m very uncertain about satchertorte’s post. While we do have to keep the Spawn population under control, we have the option to lyse two players. I decline to dismiss that option entirely. Assuming there’s an investigation role (a very good assumption), they may have enough information eventually that it’s in the pond’s interests to go for the two player lynch.
Still… unless somebody slips badly, I don’t see that situation coming up during Year One.
NETA: Confirming receipt of PM, of course.
AOFTP: Silly 60 second interval between posts. If I had evolved voice, I’d scream.
And I have had an urge today to play Primordial Soup.
What do you think I AM, anyway, some sort of genocidal gasterd supercomputer?
I don’t know that I’m parsing sache’s tone as dismissive of all things other than lysing a Spawn each round, at least not to the extent that some other people seem to be. Metagame perhaps, but he strikes me as just as likely to be a Townie confident that he’s right but willing to consider evidence to the contrary, as opposed to someone who is “dismissing anything entirely” (quoting Scuba), or “[promoting] a spawn lynch every Day without question” (quoting special ed), or of the opinion that any other option is “egregiously problematic” (quoting story).
I think it is a null tell with respect to sache, and potentially see a cluster of exaggerations of his position.
WHERE THE FUCK DID I SAY THAT?
quit making shit up. i mean call me out for a bullshit pseudo random vote but don’t transfer a whole buch of freudian crap on me.
fuck it.
unvote story
vote z
i mean my vote was INTENDED to be lame but at least it was clear. yours is a whole bunch of funk.
Ahem. I am declining to dismiss anything entirely. Did you simply misread me, Cookies, or did you misquote me?
neta:
unless you were whooshing me, in which case i didn’t catch it.
I did not misquote you. I did apply your quote as a suggestion made about an implied target, sach.
Well, look. Leave aside the Spawn for just one tiny moment, OK? I’ll get back to the Spawn.
Let’s say the Mod gave you a choice.
Let’s say the Mod said, you may pick from the following two options:
- Game as normal. One lynch Day One, Night kill Night One, and so on into eternity; or
- You lynch Day One, but you don’t get your results until the end of Day Two. The catch? No Night actions, including Scum kill, during Night One.
We would all jump on #2, right? Lynches are our tool, our way of getting information. Even if they are sloppy, two lynches without the Scum getting to Night kill is always a plus; it’s as if a Doctor had a successful protection. Well, the present situation, sans Spawn lynch, is, essentially, option #2.
Now, the Spawn mechanic changes things in a very serious way. I just don’t think it’s the slam dunk that you and sachertorte believe it to be. More on this in the morning.
Cookies, I strongly disagree with your characterization of the situation from top to bottom. My wife is jonesing to go check Cafe World, so a longer response will have to wait until morning, but in short: no one, so far, has expressed any sort of suspicion of sachertorte on the basis of his opinion about this. Your concern for the exaggeration being used to characterize his position seems a bit premature.
And yeah, I think the auto-vote for Spawn that happened at the outset of this Day was great cover for Scum to slip in and show how Townie they were by acting the same as all the Townies. Were you under the impression I was accusing all 8-10 people who voted Spawn of being Scum?
[quote=“peekercpa, post:229, topic:526202”]
WHERE THE FUCK DID I SAY THAT?
quit making shit up. i mean call me out for a bullshit pseudo random vote but don’t transfer a whole buch of freudian crap on me.
How else you want that interpreted other than “I’m going to vote for strong players”?
I repeat, this is up there for most foolish strategy in a Mafia game I’ve seen.
I can’t help but concur with you here–I don’t think we can make any judgements on towniness/scumminess from anything related to the Spawn mechanic and strategies for dealing with same until we get to the point where we have killed 2-3 scum and can reasonably surmise that the spawn are suddenly a potential spoiler for scum planning/voting–which is also the time, IMHO, it starts making sense to leave spawn alive.
On the face of it, this seems valid. But on further inspection, it’s meaningless. Yes, when we lyse Spawn, we know we’re getting a bad guy.
However, the real bad guys are the Scum. And it’s true we’re likely to make mistakes, it’s the main way of getting rid of Scum.
It’s dangerous to think of mislynches as bringing us farther from our win condition. Because lyncihg is the only way to get the Scum.
And, while we’re likely to make mistakes, I’m also not willing to acept that lynching 2 players makes us doubly likely to mislynch. I would propose, in fact, that many times the 2nd candidate IS the Scum when we mislynch.
Anyway, this is all hypothetical, we don’t really know what we’re dealing with.
And still, I maintain that for now, we are probably better off lynching Spawn, but I’m still not willing to make it our standard operating procedure. I think it needs to be continually discussed.
You’ve got a very good point, storyteller. The basic mechanic of this game is:
Day, Town lynches two.
Dusk, Scum gain one, who sticks out like a sore thumb.
Night, Scum kill one.
In kill terms, the pond can eliminate two players to the Scum’s one. This is (somewhat) balanced by the Scum’s growth via Spawn.
So the pond has an ability to gain twice as much definite information as normal. I repeat my opinion from earlier, this is an option worth keeping.
Vote total:
Spawn 10
peekercpa 2
Zeriel 1
1: special_ed
2: ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies – Spawn (193)
3: Drain Bead – Spawn (191)
4: Oredigger77 – Spawn (194)
5: storyteller0910
6: Meeko – Spawn (182)
7: Mahaloth – Spawn (209), peeker (209)
8: Freudian Slit – Spawn (183)
9: USCDiver
10: Alka Seltzer
11: peekercpa – Spawn (186), [del]story[/del] (186-229), Zeriel (229)
12: Natlaw
13: Zeriel – Spawn (204), peeker (204)
14: DiggitCamara
15: amrussell
16: KellyCriterion
17: Scuba_Ben – Spawn (225)
18: sachertorte – Spawn (202)
19: fluiddruid
20: TexCat – Spawn (198)
21: Rysto
No, I was under the impression that you apparently chose to try and say something reasonable in a way that was very broad and with a high probability of false-positives. Whether or not that was a manipulation or not, I don’t know yet, but it definitely caught my eye.
Imho anything that goes against our win condition is by definition bad and real and of course there are various ways some will be more dangerous than others depending on context.
The idea that it is dangerous to keep mislynches in their proper context of being counter productive to the win condition is surreal in its absurdity.
I’m also not willing to accept that lynching 2 players makes us twice as likely to mislynch, which is why I said that it would make us more likely to mislynch.
I wasn’t really referring to your approach, in particular, as knee-jerk; you have given it thought and have looked at it from multiple sides. I thought the group reaction as a whole, which has resulted in ten Spawn votes within six hours of role assignment, was fairly characterized as knee-jerk as I understand the term.
Well, it really sort of depends on what you mean by “the late game,” doesn’t it? I mean, if the Town uses the double-PC-lyse once in the early game, it will result in a single extra Spawn hanging around. Said extra Spawn need not ever be dealt with until all PC Scum have been killed. Granted, we won’t know exactly when we’ve killed all the PC Scum, but it will eventually become apparent (at worst, when we’re down to three living players and two Spawn, and the game isn’t over, the three living players would know that they are all Town, and could act accordingly). In other words, the double-Spawn-lyse need not be used in the late game, but as the last thing that happens (assuming a Town win). Does that make sense? If it doesn’t, let me know, and I"ll try again 
How is it a mess or obfuscated? Every player is responsible for is or her own vote(s). I think in the ideal system, you’d vote for your strong suspects. If you have only one strong suspect, vote for that player and a Spawn. If you have two strong suspects, vote for both. In the end, whether we do a double lyse in a given Summer depends on whether there are enough players willing to go on record as having suspicions strong enough to support a double lyse. I don’t see how that obfuscates or confuses anything.
In the words of the immortal classic, Chicken Run, “are those the only two choices?” I argue that they are not; that we could do two today and one tomorrow and one the day after that and so on until dealing with the Spawn is the only business that remains to us.
Of course, that strategy carries a risk. If we mislynch a few times, we may have to double-lyse Spawn just to keep from losing. That’s a significant risk, and one of which we would have to be mindful.
Of course, this is largely academic, as there is zero support for a First Summer double-PC-lyse - hell, I don’t even know if I think it’s a good idea or not. But the early discussion of it is probably worth examining, yes? Bed now, analysis later.
I’m baffled that we even need to discuss this.
[/QUOTE]