I don’t think Rysto’s argument about Diggit’s Drainbead vote is a good one, in that I agree that her vote reason with the mention of that someone voted someone now-known-as-town was odd.
I agree with Storyteller that you seem to believe both his claim is (partly) true, so it can be a town role. But if it’s partly true a scummy Storyteller would killed Winter Two since he might have been lynched the next Summer.
Another would be at a mislynch at lynch or lose resulting in even numbers of town and scum, since the need a strict majority the Winter action result in another Summer of lynch or lose. Of course requires estimating the correct number of scum correctly.
I think that you misunderstand my argument. I agree that Drain’s original vote was strange and worthy of attention. However, Diggit’s stated perspective on the whole thing was that he thought that Drain was exhibiting PIS. My argument was that if Drain was exhibiting PIS then no one could reasonably conclude that Drain was scum.
I voted him for an inconsistence about voting Mahaloth (not wanting to discuss how to scum hunt but asking earlier how to do it). That seemed in conflict with her newbie status.
Summer Three I did ask him again to clarify, but she referred back to his previous post without much extra explanation. I did let that slide, mostly because I decided it was newbie laziness. Because I read Mahaloth’s and Kelly’s interaction I was familiar with Mahaloth posts and they seemed to lack actual scum hunting and he was placing easy votes. So I voted Mahaloth for that scummy behavior and since I didn’t think he would be voting a fellow newbie scum that moved Kelly more in the not-scum camp.
Also note that when I voted it wasn’t between Kelly and Mahaloth, but if I remember correctly Storyteller, you and Mahaloth. I didn’t think either of the first two cases were much good, so I voted Mahaloth for reasons above.
I was around during the vote changes at the end of the Summer (first to Kelly and then back to Mahaloth). I did consider changing to my vote at that point, but I didn’t like the swing to Kelly in the first place and he hadn’t claimed either so I left my vote where it was.
You’re making the reverse of claim of when you voted special ed for defending Scuba_Ben/Redskeezix.
You voted him because he seemed to know Scuba_Ben was town - here PIS is scummy. But now you say exhibiting PIS is not scummy?
On reread I do see that Diggit claimed PIS after but not when he voted (and ed being a town power role wasn’t PIS anymore at that point). I didn’t check if Drainbead defended ed Summer One when it would have been PIS and/or if Diggit mentioned it then.
Sometimes PIS is scummy; sometimes it’s not. I voted for ed because, in my experience, scum are more likely to slip and say that an unconfirmed player is Town than a townie is to make an unjustified assumption.
In the case of Drain the only PIS that she possibly could have been exhibiting was mason PIS.
I’m not sure what case is being made here exactly, I voted for the player I thought was most Scummy in those Days. Also I wasn’t the last voter for peekercpa, **AlkaSeltzer **was.
I said I’d come back with my list, and I was able to think of a couple more eliminations.
I started with the full list of players and eliminated them based on category, players already eliminated were not considered for later categories.
People who were dead before freudian: special Ed, cookies, mahaloth,peeker,zeriel,fluid,Kelly
People who said they weren’t masons already: Red Skeezix, storyteller, texcat
people who said they were masons as of meeko’s claim: drain, meeko
people who meeko voted for: Natlaw,sachertorte
people who drain voted for: Rysto
people who voted drain: Diggit,amrussel
people who voted meeko: USCDiver
Here is the choice that scum was facing last night:
4: Oredigger77
8: Freudian Slit
10: Alka Seltzer
If Oredigger or Alka are scum it’s a 50-50 shot of hitting guaranteed unprotected mason, if they both are it’s 100%.
That puts us into 3 groups (masons, not mason, possible mason guesses for last night).
It’s not particularly damning. It’s just more data. At this point I’m leaning towards Alka. The late voting tie on day 3 was pretty scummy, esp since if Alka was scum he’d know maha was town and story had broadcasted that he preferred the maha lynch, and would break a tie. To be honest, with a short think and not much research, it seems like Oredigger has voted for everyone surrounding the storyteller double lyse + claim mess. Oredigger was also named by Kelly, but that could just be coincidence.
so for now, for what appears to be vote manipulation and some weak circumstantial analysis based on who was a mason possibility: vote Alka Seltzer
vote Spawn
I know I already advertsided but I just wanted to say that we need a sub for the game that I am currently hosting here so anyone who died or otherwise wanted to start playing in the meantime or was hesitant the first time can get in there if you want anyone?
This is interesting, but Drain, Meeko and Freudian exposed themselves as possible non-vanillas on Day 1. It came after peeker accused me of of a slip, something I interpreted as possible role-fishing. Drain, Meeko and Freudian all took an interest, reveling that they thought vanilla = plankton. This wasn’t clear from a public perspective, town power roles could have been types of plankton, or other things living in a pond. I didn’t want to spell that out on Day 1, as I didn’t want to help the scum fish. I tried to close the whole thing down as quick as possible, before other players started giving hints about their roles.
There was no slip on my part, I’m very careful about this kind of thing.
I think your list is crap because for some reason it assumes Masons won’t ever vote for other Masons which is just as dangerous as assuming the same of Scum. However, I share your suspicions of **AlkaSeltzer **with regards to the non-lynch of **KellyCriterion **on Summer 3.
Well, the basis of the case is “the curious incident of the dog in the night”. You’ve done very little, and by your own admission this is because you’ve been following the thread but not contributing - instead, if anyone posts something you agree with, you decide that absolves you of the responsibility to contribute your own thoughts. As a result, you are an information black hole. This is an excellent position for scum to find themselves in, and a poor position for town.
You’re right that Alka was the last to vote for peeker - my mistake. You were the second-last, and you did not, in fact, vote for him because you thought he was scummiest:
You explicitly disavowed the idea that peeker was being scummy in his play. Three times. On Day One, weak cases are expected. But now you’re re-writing your voting history, which is by no means par for the course. And if you were voting for someone you knew was town, being able to go back and point out that you never actually thought he was scum is tremendously helpful.
Re-reading Summer 4, I’m struck by the fact that, contrary to your avowed practice of waiting to see what other people say, you were very quick to vote for Kelly. To be specific: there were four votes for Kelly at the very beginning of the Summer, brought over from the previous Summer. Three of these unvoted when Kelly first claimed (Drain being the holdout.) There then followed a “satellite delayed” interrogation and some general discussion of the claim. Some were more believing than others but gradually the discrepancies became more glaring. Nevertheless, even the most suspcious players were hesitant about voting. At that point, you came in and threw the first post-claim vote down. At which point things quickly snow-balled. Given your admitted wait-and-see attitude, this is something of a change of pace. It struck me at the time that in the event of a claim unravelling, Kelly’s fellow scum would want to distance themselves from him pretty rapidly, and the best way to do that is to be quick off the mark with a vote.
And what’s funny is that I didn’t think it was unclear at all, from the game rules post. And the fact that you did probably means that YOU aren’t plankton, either. Obviously if you had that role, you’d know for sure.
Based on that and Skeezik’s analysis above, I’m comfortable voting for you.
Looking at Story, he is at least engaging with me now, making it possible to make a better judgement on him. I think he is making some reasonable points in his defence, but overall I’m not convinced.
@Town - Can anyone else confirm this please? If this is true, Story’s position on double-lyse makes even less sense. A vig always has the option of killing for information, going for a player with a voting record, so it’s a safer and better option than a double player lyse in this game.
I don’t have a big problem with your vote of Fluid, although it was a reversal of your Day 1 analysis on her, but voting for Fluid and Sach was a clear contradiciton of your analysis. Why vote for both of them when you thought that no more than one of them was scum?
I don’t have an issue with the timing of the claim, but you were certainly under pressure, and anticipating more votes, as is clear from your claim post below:
Looking at the timing of your vote on Fluid, it placed her in a tie with yourself at 3 votes each, so I can’t rule out self-defence as a motive. I find it significant that you voted Fluid, who presented a comprehensive case against you, instead of Sach, who mostly argued with you on strategy.
I find it very strange you say you can’t read me based on playstyle, I’ve posted a lot of game-relevant content. That’s about the third time you’ve repeated this, and it contradicts your position here:
There is a strong implicit assumption that I am town here. If Story thought I was scum, I would have a strong motive for attacking him over double lyse. Either Story had a town read on me (which he is denying), or he slipped here and knew I was town.
At that point in the game, a large proportion of your posting concerned double player-lyse. You made a substantial analysis post late on Day 1 where you voted Freudian (subsequently not followed up at all), but didn’t do any scum hunting Day 2 until your vote for Fluid. I don’t remember you making many comments on other players, is this accurate?
OK, I can see the argument there.
Yeah, I don’t like these kind of attacks either. It does support your vote for Fluid.
Don’t like this. Town needs to peform the best analysis we can with the information we have. A crazy role from x games ago isn’t really relevant. Trying to assess whether a role makes sense is a perfectly reasonable thing to do. Obviously, there is a degree of risk, but that is true of any case made in mafia.
The other possibility is that you chose the claim knowing you’d almost certainly never have to prove it, and that you don’t have a black-hole kill ability.
@Story - Do you agree with me that a black-hole kill would be a very powerful role for scum to have, and it would severly change the game balance unless town had a role to counter it?
Earlier I floated the idea of testing your ability late in the game if we end up with even numbers. I expected you to show some interest in this if you are town. What are your thoughts on this?
Since I’m picking up a some votes here, I’ll make a few points in self-defence.
On Day 2 I defended Drain before her mason claim, when she was the vote leader and Kelly also had some votes. That would not have been a smart move if I was scum.
On Day 3 I encouraged Meeko to vote for his top candidate, when he was complaining about “not being able to unvote”. At the time, he was showing suspicion of Kelly.
Obviously, I made a bad call on Kelly vs Mahaloth. I’ll dig up the relevant posts that show what I was thinking.
Can I have some actual reasons for the vote please?
It was clear that the vanilla town were plankton from the posted PM. What wasn’t clear was if town power roles were special types of plankton or some other type of creature. I was being careful to post from that perspective. That question probably didn’t occur to you because you had extra information (PIS).
You should remember that I know how to protect roles from the last game Drain. After I blocked you, I was careful to remain neutral towards you. Scum would probably have guessed I was the blocker if I had blocked the kill and I’d started a case against you the next day.
You’ve claimed now Meeko, so it’s not really relevant, and it wouldn’t help us find scum.
This is consistent with what I saw. However, I disagree with the idea that we can assume that at least one of Oredigger and Alka Seltzer are scum. In order to feel this way, we must accept that scum would be more inclined to take a shot in this pool if one of Oredigger and Alka Seltzer were scum. I do not believe this is the case.
Let’s assume that all three are Town:
Scum would feel that one or more of these players is a Mason, most likely unprotected.
Even if they choose wrong, it doesn’t actively hurt scum. So there isn’t exactly a deterrent from choosing from this grouping. For this reason I think it is dangerous to assume that one of Oredigger and Alka Seltzer are scum.
Let’s assume that one of them is scum:
Red Skeezix concludes that the scummy one is alka seltzer. I disagree. If we were to go down the Oredigger versus Alka Seltzer path, I would think Oredigger is the scummy one. Scum are not revealed by what they do, but by what they Don’t Do. Alka Seltzer is getting votes because he is the ‘scummy’ one, that is, he has done ‘suspicious things.’ This “apparent scumminess” is precisely why I would (if the choice was between Oredigger and Alka) choose Oredigger for lynching. Everything Alka Seltzer has done (as far as I can tell so far) that people are pointing to as “scummy” are precisely the things that Town would do and should do in pursuit of scum.
So Alka Seltzer voted for Mahaloth. Big deal. I voted for Mahaloth, as did many others.
So Alka Seltzer voted for Mahaloth LATE. This is where things get interesting. Alka Seltzer created a TIE. A Tie is a risky place for scum. The risk is that KellyCriterion dies by random result AND Alka Seltzer gets heat for the vote. Bad place to be. I don’t see it as a scum move. Furthermore, Alka Seltzer was voting after another pair of late votes switched the count from Mahaloth to KellyCriterion LATE. I can see Town reacting badly to that.
The main point against Alka Seltzer isn’t nearly as “scummy” as people say it is.
Furthermore, I find Alka Seltzer engaging. He certainly is pursuing his thoughts and storyteller. Does that look ‘scummy?’ It doesn’t to me. Everyone else (including myself) has given up on the storyteller angle. Why would a scummy Alka Seltzer bother? Even if Alka Seltzer is scum and storyteller is Town it is a waste of effort.
As for why I would choose Oredigger over Alka Seltzer is precisely because he is so “not scummy” if that makes sense. I know. I get myself into trouble for these thoughts, but time and time again, scum play safe, scum stay out of the fray, and the only thing that makes scum visible is their lack of “apparent scummines.” I guess that is the best way to put it. It goes back to my “clean noser” theory of mafia.
Look at peekercpa: he was lynched for “acting scummy”
Look at fluiddruid: she was lynched for what exactly? Something in there had to have been “scummy” but really all she did was actively play the game.
Mahaloth was the closest we got to lynching someone for lack of committment, so yeah, it’s not a perfect system.
KellyCriterion was lynched based on an inconsistency in his story. Frankly, if he had claimed cleanly (standard cop) he probably would not have been lynched.
Anyway, I’m dubious of the “one of Alka Seltzer and Oredigger must be scum” assumption.
As for detectives, I’ve been pondering detectives a bit more this morning. I’m torn between thinking we don’t have one (mainly because one hasn’t spoken up) and the fact that we are incredibly screwed if there isn’t one. Not so much for the lack of investigations, but that scum can easily claim detective from here to the end of the game. It is bad enough if we don’t have a detective, but it is far worse because we won’t know that we don’t have a detective.
So I keep vacillating on whether or not I expect there to be a detective. In game evidence points to there not being a detective. Game design balance mandates that there be one.