|
Post by Inner Stickler on Oct 10, 2012 13:17:05 GMT -5
Maybe it is just that I'm new to the game but I don't see how claiming town will help town - If the numbers are correct we started with 7 townies and 5 scum - yes the scum can only kill one per night but if they have claimed town to hit each night they win in 7 days as town has 7 or so days to lynch the 5 scum and so far... nada nothing... I just don't see how claiming town is a good move for town - having the scum blindly doing their night killing in the town/3rd party group would be better. That forces us to lynch in the town/3rd party group as well. Patricia, if tomorrow we all wake up and Parzival is dead and a town weak cop just like he says, what are you going to think of Pizzaguy and his claim that Parzival is hostile to town?
|
|
|
Post by patricia on Oct 10, 2012 13:21:04 GMT -5
I see your point Inner still trying to learn the finer points - wishing I had a night action informed or not - guess I will go back to my room and see who is dead in the morning
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Oct 10, 2012 13:21:12 GMT -5
Scum only have one nightkill between them, usually so between ATPG, Parz, Colby, JBG, Red and uh any others that have slipped my mind, they can't kill everyone. Who they choose will tell us things. They may even choose to ignore the claims and go hunting for a role that strikes them as more dangerous to scum in which case, the truthtellers will have another night to gather info. well if they won the merc bidding it would most likely be at least two. and if they have any other special powers then i guess the death toll could be higher.
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Oct 10, 2012 13:24:33 GMT -5
But I don't care about their wincons except to the end that I need to frustrate them. From the point of view of town, whether it's a third party or scum, if it's hostile, it needs to die. From a mathematical point of view, the two are equivalent. fair enough. i guess to those folks whose wincons are tied into the hostile/non hostile designation it makes sense. but cripes i think i already see two hostile townies. makes one wonder, doesn't it.
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Oct 10, 2012 13:27:23 GMT -5
or do you suggest that regardless of being town because they are designated as hostile they need to go bye bye for the non hostiles to win. yeh, this smells like a take off on that frustrating peacemaker game.
|
|
|
Post by Inner Stickler on Oct 10, 2012 13:44:10 GMT -5
I see your point Inner still trying to learn the finer points - wishing I had a night action informed or not - guess I will go back to my room and see who is dead in the morning Ok, one more piece of advice: when it comes to the subject of Night Actions, keep mum. If you're town, you've just alerted scum to the fact that you don't act at night and therefore are unlikely to be a role that can uncover their perfidiousness so they won't target you. As a rule we try not to help the scum in narrowing their pool of targets. No, peeker, it's like this. In order for town to win, all factions hostile to town must die. Whether that is a scum team, a PFK or a scum team and a PFK, they all must die and the order in which it happens is irrelevant. For the purposes of advancing town's wincon either is an acceptable target while Third Party nonhostile and Town are not.
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Oct 10, 2012 14:03:51 GMT -5
No, peeker, it's like this. In order for town to win, all factions hostile to town must die. Whether that is a scum team, a PFK or a scum team and a PFK, they all must die and the order in which it happens is irrelevant. For the purposes of advancing town's wincon either is an acceptable target while Third Party nonhostile and Town are not. well i am glad it makes sense to you. thank og i don't have to burdened with those distinctions. because a hostile town and/or a non hostile scum seem to be contradictory.
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Oct 10, 2012 14:07:47 GMT -5
I just want to make sure I've read the rules right:
If Pizza's partner is, as claimed, Town, then if an Investigatee is Scum or Hostile third-party, then said partner will get "Hostile" as a result.
If, however, the Investigatee were Town, even though Town's "alignment" is Hostile, said partner would have gotten "Non-hostile" because Town's wincon is not Hostile to Town.
Is that right?
|
|
|
Post by Inner Stickler on Oct 10, 2012 14:09:42 GMT -5
Yes.
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Oct 10, 2012 14:10:15 GMT -5
Okay, thanks.
I've been fumbling with that all game.
|
|
|
Post by Inner Stickler on Oct 10, 2012 14:16:44 GMT -5
well i am glad it makes sense to you. thank og i don't have to burdened with those distinctions. because a hostile town and/or a non hostile scum seem to be contradictory. For a Townie: Scum are Hostile Townies are Non-Hostile Third Parties are Non-Hostile PFKs are Hostile For a Scum: Scum are Non-Hostile Townies are Hostile Third Parties are Non-Hostile PFKs are Hostile For a Third Party*: Scum are Non-Hostile Townies are Non-Hostile Third Parties are Non-Hostile PFKs are Hostile For a PFK*: Scum are Hostile Townies are Hostile Third Parties are Hostile PFKs are Hostile *General case only. It's possible that their wincons are such that my designations are not accurate.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Oct 10, 2012 14:54:06 GMT -5
For a Townie: Scum are Hostile Townies are Non-Hostile Third Parties are Non-Hostile PFKs are Hostile For a Scum: Scum are Non-Hostile Townies are Hostile Third Parties are Non-Hostile PFKs are Hostile For a Third Party*: Scum are Non-Hostile Townies are Non-Hostile Third Parties are Non-Hostile PFKs are Hostile For a PFK*: Scum are Hostile Townies are Hostile Third Parties are Hostile PFKs are Hostile This is the only thing I'd add, though it may just confuse people all over again: For the Mod (as seen in death-reveal flips): Scum are Hostile Townies are Hostile Third Parties are either: -Non Hostile - (See Mahaloth's death flip on Day 1 Dusk and scathach's on Day 2 ) or -Hostile (pfk) - (Theoretical, we haven't seen one flip) or -Gastardly ambiguous (see Peeker's not-really-dead flip at Dawn of Day 2)
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Oct 10, 2012 14:55:17 GMT -5
NETA:
Neglected to add the (Theoretical, we haven't seen one flip) for the Scum on the Mod perspective
|
|
|
Post by Askthepizzaguy on Oct 10, 2012 16:45:24 GMT -5
But I don't care about their wincons except to the end that I need to frustrate them. From the point of view of town, whether it's a third party or scum, if it's hostile, it needs to die. From a mathematical point of view, the two are equivalent. Precisely. If one town plus all nonhostiles survive, town and nonhostiles win. Town and nonhostile third party mean precisely no difference except that nonhostile third parties can become hostile if recruited by the scummy scummy scums.
|
|
|
Post by Askthepizzaguy on Oct 10, 2012 17:04:33 GMT -5
Okay, askthepizzaguy, I'll play along. I honestly don't think my choices for scum are any better than anyone else's. You got that right. We're certainly hostile to you. I'll note I was looking for names, but whatevs. You'd just lurve it if we lynched Colby. That really tells me all I need to know about you. Frankly a townie who wanted to lynch Colby would be as dangerous to the town winning the game as a scumbag. So far, four targets that are completely off. MMMMM I like this. First of all, you're attacking my beloved Cookies. With nonsense, might I add. Storyteller is too busy telling stories to be hostile. He's nearly as awesome as Cookies. Inner Stickler is sticky. On the inner part. I think I've disagreed with every single one of dizzy's suspects and suggested courses of action so far. Richy rich, never got a scum vibe from him but who knows. Ginger is dangerously powerful, hostile, and lying to us. As such she cannot survive the game. They went from knowing a whole lot of nada, to greatly understanding the game setup, knowing what our priorities are, formulating a plan of action that works, and understanding that although my tagging powers are useful, they're not nearly as useful unless I am publicly known, and they're less useful than simply being a vocal spokesperson for town in general. And so I made that conscious trade-off. I am unimpressed by folks complaining about my role claim, because I already claimed a while back. I simply didn't indicate I was a mason nor did I show my role PM. That was deliberate. None of that was necessary to know. As for Parzival, he's scum. That's known to the town forces now, and as such, he won't survive the game. As such, I've traded myself (1 townie) for scum (1 Parzival) which is always a good trade. And of course he'd claim upon such a vehement and pointed accusation. What were we going to expect? The part of his claim which you all should be laughing at is his claim that he's town. If he were better at lying he would have claimed third party. That might have fooled someone. Not me, but someone. His claim pretty much directly contradicts Red Skeezix, let alone my mason partner. So, either all the scumbags in this game are crawling out of the woodwork to drown Parzival in blue pee, or he's the scumbag.
|
|
|
Post by Askthepizzaguy on Oct 10, 2012 17:08:00 GMT -5
If I were a betting man, I would bet on the group of folks that look like they're all townies attacking the one random guy that is probably scum due to the specific type of accusation leveled, who it is being generated from, and just how random it would be that all the scumbags would want Parzival dead at great risk to themselves once he is and is exposed townie.
His admittedly weak-ass role is not something the scum universe must tear itself apart trying to destroy.
There's not enough townies in this game for Parzival to be townie, so either both me and Red Skeezix are scum, or Parzival is.
That's a really simple riddle and I hope folks come to the correct conclusion.
|
|
|
Post by Askthepizzaguy on Oct 10, 2012 17:11:57 GMT -5
If I were scum I probably would be claiming the investigation results said Colby was guilty, as at this point the only way Colby could be slain would be by the lynch. Assuming folks use the Merc correctly.
But since that's a long shot, my best guess is that the scumbags (including Parzival) simply include Colby on the probably scum list and hope townies do something very foolish. Which is likely what half of them are doing.
Anyone who has consistently accused Colby or tried to get him dead is on my radar at this point.
|
|
|
Post by Askthepizzaguy on Oct 10, 2012 17:40:26 GMT -5
The more I think about it, the more scummy the KidVermicious bid looks to me. We have to accept that he made the high bid since no counter-claim. And for now accept the number (don't think he'd lie about that regardless of alignment). But we're going with just his say, even though he we don't know his alignment, that we should go on what he says. I realize that maybe most people are actually voting Mahaloth because they want to, not to 'save' KidV, but I don't think Mahaloth is scum. Such a high bid, essentially 'forcing' us to bandwagon on someone else and letting scum hide there, while gaining control of the merc, seems enough like a scummy ploy to me to: vote KidVermicious And obviously, strongly disagree with the above statement, the risk/reward is wrong and scumbags gambling that townies will save them is a bad gamble. How about not subjecting yourself to death in the first place? Also, I like scumbags that risk their balls getting chopped off day one. I would like to encourage more of that kind of dumbass behavior so it blows up in their face. Can't tell yet if I simply disagree with Parzival's fundamental take on mafia strategy or if I find him to be pulling BS out of thin air. Odds are simple disagreement but I find his statement here and his vote completely contrary to good townie play. My eye is watching him now, though. Oh man. I snagged onto his scummy behavior really early on and I just plain forgot about it.The shame, the shame. Thank goodness my partner is on the ball.
|
|
|
Post by Rich Beckman on Oct 10, 2012 17:41:15 GMT -5
Scum only have one nightkill between them, usually so between ATPG, Parz, Colby, JBG, Red and uh any others that have slipped my mind, they can't kill everyone. Who they choose will tell us things. They may even choose to ignore the claims and go hunting for a role that strikes them as more dangerous to scum in which case, the truthtellers will have another night to gather info. Truthtellers. What have I missed. What are Truthtellers? Do we know for sure we have them? How do we know?
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Oct 10, 2012 17:53:16 GMT -5
IANInner, but I think he just means Those Who Are Telling The Truth.
|
|
Parzival
Mome Rath
Let's all strive to do our best today![on:forgot to log out][of:forgot to log in]
Posts: 201
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Parzival on Oct 10, 2012 19:15:27 GMT -5
AskThePizzaGuy, I'm wondering about your buddy detective 'mason'. You were supposedly investigating JustBeingGinger - you said you'd know in "two days" But you're also claiming to have investigated me at the same time. Did you just decide to hold off on her or what?
|
|
|
Post by JustBeingGinger on Oct 10, 2012 19:51:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by lauriern on Oct 10, 2012 20:22:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by lauriern on Oct 10, 2012 20:24:57 GMT -5
Sorry my participation has been spotty. I have been side-tracked by another game and RL came slamming in today. Will try for better participation tomorrow after some sleep.
|
|
|
Post by JustBeingGinger on Oct 10, 2012 20:34:18 GMT -5
I posted in the going away thread that I would be out of town but this is not the case. Plans have changed, I am no longer going to Baltimore to see my fiance but he is coming here. So I will have access to the boards but with limited play, well limited play with this game... Have fun Thank you!!!!! I intend to!!!
|
|
|
Post by Rich Beckman on Oct 10, 2012 23:15:03 GMT -5
I am trying to make my spreadsheet more useful by including people's votes. Since I did not start doing that from the get go, I am having to go back and review posting records. Looking at Colby's, I notice this: Silver Jan and Ginger are in my game, I will send them back over here if they log on Notified Ginger, and Jan is on vacation so not sure when she will return That was Sept 13, but Ginger does not show until Oct. 1 after Lightfoot notifies her. I do not know that this means anything at all, but it is a data point. Somehow I managed to post this in The Re-Sign-In/Sign-up Thread Part II: The Return thread before I reposted it here.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Oct 11, 2012 0:12:58 GMT -5
If one town plus all nonhostiles survive, town and nonhostiles win. Town and nonhostile third party mean precisely no difference except that nonhostile third parties can become hostile if recruited by the scummy scummy scums. You are saying these things as if they are established facts. I don't believe that is the case. Do you have some concrete evidence that these statements are true, or do these fall under the category of 'things that only Pizza has been able to figure out'?
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Oct 11, 2012 0:19:32 GMT -5
I am trying to make my spreadsheet more useful by including people's votes. Since I did not start doing that from the get go, I am having to go back and review posting records. Looking at Colby's, I notice this: Notified Ginger, and Jan is on vacation so not sure when she will return That was Sept 13, but Ginger does not show until Oct. 1 after Lightfoot notifies her. I do not know that this means anything at all, but it is a data point. Somehow I managed to post this in The Re-Sign-In/Sign-up Thread Part II: The Return thread before I reposted it here.I've never had Admin privileges on these boards, but Pollux's post on the topic indicated that he could tell when our initial PMs were actually opened vs sitting unread in our inboxes, and that in Ginger's case that opening did not take place until shortly before she posted on the 1st. Whether or not that little bit of mod-confirmed data will be fought over in the post-game remains to be seen, but I honestly think the most sensible, fair, fun, and game-loving thing to do is back away from the meta-gaming on that point and just assume that she was a player of unknown alignment who just arrived to the party late for reasons unrelated to the game. That includes, by logical extension, trying not to let the mod-confirmed information ripple over to in-game perceptions of Pizza and his suspicions as to her late arrival, imho. And you tricked me into posting in the other thread too.
|
|
Parzival
Mome Rath
Let's all strive to do our best today![on:forgot to log out][of:forgot to log in]
Posts: 201
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Parzival on Oct 11, 2012 0:39:40 GMT -5
One last thought before I go to bed. Pizza made what seemed awfully odd statements to me over the last few days. In particular, he seemed more concerned about "who's townie" than finding scum. The one post that struck me the most was when he actually drew up a list: <font style="font-size: 12px;">Listen, I think now would be a great time to post a list of players currently alive that we wouldn't mind lynching. I have a severe dearth of information other than what I've been referring to, so as such, most of these are acceptable. I have crossed off a few names I'm not particularly thrilled about lynching. Or vigging, for that matter. Player List 1. CometotheDarkSideWeHaveCookies2. gnarlycharlie 3. colby11 5. Meeko6. Pleonast7. crys 8. BillMc 9. dizzymrslizzy 10. wombat99 11. Lightfoot 12. storyteller 13. Merestil Haye 14. Sister Coyote 15. KidVermicious16. LaurieRN 17. patricia 18. Suburban Plankton 20. Inner Stickler 21. Parzival 22. richbeckman 23. Red Skeezix 24. scathach 25. guiri 26. Silver Jan 27. sinjin 28. JustBeingGinger 29. AskthepizzaguyDead 4. mahaloth, aka Arthur Dent (Third-Party Nonhostile One-Shot Killer), lynched Day One 19. peekercpa, aka Deadpool (Third-Party Serial Annoyer), killed Night One My guess is that to protect his so-called mason buddy, he's put them on this list. When you need to go hunting down the other part of his hostile team, look there. I can actually help this along a bit. I know Meeko's role name. If pizzaguy's claim has some truth to it, his partner would have a Blade Runner name. Meeko does not have a Blade Runner name. (He does have a name that could indicate a detective, in a weird way, but he'd likely be really good or really bad depending on how you interpret it). So it's probably not Meeko. And in response to Rich Beckman's question about the breadcrumb: I don't want to reveal Meeko's name, as it adds nothing to help us, and he can reveal it at his discretion. All he can do is confirm that I know it, so leaving a hint that only he understands is all that's necessary. My earlier note was really vague; in this post I think it's a lot easier for him to see.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Oct 11, 2012 0:50:59 GMT -5
My guess is that to protect his so-called mason buddy, he's put them on this list. I don't know about that guess. Speaking for myself and regardless of the apparent smear at myself and KidV, if I were posing as a Mason something like that is the last thing I would do to either try and protect or breadcrumb another Mason-poser, whether I was Scum or PFK aligned.
|
|