|
Day 4
Nov 24, 2009 10:44:45 GMT -5
Post by sachertorte on Nov 24, 2009 10:44:45 GMT -5
Then you intentionally blocked him again last night, the only guy that has given us any information at all in this game, because he might have bussed a scum buddy at a time when scum and alien are wiping the floor with us. I'm sure all this makes perfect sense in the peekerverse. This aspect of your argument is not quite fair. Special Ed explicitly claimed to not be the Detective. peeker very well might be lying and Scum, but if he were not, blocking Ed would be a pretty low-risk manuever from peeker's standpoint - if Ed is Scum, then maybe you block a kill or other unpleasant option, and if Ed is Town, well, he's not the Detective, so no investigation will be blocked. A lot of peeker's claim smells like my college dorm room, but the above is not a reasonable criticism. No. It is a reasonable criticism. If we suppose that peekercpa took Ed's misdirection at face value and that Ed was NOT the detective, then what was peekercpa's ploy? peeker himself had said that he wanted to see if Ed would come up with another investigation when Ed couldn't because he was blocked by peekercpa. So either way peekercpa was potentially interfering with an investigation mechanism (whether Ed directly or via Ed as medium). And if peeker truly thought Ed was NOT the detective, then why would he expect Ed to come up with another result the next day and spring his trap? The fact that peekercpa wanted to trap Ed in a lie by Ed announcing a result when he could not have a result shows peekercpa's acceptance that Ed is the Detective. Otherwise peeker's plan makes even less sense. It doesn't make sense. And you should know it doesn't make sense.
|
|
|
Day 4
Nov 24, 2009 10:45:36 GMT -5
Post by storyteller0910 on Nov 24, 2009 10:45:36 GMT -5
Sach, here are the relevant claims from Sister Coyote:
And later:
I'm not sure how to reconcile this role (which is confirmed and exists) with a simple killer alien. Checking a player for signs of corruption by the alien makes no sense if the alien just slaughters people.
|
|
|
Day 4
Nov 24, 2009 10:47:37 GMT -5
Post by storyteller0910 on Nov 24, 2009 10:47:37 GMT -5
This aspect of your argument is not quite fair. Special Ed explicitly claimed to not be the Detective. peeker very well might be lying and Scum, but if he were not, blocking Ed would be a pretty low-risk manuever from peeker's standpoint - if Ed is Scum, then maybe you block a kill or other unpleasant option, and if Ed is Town, well, he's not the Detective, so no investigation will be blocked. A lot of peeker's claim smells like my college dorm room, but the above is not a reasonable criticism. No. It is a reasonable criticism. If we suppose that peekercpa took Ed's misdirection at face value and that Ed was NOT the detective, then what was peekercpa's ploy? peeker himself had said that he wanted to see if Ed would come up with another investigation when Ed couldn't because he was blocked by peekercpa. So either way peekercpa was potentially interfering with an investigation mechanism (whether Ed directly or via Ed as medium). And if peeker truly thought Ed was NOT the detective, then why would he expect Ed to come up with another result the next day and spring his trap? The fact that peekercpa wanted to trap Ed in a lie by Ed announcing a result when he could not have a result shows peekercpa's acceptance that Ed is the Detective. Otherwise peeker's plan makes even less sense. It doesn't make sense. And you should know it doesn't make sense. Yeah, I missed where peeker claimed to have the ability to block BOTH incoming AND outgoing abilities of every kind, plus the ability to identify the supposedly killer alien if it appears. I withdraw my objection.
|
|
|
Day 4
Nov 24, 2009 10:50:13 GMT -5
Post by sachertorte on Nov 24, 2009 10:50:13 GMT -5
Yes, I did. Was it, like, common knowledge that he was lying and was really the investigator? If so, why on Earth wouldn't the Scum kill him? Because they have a ROLEBLOCKER! It is clearly optimal to take out a KNOWN TOWN (Kat!) via death, and prevent the creation of new confirmed town by Roleblocking the Detective. Any other scum plan is less efficient. I think I want storyteller dead too.
|
|
|
Day 4
Nov 24, 2009 10:51:13 GMT -5
Post by storyteller0910 on Nov 24, 2009 10:51:13 GMT -5
I think I want storyteller dead too. You always want me dead; why should this game be any different? ;D
|
|
|
Day 4
Nov 24, 2009 11:54:30 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on Nov 24, 2009 11:54:30 GMT -5
Player Analysis
01. peekercpa 02. Special Ed 05. shaggy 08. redskeezix 10. storyteller 14. Pleonast 17. sinjin 19. Nanook (ne Idle Thoughts) 20. sachertorte (ne Boozahol Squid)
With 9 players left, we can be no worse than 4 scum left (else the game would be over). That is a lynch scum or lose position, so we do not have the luxury of lynching a town player for confirmation.
I'll take a look at each player.
Nanook (ne Idle Thoughts), sachertorte (ne Boozahol Squid): claimed mason. Will be definitely confirmed once we get the reveal on Kat, and since that means it's a high-risk gambit if they're lying, they get a pass from me ToDay.
Special Ed: claimed investigator. He lied earlier, but this is one of the examples of a pro-town lie. Normally, I'd require some sort of further confirmation, but since he did give us scum and we're short on time, he gets a pass from me ToDay.
sinjin, redskeezix, storyteller: claimed vanilla town. Yep, that's the classic scum claim. They go into my likely-scum column.
peekercpa: claimed, uh, something. I've always had trouble decyphering peek, even when he's not trying to obfuscate (and I don't think he is). Some sort of joint blocker/protector/investigator? And blocking Ed? When there was an obvious alien target on Night One. And I'm not sure what the townie reasoning for blocking him after he gave us a scum name. To intercept the next one? He goes into my likely-scum column.
shaggy: claimed alien. Says he's an inclusive winner. I'm not so sure. I think the evidence is clear that there have been extra kills this game. We've had 8 deaths so far. Definitely one, and likely two were from our vig Bill. That leaves 6 deaths. Presumably 3 of those were scum-kills, although the evidence is mixed as to whether Sister was killed by scum or someone else. At best, there's 3 kills we can't account to scum, including 2 last Night when the vig was dead.
I do not believe shaggy has not made kills. Whether or not it's better to kill a serial killer or scum requires some more thought. But he's on my likely-lynch column.
Pleonast: I am a weak tracker. Each Night, I clean a player's room (someone has to keep the ship ship-shape). If the player is out of their room (they take an action), I will know. I won't know who/where/what they were doing. My targets were Night One: redskeezix. I have no idea about this player, so I figured I try him. No action, he was in his room all Night. Of course, this doesn't mean he isn't scum, just that he wasn't the killer (I checked with the mod that a specific scum does do the killing). I was sorely tempted to do pedescribe, but I can't separate pro-town actions from scummy ones, so no point. Night Two: Nanook. Low volume poster, but understandably so, so I didn't expect the vig to take him out. No action. Night Three: shaggy. I figured I try one of the higher-volume posters. He went out during the Night.
My ordering of players from least to most suspicious: Nanook, sach: I'll be amazed if they aren't town. Ed: Very likely town. I'd like to have more than one investigation to judge him by, but I expect (if he's telling the truth) he'll either be blocked or dead ToNight. Still we need to keep in mind the chance that he's scum who bussed one of his own. But he's not a good candidate for lynch ToDay (since I think there's at least three scum, I'd want to kill two others before lynching this unlikely one). storyteller, sinjin, redskeezix: I expect at least one these is lying, with red somewhat less likely to be scum. Good lynch candidates for ToMorrow. peekercpa: Either a confused townie or a confusing scum. Good lynch candidate. shaggy: I think the evidence points to a serial killer alien, instead of the claimed tagger inclusive winning one. Good lynch candidate.
If we're at lynch or lose now (4 town, 4 scum, 1 alien), if we lynch a scum, I expect we'll see 2 more kills ToNight, unless we have some way of blocking the alien (or the scum kill, which is harder). If we can block the alien, and keep blocking, we'll stay at lynch or lose until all the scum are gone. Unless the alien hits scum, which will bring us out of lynch or lose. If we lynch the alien ToDay, we lose outright. So in this case (4-4-1) we either lynch scum and hope for good luck, or we lose immediately. Easy choice.
If we have one more mislynch left (5 town, 3 scum, 1 alien), if we lynch scum, we'll still get the two kills ToNight (unless we block the alien), which will put us at 3-2-1 and lynch or lose (unless the alien gets scum, 4-1-1). If we lynch the alien, we'll have only the scum kill, which will put us at 4-3 ToMorrow, also lynch or lose. At Day Six, we could be 1-1-1 (or 2-0-1 if the alien kills one scum) or 3-2.
That's a lot of counting, please double-check my outlines, in case I missed something.
I think I will vote shaggy unless he fesses up to being a killer and promises to try to kill scum. While I could just as easily vote for peeker, shaggy's already lying about not killing and I wonder if there's anything else he's not telling us about. That makes him slightly more dangerous than peeker at the moment.
|
|
|
Day 4
Nov 24, 2009 13:04:34 GMT -5
Post by Nanook on Nov 24, 2009 13:04:34 GMT -5
The problem with Shaggy as an Alien SK is SisC's claimed role makes no sense then. Unless you want to assume either she was lying, which I refuse to believe, or that Shaggy is both a mad bomber-like role AND a SK, which I can't even imagine how it would work. It's possible that Shaggy's bomber role includes actual bombs of some sort I guess, but I don't think that lynching him is the correct play.
It's funny sach, I kinda want story dead too. I just can't quite articulate why.
Thanks for clearing that up sinjin.
Shaggy, if you're going to vote with the masons, then vote peeker. I think his claim is full of it. I think it's peeker taking his actual role(scum roleblocker) and trying to twist it around to being a Town role.
Vote: peeker
|
|
|
Day 4
Nov 24, 2009 13:24:53 GMT -5
Post by storyteller0910 on Nov 24, 2009 13:24:53 GMT -5
OK, I know we're going to lynch peeker toDay, and we absolutely should, but y'all, if I am dead toMorrow and can't advocate for it myself, will you please give some thought to lynching Pleonast? I had no particular suspicion of him before his most recent post, but he's managed to trigger at least four different alarm bells. Let's look at this: sinjin, redskeezix, storyteller: claimed vanilla town. Yep, that's the classic scum claim. They go into my likely-scum column. !!!!! This is bad reasoning. First of all, I dispute the premise: that "vanilla Town" is the classic Scum claim... particularly not in this game, where we have seen no vanillas whatsoever so far. But more importantly, there is a leap being made here - from "Scum would likely claim Vanilla" to "players who claim vanilla are likely scum." This is not a justifiable leap. I think Pleonast is trying to direct suspicion onto the vanillas so that we will not look at the power roles - specifically, himself. Even if there's one Scum among the vanillas, focusing attention on the vanillas as a pool in which Scum must hide is certainly a profitable tactic for endgame. I mean, I know I'm not Scum. But there's sachertorte calling for my head, and now Pleonast saying we should dive in the vanilla pool to find Scum, because surely that's the classic Scum claim, and frankly I'll lay odds that I'm lynched toMorrow if I don't die toNight. That's another mislynch down. Then, hey, even if it's not game over by then, there are still more claimed vanillas to lynch, right, Pleo? If even one of them are Town, the chances of Scum riding this to a win are very high if this line is believed.
OK, I'm going to outline my problems with this claim as concisely as possible:
This is an incredibly weak role for Town. What possible value is there in this role, when there is a full-grown version of the same freaking role wandering around? A Townie Weak Tracker of this sort can't seperate active Scum from Power Role, and can't seperate Vanilla from Inactive Scum from Passive Power Role. It's worthless.
And of course, Pleo claims and offers results when they are even more worthless - after a mass claim. Just so happens that Pleo offers his finding that Nanook and redskeezix (claimed Mason and vanilla, respectively) did nothing and shaggy (claimed Alien) did something. That sure worked out well, how this role produced such consistent results.
And finally, this:
You know who could really use a weak Tracker? The Scum. They don't have to worry about separating power roles from Scum, or Vanilla/Inactive Power Roles from inactive Scum. A weak Tracker won't find every power role, true, and it won't help the Scum identify priority power roles over lower priority power roles, but it would be a useful tool. Player is moving around? Likely choice to kill them, since they may be a Doctor or Cop. Player isn't moving around: ah, leave 'em alone, maybe they're a Mason but maybe they're vanilla.
I think Pleonast is a Scum Tracker. Fairly elegant setup: Scum get a Godfather who investigates as Vanilla (either dead or one of the three claimed vanillas now alive), a Tracker, a Role-Blocker, and a Toughguy (whatever that turns out to mean).
|
|
|
Day 4
Nov 24, 2009 13:25:51 GMT -5
Post by storyteller0910 on Nov 24, 2009 13:25:51 GMT -5
It's funny sach, I kinda want story dead too. I just can't quite articulate why. Awesome. This'll make for an exciting and productive Day Five, I'm just sure of it. Oh, and if anyone watching could fix the coding on my last post, I'd really appreciate it. That was some serious butchery.
|
|
|
Day 4
Nov 24, 2009 14:08:51 GMT -5
Post by special on Nov 24, 2009 14:08:51 GMT -5
I'm leaning towards the storyteller side of the debate right now.
If peeker is the scum roleblocker, I expect to die toNight. I think we've neglected to consider that peeker may be a scum without being the roleblocker. He'd just have information that the scum roleblocker has, and with the potential watcher as well as a tracker already dead, it really shouldn't matter which scum claims what.
Pleonast's claim just strikes me as poor. I think a re-read of his early posts is in order
Likeliest Scum: peekercpa Pleonast
Likeliest 3rd party: shaggy
Likliest Town: Nanook sachertorte Special Ed
Unknown (should contain 1 Scum if one didn't die last Night): redskeezix (would like to see if any Vanilla turn up) storyteller (may just be earning Townie cred with his arguments sinjin (I like the way she went after peeker)
|
|
|
Day 4
Nov 24, 2009 14:19:48 GMT -5
Post by storyteller0910 on Nov 24, 2009 14:19:48 GMT -5
One more point regarding Pleonast:
Please note that his emphasis on the danger associated with shaggy, including his insistence that shaggy is more likely a killer than a Mad Bomber and failure to address Sister Coyote's role in light of this contention, his description of shaggy as a "good lynch candidate," and indeed his vote for shaggy, all are perfectly consistent with Scum goals.
Much, much better to get us to lynch the Mad Bomber (or a Serial Killer, for that matter). If we don't, the Scum will eventually have to kill them in order to win, and they'd rather we waste a mislynch (because make no mistake - lynching a third-party player is a mislynch for game resolution purposes; everyone remember Arkham if you doubt it).
|
|
|
Day 4
Nov 24, 2009 14:25:21 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on Nov 24, 2009 14:25:21 GMT -5
I think you are reading too much into Sister's information. She didn't know exactly what the alien does. And we definitely have excess kills. Do we have 2 third parties? That would put us at 3-4-2 at worst, or 5-2-2. Would someone outline the scenario? Because I don't think it's likely. I think it's more likely we have just the one third party--an alien who is someone causing extra deaths. Maybe it's recruitment. Sister was killed because she can't be recruited. And the next two Nights, the alien's target refused to be recruited. Or the alien is simply lying and Sister misread (or was given incomplete) information about the alien. I for see making a case for lynching scum instead of the alien, but to dismiss the third party preemptively sure looks like a doomed tactic to me. !!!!! This is bad reasoning. First of all, I dispute the premise: that "vanilla Town" is the classic Scum claim... particularly not in this game, where we have seen no vanillas whatsoever so far. But more importantly, there is a leap being made here - from "Scum would likely claim Vanilla" to "players who claim vanilla are likely scum." This is not a justifiable leap. It's justifiable because I'm looking at the numbers and not being distracted by peeker's shiny claim. I think there's 3 scum left, plus the alien. I know I'm town, and I'm believing Nanook, sach and Ed. I'm sure shaggy is alien, even if he's lying about not killing. Given the scummy peeker, that leaves 2 scum among the 3 claimed vanilla. Those are the numbers--the claimed vanillas look very scummy to me. And look who's now throwing suspicion: storyteller. He says I made a weak claim, yet his is weaker. At least I'm somewhat verifiable; he's claimed nothing at all. So of course he tries to throw heat on me--it's not like there's any other sane claim he can point at. And my role is not that useless, especially at end game. I'm basically a vanilla-confirmer. It's not certain, especially in the early game, but now I'm actually useful. I can watch a claimed vanilla and report back. Any of them that takes an action, we got them. Once we lynch peeker, one of the vanilla-claimers will have to kill, and risk being caught by me. Hmm, I wonder why story is complaining? I think the whole peeker claim is a ploy to get us lynch scum instead of the alien. The extra kill is hurting town more than scum at this point. And note that story was very careful about placing his vote on peeker; well after the lead was set. We know peeker is scum, but I'd like to see those voting to state why they think a single scum is more important than a third-party killer. Or explain where the extra deaths are coming from, if not the alien.
|
|
|
Day 4
Nov 24, 2009 14:37:59 GMT -5
Post by special on Nov 24, 2009 14:37:59 GMT -5
Or explain where the extra deaths are coming from, if not the alien. I had a really really odd thought. 2 Aliens, one with a killing ability, one with a tagging ability. Mhaye as SK, killing Sister, Bill and dying as he kills Kat. His claim of watcher (that was this game right?) to cover himself if he was tracked. The extra Night 2 kill, maybe that was Dirx's power or maybe the Scum had some other 1 time extra kill. another thought is that MHaye was Scum caught on a mason-bomb or some other odd self-defensive power. I'd hate to think he was Town caught randomly by the kill. nphase as the Scum kill doesn't make as much sense, unless they were onto something. Perhaps she had a protective power that they'd discovered or suspected. I typed this a while ago, and reading it over, it seems like gibberish, but I'm posting it anyway
|
|
|
Day 4
Nov 24, 2009 14:42:24 GMT -5
Post by storyteller0910 on Nov 24, 2009 14:42:24 GMT -5
Ooh, yeah, Pleo's Scum. If he's not, I'll change my little tag thing from "UATU SPEAKS IN ALL CAPS" to "I am a moron and Pleonast rules" for the duration of this and the next game. And my role is not that useless, especially at end game. I'm basically a vanilla-confirmer. It's not certain, especially in the early game, but now I'm actually useful. I can watch a claimed vanilla and report back. Any of them that takes an action, we got them. Once we lynch peeker, one of the vanilla-claimers will have to kill, and risk being caught by me. Hmm, I wonder why story is complaining? Tell you what: watch me toNight. Go ahead. Triple dog dare you. ToMorrow we'll both still be alive, as you know (unless whoever has the extra kill decides that even a Scum Weak Tracker is a risk). You will then have to "clear" me according to your own logic above, or admit that some aspect of what you've been saying was crap. So... just to be clear... the Scum, of which I am one and peeker is another, want us to lynch Scum, instead of a third-party. They want this because they benefit from losing one of their own (possibly a role-blocker), because it keeps alive an extra kill that is not under their control and could take out any one of them at any moment. So they don't want the alien lynched, so much so that they'll sacrifice one of their own. peeker and I somehow psychically know that the Alien is going to claim, so peeker claims a ridiculous role so that the Town will leave the Alien alone (remember, shaggy claimed after peek did, so the idea that the peek thing is a brilliant ploy to keep us away from shaggy is silly on the face of it). THEN, as part of this ploy, I hold off voting for peek, who I want to be lynched. Are you actually reading this stuff before you post it? I mean, come on, sach and Nanook, whatever your gut is telling you about me, please just read the flailing Pleonast is doing here and keep it in mind. 1. Because lynching Scum is obviously better than lynching third-party, given the choice. You know that; you've played this game before. That hypothesized third-party killer could just as easily kill Scum. For all we know, (s)he did last Night. 1A. Because even if there IS a third-party killer, it is unlikely to be shaggy, for reasons I have already discussed. 2. Sure! Either skeezix or sinjin (or mhaye or nphase, or from Town's perspective, me) could be a third-party Serial Killer. The Scum could have an extra kill. There could be some sort of delayed kill resulting from the actions of a player. Who knows? There are plenty of possible explanations. ------------- My only remaining concern is that shaggy is actually Scum, and that the real Alien is (wisely) staying silent. This is a possibility we must consider, and something with which we are going to have to contend toMorrow if and when peeker comes up Town and depending on what the reveal of the dead indicates.
|
|
|
Day 4
Nov 24, 2009 14:47:38 GMT -5
Post by Red Skeezix on Nov 24, 2009 14:47:38 GMT -5
On shaggy. The mad bomber role doesn't work as non winstealing. Why tag, why have a special investigator if it's not winstealing? mad-bombers have been non-win-stealing in the past. Though not in the way shaggy describes. I'm intrigued by this 'special investigator.' Who is this person and what are the details of the role? Although this has already been answered by others, I was referring to Sister Coyote's claim: I am human, I am a Passenger, I can check for signs that a player has been tainted/corrupted by the alien in question. To me, this reads like there is either a recruitment mechanic going on, or else we have a mad bomber, but I can't say which for sure<snip> And the confirmation of the role, from the Day 3 opening color: <snip> I had a really really odd thought. 2 Aliens, one with a killing ability, one with a tagging ability. Mhaye as SK, killing Sister, Bill and dying as he kills Kat. His claim of watcher (that was this game right?) to cover himself if he was tracked. I don't think MHaye claimed anything in this game (at least I don't have anything from him in my crib sheet). I know he claimed watcher in the other game though. I thought ped claimed watcher in this game.
|
|
|
Day 4
Nov 24, 2009 14:48:38 GMT -5
Post by special on Nov 24, 2009 14:48:38 GMT -5
I'd like to see those voting to state why they think a single scum is more important than a third-party killer. I understand the desire to have the SK eliminated. The Scum can hold off for longer than we can. However, it does us no good to eliminate the SK while we seem to be at a disadvantage to the Scum. What's the point in reducing the kill rate if we're outnumbered by Scum? If there are 3 Scum left, if we lynch the SK, and the Scum kill toNight, we go into tomorrow 4-3 and at LoL for the rest of the game. If, instead we lynch a Scum we have 2 possibilities. SK kills Town or Scum. If they get Town, we're at 3-2-1 LoL again with a Scum lynch, 3-1-1, and we start Day 6 at 1-1-1 and the SK gets to decide who wins ;-) If they lynch Scum, we're at 4-1-1. SK would have to hope for a mislynch to 3-1-1 so the end result is the same. And these are just my musings as I look at it, but it really seems like it's to Scum's advantage to lynch the SK and hope for one more mislynch. It's to the SK's advantage to lynch Scum and hope for the best. (maybe 1-1-1 with no lynch, and see who the killing sides decide to target?) Isn't that how it ended in Not-so-Simpletown on SDMB? Results may change if we got a Scum last Night...
|
|
|
Day 4
Nov 24, 2009 14:50:31 GMT -5
Post by special on Nov 24, 2009 14:50:31 GMT -5
[quote author=redskeezix board=game17 thread=1204 post=57872 time=1259092058 I don't think MHaye claimed anything in this game (at least I don't have anything from him in my crib sheet). I know he claimed watcher in the other game though. I thought ped claimed watcher in this game. [/quote]
Yeah, I don't have my notes at work.
|
|
|
Day 4
Nov 24, 2009 14:52:24 GMT -5
Post by sachertorte on Nov 24, 2009 14:52:24 GMT -5
I actually agree with Pleonast. Since the train is so full bore on peekercpa I guess I'll speak up.
My inclination would be to lynch shaggy as well. I even wrote a post with a vote for him be decided not to post it since I prefer to let the Town make a decision (or at least a first cut at a decision) without mason intervention.
Sister Coyote's posts give me pause, but with the large number of night kills I'm left wondering how shaggy could be a non-killer alien AND for us to have had three kills on Night Three. So while one can point to Sister Coyote's notes to point to shaggy being a mad bomber, one can point to the NK rate and reason that shaggy is a killer.
Case 1: Shaggy is a Mad Bomber No one alive has claimed pro-Town Vig. (Have either of the dead claimed?) That means three kills had to come from non-Town sources or a dead player. Even if one of the three kills was by one of the dead players, that leaves 2 kills. One presumably from scum and 1 from a third party. If Shaggy is a non-killer then that means there is another third party in addition to Shaggy and Guy. In other words, three of 20 players were third party. I have a hard time with this scenario.
Case 2: Shaggy is a killer Problems arise from Sister Coyote's claim where she states something to the effect of being immune from 'control.' We don't know what that means. If it means she is immune to being killed then we would have to justify her being killed by someone other than the alien. Do we think scum would have killed Sister Coyote? It doesn't seem like a good choice.
Neither really fits right. But I think we should be trying to reduce the night kill count. Theoretically, we could lynch scum and still lose if we come back to see another three dead townies. Furthermore on the off chance that peeker is Town, he should be protecting either nanook or me.
|
|
|
Day 4
Nov 24, 2009 15:02:38 GMT -5
Post by sachertorte on Nov 24, 2009 15:02:38 GMT -5
And my role is not that useless, especially at end game. I'm basically a vanilla-confirmer. It's not certain, especially in the early game, but now I'm actually useful. I can watch a claimed vanilla and report back. Any of them that takes an action, we got them. Once we lynch peeker, one of the vanilla-claimers will have to kill, and risk being caught by me. Hmm, I wonder why story is complaining? That's fine. I guess. But wouldn't this be a reason to push for lynching peekercpa instead of shaggy? I get the idea, but I don't agree based on game-events. I'm not sure if scum are willing to employ such a risky plan. If I recall correctly, peeker claimed before shaggy. At that point in time scum would not have any reason to think that the alien (or extra killer-whatever) was in danger of being lynched. I agree that the extra kill is clearly non-Town and all kills will be directed to the confirmed Town segment, but the idea that scum actively tried to 'save' the alien for these reasons don't quite make sense. we do? I strongly suspect this is the case, but I hardly know it to be true. Where is this certainty coming from? This I agree with. If I could lynch the third party killer with certainty I would do so right now. The problem is I am not certain that shaggy is a killer (though I lean in that direction).
|
|
|
Day 4
Nov 24, 2009 15:20:42 GMT -5
Post by sachertorte on Nov 24, 2009 15:20:42 GMT -5
Ooh, yeah, Pleo's Scum. If he's not, I'll change my little tag thing from "UATU SPEAKS IN ALL CAPS" to "I am a moron and Pleonast rules" for the duration of this and the next game. I find this statement odd. Why would you post such a thing? Why such a high level of certainty? If you are Town you could not possibly have this level of certainty. Its not something I think a Townie would do. It does strike me as something scum would do. If storyteller is scum then no one would hold him to a 'hey look at me, I'm sooooo sure Pleonast is scum that I'll announce my stupidity if he turns up Town' Because if storyteller is scum and Pleonast is town then such a banner is pretty much boasting 'I'm so awesome I tricked people into thinking Pleonast was scum.' It's a bad statement all around. Again, storyteller is behaving in a very strange way. Pleonast observing storyteller is only light evidence, NOT exculpatory evidence. Obviously someone else could perform the scum's nightkill. It's a very strange thing for storyteller to say. I agree that it seems unlikely (and I agree that it is solely based on the ORDER of events). But the theory is sound. What the Third Party does really depends on the win condition of the third party. If he needs to be the last one standing, then I would agree that the third party killer is in the position where he needs to kill a scum to keep the game going long enough for both sides to get decimated. But the risk of going after scum is that the pool of unknowns shrinks, which is bad for the SK. A viable strategy is for the Third Party to keep the unconfirmed pool as large as possible and kill confirmed Town. Will the SK do this? Don't know. But it is possible, risky for him, but possible. I find it more plausible that the killer would feign tagger than vice versa. The tagger is more powerful to a Third Faction (if it is a faction instead of individuals). You seem rather certain that peeker will come up Town. If so, why are you voting for him?
|
|
|
Day 4
Nov 24, 2009 15:24:52 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on Nov 24, 2009 15:24:52 GMT -5
Probably my last post before Dusk, family is coming over this afternoon and staying until the weekend. I've already chosen which wine cup I'll be drinking from, so no worries about not getting my Night action in.
Just so it's clear, I'm not against the peeker lynch, I'm simply not convinced it's our best option. Things are not adding up, and his claim is way too out there for me not to think something is not right.
And the way story is attacking the role that's basically designed to verify his claim smacks me as suspicious. Also note how he totally discounts the extra kills. His reasoning that the third-party killer cannot be shaggy rests entirely on Sister's information about the alien she was tracking. She didn't have near as much certainty as story claims to have ("I can check for signs that a player has been tainted/corrupted by the alien in question. To me, this reads like there is either a recruitment mechanic going on, or else we have a mad bomber, but I can't say which for sure."). She's stating her interpretation, and is not certain.
Ed, that's the type analysis I was trying to work through. It seems like it's better to lynch the serial killer first--I'd rather be at lynch-or-lose with only town vs scum, than with a third party taking pot shots at whoever.
sach, I don't know what's going on, but the quick movement onto a very suspicious claim while an admitted third-party gets almost nothing until I brought it up, really twigs my paranoia. I can't see any townie reason for peeker's claim, but I can see why a third-party killer alien would lie about not making kills.
I'm glad at least a few other townies are looking at the whole picture.
|
|
|
Day 4
Nov 24, 2009 15:44:03 GMT -5
Post by Nanook on Nov 24, 2009 15:44:03 GMT -5
Regardless of whether Shaggy is a mad bomber or some sort of recruitment role, SisC's claimed powers make zero sense if the Alien is a straight up killer. None. A delayed killer? Maybe. But if that's the case, lynching him Today will not stop a kill Tonight. Whereas lynching Peeker might remove a scum roleblocker.
|
|
|
Day 4
Nov 24, 2009 15:50:03 GMT -5
Post by special on Nov 24, 2009 15:50:03 GMT -5
Case 1: Shaggy is a Mad Bomber No one alive has claimed pro-Town Vig. (Have either of the dead claimed?) That means three kills had to come from non-Town sources or a dead player. Even if one of the three kills was by one of the dead players, that leaves 2 kills. One presumably from scum and 1 from a third party. If Shaggy is a non-killer then that means there is another third party in addition to Shaggy and Guy. In other words, three of 20 players were third party. I have a hard time with this scenario. Bill claimed a Vig (I think he did it on GB as well)
|
|
|
Day 4
Nov 24, 2009 18:25:13 GMT -5
Post by CatInASuit on Nov 24, 2009 18:25:13 GMT -5
Vote Count
Current Status: peekercpa Lynch.
peekercpa(6) shaggy (1)
|
|
|
Day 4
Nov 24, 2009 19:10:55 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Nov 24, 2009 19:10:55 GMT -5
good job shag. that's the best we could hope for under the circumstances. oh well, good luck. i've got to run and won't be back until after they kill me, the bastards. but at least some of them have bought off so it should give you at least a night to seal the deal.
|
|
|
Day 4
Nov 24, 2009 20:09:19 GMT -5
Post by shaggy on Nov 24, 2009 20:09:19 GMT -5
Hey everyone well after rereading here are my thoughts on what I have read and I will make this a few posts as not to make it to long and to hard to read. Peculiar role claim. I could believe Mad Bomber, possibly. I could believe 3rd party and not PFK, possibly. I do not believe that you must tag EVERY player. What kind of win condition is that? Is it even possible to win? Historically, non-exclusive Mad Bombers must tag a certain number of players and independently win when that is achieved. So the question is, do I believe Catinasuit created a role as shaggy describes it? Right now, No. I don't. I dunno what to say to this other then, I guess I just got a crappy version of the role. Not sure what else to say about it. I'm with Ed here. Shaggy is more likely to be win stealing than not, but with only one confirmed dead Scum, we can't afford to spend a lynch on him. Where did the certainty in Shaggy being a mad bomber come from? Who believes this and why? The nightly death count points to a killer alien. Do we think there are two aliens? Why? Is it not possible that shaggy is a killer alien who is claiming mad bomber for shits and giggles? Does it not behoove us to knock off a possible SK and reduce the night death count? Do we have reason to believe shaggy cannot kill other than his statement that he cannot do so? Might I point out, that until sister ended up dead, no one thought I was a killer at all, it was mad bomber. Then after that everyone assumed that because she died, I therefore must be a killer. Ergo you make assumption and then the "evidance" fits the predetermined conclusion. Which is funny, cause did I not say this maybe a reason they or whom ever took her out? So they can make everyone believe all the deaths are because of the one alien? And yet here we are on day 4, doing exactly that. Having some actually buying into the hype that the alien, me...is suposedly a killer. And why? really because of sister and her alone being killed. If she had not died night one, but rather even night 2, no one would be thinking I am a killer at all. But rather a mad bomber. Night one I tagged ed . Also why I am suspicous of peek cause my night action went through but if I understand him right it should not, since he stops not only you but any one elses power on you. I was hoping to hear his responce to my claim before saying this, for a better idea of his alignment but hey...It does beg the question, how can my tag have gone through if he blocked you and all other players? I picked you because you I find eigther end up dead early or last to the end. No insult intended here but kinda no middle ground I find in the past with you, so since you were not in hot water at the end of day one, I thought, you may go to the end, so it is worth taging you. This makes no sense. You expect us to believe that you tagged someone you acknowledge has a tendency to die early? If Ed has staying power past mid-game, isn't it more logical to WAIT UNTIL MIDGAME to tag Ed?!! This is insanity. I want shaggy dead! I geuss I did not make myself understandable....In games he eigther dies early or makes it to the end. Since he was under no heat, and apeared like he was not going to be lynched anytime soon, I therefore took the gamble he would make it to the end. So I never said I tagged him because he dies but tagged him cause he apears asthough he will go to the end.
|
|
|
Day 4
Nov 24, 2009 20:11:48 GMT -5
Post by shaggy on Nov 24, 2009 20:11:48 GMT -5
So in the absolute worst case scenario, if there are three more deaths toNight and none of them are shaggy and none of them are any of his tagged targets AND none of his tagged targets have died to date... well, in that case he could win toMorrow. This seems remarkably unlikely, though. Um I said I tried to tag kat but since she is dead...well I can not tag a dead person...Not sure why you think all my tags are alive. Sorry if it was hard to read. I'm not sure how to reconcile this role (which is confirmed and exists) with a simple killer alien. Checking a player for signs of corruption by the alien makes no sense if the alien just slaughters people. Pretty much what I said above...Even [b[ sister c [/b] said I am a mad bomer not a killer. Also this checking for corruption fits with indicate the tags I place on people. Once again, that I am a mad bomber. Yeah, I missed where peeker claimed to have the ability to block BOTH incoming AND outgoing abilities of every kind, plus the ability to identify the supposedly killer alien if it appears. I withdraw my objection. And that is my biggest problem if he blocks in coming, how did he not block my tagging on night 1? Also if he knew who I was, being the alien why not say day 2? I mean he would know who I was right then, according to his claim. Well unless there is infact a 2nd killing alien out there.
|
|
|
Day 4
Nov 24, 2009 20:14:56 GMT -5
Post by shaggy on Nov 24, 2009 20:14:56 GMT -5
shaggy: claimed alien. Says he's an inclusive winner. I'm not so sure. I think the evidence is clear that there have been extra kills this game. We've had 8 deaths so far. Definitely one, and likely two were from our vig Bill. That leaves 6 deaths. Presumably 3 of those were scum-kills, although the evidence is mixed as to whether Sister was killed by scum or someone else. At best, there's 3 kills we can't account to scum, including 2 last Night when the vig was dead. [/quot] I do not believe shaggy has not made kills. Whether or not it's better to kill a serial killer or scum requires some more thought. But he's on my likely-lynch column. Night Three: shaggy. I figured I try one of the higher-volume posters. He went out during the Night. So cause lots die and I happen to go out last night, that can only mean I am a killer....something seems wrong with that logic. shaggy: I think the evidence points to a serial killer alien, instead of the claimed tagger inclusive winning one. Good lynch candidate. Once again other then assuming I must be, where is the evidance you say there is? I mean where is the tangible evidance saying I am the one doing the killing? One thing to say i have a feeling you are but to say there is evidance? Just not following that train of thought. If we're at lynch or lose now (4 town, 4 scum, 1 alien), if we lynch a scum, I expect we'll see 2 more kills ToNight, unless we have some way of blocking the alien (or the scum kill, which is harder). If we can block the alien, and keep blocking, we'll stay at lynch or lose until all the scum are gone. Unless the alien hits scum, which will bring us out of lynch or lose. If we lynch the alien ToDay, we lose outright. So in this case (4-4-1) we either lynch scum and hope for good luck, or we lose immediately. Easy choice. And yet you choose to not vote scum...kinda seems odd to me. I think I will vote shaggyunless he fesses up to being a killer and promises to try to kill scum. While I could just as easily vote for peeker, shaggy's already lying about not killing and I wonder if there's anything else he's not telling us about. That makes him slightly more dangerous than peeker at the moment. See above...where is the evidance to say I am lying...I mean if your reason for the vote is that I already am shown to be lying...maybe it is just me but you kinda have to show where it is shown that I am lying. And saying look at the body count is not really showing to me. But then being about me I am impartial but hey. I think you are reading too much into Sister's information. She didn't know exactly what the alien does. And we definitely have excess kills. Therefore it is more logical to say a recriuting/madbomber that kills then a SK....not sure I agree there but ok. Also she new I was eigther a madbomber or a recriuter according to her.
|
|
|
Day 4
Nov 24, 2009 20:21:58 GMT -5
Post by shaggy on Nov 24, 2009 20:21:58 GMT -5
The problem with Shaggy as an Alien SK is SisC's claimed role makes no sense then. Unless you want to assume either she was lying, which I refuse to believe, or that Shaggy is both a mad bomber-like role AND a SK, which I can't even imagine how it would work. It's possible that Shaggy's bomber role includes actual bombs of some sort I guess, but I don't think that lynching him is the correct play. It's funny sach, I kinda want story dead too. I just can't quite articulate why. Thanks for clearing that up sinjin. Shaggy, if you're going to vote with the masons, then vote peeker. I think his claim is full of it. I think it's peeker taking his actual role(scum roleblocker) and trying to twist it around to being a Town role. Vote: peeker [/color][/quote] Ok I have my vote on him already and will keep it there. if you change your mind and want me to vote else where just let me know. I think it's more likely we have just the one third party--an alien who is someone causing extra deaths. Maybe it's recruitment. Sister was killed because she can't be recruited. And the next two Nights, the alien's target refused to be recruited. Or the alien is simply lying and Sister misread (or was given incomplete) information about the alien. No offence but now you just seem to be really digging deep to try and find anything to justify your verdict that I am a killer... I mean are you seriously suggesting this is a gastered game and sister c got incomplete info from the MOD? How would that not be a gastard thing to do? I am prejudice here and know that but still, come on, this just screams like a real stretch to justify your conclusion on me here.
|
|
|
Day 4
Nov 24, 2009 23:14:18 GMT -5
Post by sinjin on Nov 24, 2009 23:14:18 GMT -5
Sister Coyote's posts on her role:
Protean: 1. readily assuming different forms or characters; extremely variable. 2. changeable in shape or form, as an amoeba. 3. (of an actor or actress) versatile; able to play many kinds of roles. 4. (initial capital letter ) of, pertaining to, or suggestive of Proteus.
Kill descriptions:
Night 1: GuyIncognito was noticed one last time. killed by BillMc vig Sister Coyote has been electrocuted. Night 2: BillMc has been killed in an explosion pedescribe was impaled Natlaw was garotted Night 3: Kat has been killed in an explosion MHaye was also killed in the explosion nphase was poisoned
I've been thinking of the explosions as being done by a mad bomber/alien. What if we turn it around and think of the explosions being the work of the infiltrators and the other kills instigated by the protean entity who is controlling someone else. Cat's a smart cat. He would not have called the alien a Protean for no reason. A protean, as defined above is variable/versatile. So the protean entity is responsible for the varied kills above.
I think we had only two killers Night 3. One who planted a bomb that took out both MHaye and Kat and another that poisoned nphase.
Does this make any sense?
|
|