**Something tells me I should have asked this about Nanook. **
Because Townies can’t increase their numbers, but Sinners can. If I were a Blackheart, if given a choice between getting rid of a Townie (whose numbers don’t increase) and a Sinner (whose numbers increase, at least temporarily, every night) I would think I’d want to get rid of the Sinners first.
Either I closed without submitting or it got lost, but I just asked about Nanook(though I don’t see the post now).
Should we sub or lynch him? He has not played in a week. If he’s scum, he’s sliding by with a complete free pass. In fact, I’m not totally sure it isn’t a tactic of his. Just sit there and say nothing and avoid all attention.
Thoughts?
From a Blackheart’s point of view, there are only two reasons it would matter who they target:
1: They don’t want anyone else to hit their win condition first. Town can’t win without eliminating the Blackhearts anyway, so they don’t care about the Town win condition, but depending on how the Seed of Sin interacts with Blackhearts, the Sinners might be able to, so eventually, the Sinners will become a slightly higher priority for the Blackhearts.
2: They want to eliminate folks who can effectively work against them, whether through powers or skilled play. Anti-Blackheart power roles are probably Town, rather than Sinner, so if they want to hit power roles, they’d be better served to aim at Town.
Generally I am opposed to lynching the lurker. However, his one post in the game struck me as relatively scummy. He’s against the informal no editing rule and he jumped onto the Spurious bandwagon and then left the thread completely.
OK, I’m not sure I’d look at it that way, because Sinner numbers will increase until ALL sinners are dead.
And as per my reading, Sinners need the blackhearts dead anyway
from my understanding, Nanook is a notorious ‘seldom poster’ if Town or Scum. He’s usually very insightful though when he does post.
Well, the only thing remotely close to insightful that he’s posted this time around is that it can be a bad idea to lynch the talkers especially on Day 1.
Do we want to continue looking at lurkers, or do we want to check what we know now, against what everyone else has said on Day 1?
Sorry I’ve been off and on thus far–it’s hard to keep up with games, esp. in the beginning.
To those who were saying my posts were mostly drive by and not substantive, deal. That was my style in the last game and even though it got me killed, I was Town in the last game too.
So far I don’t have any suspects because at this point, percentages say we pretty much will just lynch Town. And I don’t think this is the type of game where just lynching or ostracizing or whatnot for the sake of doing so will get us anywhere.
Let me think about it and I’ll try to give you the pros/cons of both options in a bit…I’m slightly busy right now.
UGGGHHHH Why are you guys still misinterpreting the game?
Listen… if a town is “Sinfected” (btw… genius term) they don’t stop counting towards town numbers. Nor do the Sinners gain a new member… they are closer to their wincon, but they do not increase their membership. At least… there is no evidence of that. And town has ways to counteract that boost to Sinners wincon. We can either lynch the sinfected, let them pray, vig them, or maybe there is a person within the town who has the power to remove the sinfection? All of those are possible and cancel out the sinfected and prevent a Sinners win. That said… I don’t advocate we waste our lynch on the sinfected. Just let them pray. If they have an important role, than they will have to decide between using it or praying.
So… are the sinners winning… maybe, but you don’t have to treat it like town is losing and will continue to lose if the sinfection spreads.
CHRONOS: you said, “I’m not seeing any evidence, based on what has been publicly posted, that there was a Sinfection other than Angel. And we know of two methods of Sinfection, one of which we know didn’t happen (and will never happen again). My good friend Occam would have me conclude that she was the only one.”
Stop skimming buddy… I already stated that I can deduce that there were two infected last night based on direct knowledge I received from Pede. The only exception is if the sinners and the blackhearts chose the same target last night. Why would you want to believe that there are less sinfected than there actually is? Don’t want us to realize how close or far we are to your wincon? Are you a Sinner Chronos?
Can we see this direct knowledge from Pede? I didn’t see anything in the game that led me to that conclusion.
So basically what you’re saying is… not being helpful at all is how you play town?
I’ve always been kinda skeptical of people who say “I posted this way last game, and I was town then… ergo I am town now as well” without being confronted about their post style meaning they are scummy. It kind of smells like someone making an effort to do something, and it going unnoticed… so they bring it up themselves.
:smack: Really I said I received the direct knowledge from Pede… of course it isn’t posted in the main thread… and no… I won’t share it with everyone yet because there is no need to put out that particular info. It benefits Sinner and Blackheart more than town. So either believe me or don’t. But if you don’t, be prepared to look like an ass later.
No. I’m just saying that at this point in the game, there is really very little to go on, is all. So far I’m skeptical of people who focus on one person with no evidence–so, I voted on Chronos last time and I’m focusing on you now.
So basically, here are the positvves and negatives of considering a lynch the lurker concept on Day Two. We can’t do this much past Day Two or Three, because we hopefully will have some kind of read on people and have a suspect list.
Pros:
1.** Lurking/Hiding is a reasonable scum strategy**…draw no fire and slide right by. They’d dodge a vigilante kill most likely as well, because the vigilante might forget about them. Don’t know if we have a vigilante, but anyway.
-
It encourages(forces) people to talk, which can lead to a scum slip or help us identify patterns between scum players.
-
In Day One, I suggested it because we have little else to go and I didn’t want to take out the talkers. We took out Spurious George, who was a townie and participating. Full Disclosure: I voted Spurious at first, then changed to a somewhat lurker later when I felt it was better for the town(I voted for Captain Pinkies).
Cons:
-
Well, we have no idea if the lurker is a scum. We would be openly guessing. Obviously.
-
It’s also a **possible scum strategy to not lurk **and get themselves in this situation in the first place.
-
If you have a real reason to vote for someone who is actively posting, then use that evidence over a lurker kill. Not really a con, but a point anyway.
Anyway, what did I miss?
For which we have… your word, and nothing else. We don’t even have any quotes of your PM that imply that. You asked pedescribe, “Was someone infected”, and he answered “Yes”. Then, AngeloftheNorth says that she was infected. If you have some reason to think that AngeloftheNorth was not the person that pedescribe was telling you about in your PM, then share that reason. But if you just tell us “I know that there are two people Sinfected, and you just have to take my word for it, because I won’t tell you how I know”, then you can’t expect anyone to believe you.
Basically, what you’ve done so far is to claim you have a special role, but haven’t told anyone what it is. This is the worst possible thing to claim: On the one hand, it doesn’t help the Town to believe your claim if you don’t say what it is, but on the other hand, it does help the Scum (if you’re not one already) know who to target with their kill or other powers.
Frankly, I was already suspicious when you didn’t get night-killed, after publicly stating that you were PMing pede, and this secret-information game doesn’t make me trust you any more. And so, I will
Vote paulwhoisaghost
Vote Paulwhoisaghost
I’m used to looking like an idiot. But I’m not the one with a magic bag.
Vote paulwhoisaghost