|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Apr 21, 2010 23:08:42 GMT -5
My drama radar is a bit out of whack right now. Are we in the middle of a fight or are you two just playing?
Fisheroo, I really hope there's some substance to go with that vote.
Since Pleo already has his butt in the air as an apparent power role, I'd kinda like to hear more about this strategy of his. If he doesn't want to full claim, that's fine, but I'm still curious as to his intent. I think he's being fairly cryptic and tight-lipped. Maybe he has some litmus test that he's using based on our reactions, but who knows.
It may very well be just a familiar scab to pick, but his play continues to make no real sense as well as being frustrating.
|
|
|
Post by DorianPhoenix on Apr 22, 2010 1:32:43 GMT -5
I was just joking. It got juvenile over at FB for awhile so i was illustrating his point.
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on Apr 22, 2010 8:28:45 GMT -5
Hey, NAF, I have a question -
You seem pretty determined that we should not lynch Pleonast as a claimed power role. My question is this:
To what extent should a soft claim allow a player to escape being lynched? For how long? How do you handle the danger that Pleonast is counting on the idea that Town will never lynch an uncounterclaimed power role, and that as long as he doesn't issue a true claim, he can't really be counterclaimed? Can you not see how what Pleonast is doing, if he is Scum, allows him to string us along for Days and Days? Even if, for example, Masons claim, well, then, Pleo can just say "hey, I was the Doc all along." And then, hey, maybe a real Doc will counterclaim him, but maybe one will not - maybe we don't even have a real Doc - and what happens then? When do we decide that Pleo's anti-Town actions to this point outweigh his soft claim, and force a hard one?
The thing is, your defense of Pleo, mounted entirely on the foundation of "he's claimed a power role, and I can't believe we're going to lynch a claimed power role," doesn't make sense. You've played in these games for literally years. You've seen people coast on harder claims than Pleonast's for a very long time. You saw me do it in your own Cecilvania game, where I got lucky and there was no Detective and if I hadn't decided to cash in my chips with a false investigation result, easily could have stayed alive to the end on that claim alone - because the Town had exactly the philosophy you seem to have here. You know better than this.
So why are you riding this horse? Best guess: you know that Pleonast is telling the truth. You know that he IS a power role. All of the questions that actual Townies have about this situation seem distant to you, so the absurdity of lynching a power role seems greater to you than to us.
There are two possible reasons you could (in this scenario) know that Pleonast is telling the truth. I'm willing to place my vote based on one of those possibilities, understanding that I might be revealing the other.
vote NAF1138
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Apr 22, 2010 8:58:16 GMT -5
so story you think that they are both scum, then?
i mean, i know of another way that he would be sure but that sure as heck would lead me to NOT vote for NAF
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Apr 22, 2010 9:02:03 GMT -5
neta: or am i so durn obtuse that i am not seeing something?
|
|
|
Post by special on Apr 22, 2010 9:10:32 GMT -5
My summary of toDay. Please feel free to comment.
1. Our detective was killed last Night.
2. Ed voted for Pleo for the soft claim.
3. zuma posts.
4. Pleo votes for story for trying to get the detective to claim yesterDay
5. NAF refutes Pleo's claim that story was fishing.
6. Story chastizes Pleo
7. Cookies questions Ed's vote and wonders aloud if Pleo's actions were Scum-motivated.
8. Pleo defends his case against story
9. Story continues to defend himself.
10. Ed defends his vote, stating that forcing Pleo to claim seems to be pro-Town in almost every instance.
11. peeker posts
12. NAF votes shaggy and implies that quantum physics will explain his vote later.
13. shaggy fails to defend himself from the case NAF didn't make.
14. peeker comments on the voting for Pleo, end conclusion is that he can't tell if it supports or takes away from the case against him.
15. luv votes for Pleo and thinks incorrectly that Pleo might be a godfather.
16. fisheroo posts.
17. Ed defends his vote.
18. cookies vote for Pleo
19. NAF questions the votes for Pleo, a claimed power role
20. Pleo defends his reasoning for soft-claiming.
21. NAF asks for the doctor to claim so we can lynch Pleo. (holy crap, I missed this one before)
22. Pleo and NAF debate the number of Scum.
23. NAF comes up with his case against shaggy. It consists almost entirely with the reactions after his vote, which, support his vote. (I wonder if any reactions could have been found to support the case)
24. Zuma comments with mild support for NAF's case against shaggy. He then enters the debat on number of Scum.
25. Pleo finds NAF's case plausible. Pleo asks cookies to ask specific questions.
26. cookies asks a specific question
27. Pleo answers.
28. Ed enters the number of Scum debate.
29. Shaggy defends himself for NAF's case.
30. fisheroo with no comment, votes for shaggy.
31. shaggy and peeker question fisheroo on this action.
32. story makes a case against NAF. He cites NAF's acceptance of Pleo's claim.
33. peeker comments on story's case.
|
|
|
Post by Pleonast on Apr 22, 2010 9:13:56 GMT -5
We're about halfway through the Day. Let's look at post counts: NAF1138 12 Special Ed 9 peekercpa 8 Pleonast 7 ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies 6 zuma 5 shaggy 4 storyteller 4 luvbwfc 2 fisheroo 2 ducduc 0
ducduc is new, so I'll them the benefit of a doubt for now. Please start playing! There's plenty to discuss. If you're not sure what to talk about, give your opinion on a discussion between other players. Let us know who you believe and who you don't and why.
|
|
|
Post by special on Apr 22, 2010 9:16:04 GMT -5
Here are our participants broken down subjectively into participation for toDay:
Full participant NAF Cookies Special Ed Shaggy Pleonast Storyteller
Partial participant Zuma Peekercpa
Minimal participant Luv Fisheroo
AWOL ducduc
|
|
|
Post by zuma on Apr 22, 2010 9:20:49 GMT -5
so story you think that they are both scum, then? i mean, i know of another way that he would be sure but that sure as heck would lead me to NOT vote for NAFI think he's obviously implying that it's possible NAF knows Pleo is telling the truth (if Pleo is indeed telling the truth) because either 1. NAF and Pleo are both masons (no reason to be cryptic at this point as now both you and story have raised the possibility and frankly I'm sure others have considered it as well) or 2. NAF is scum and therefore knows Pleo is town. Honestly I was considering the same possibilities, in addition to the possibility that both are scum. But I'm considering a hell of a lot more possibilities regardless. Obviously if Pleo is telling the truth he will not be lynched without claiming first, and giving the rest of us enough time to possibly counter-claim, so I'm not so sure what NAF's fear of people voting for Pleo is. The whole Pleo thing is starting to annoy me because it continues to occupy an inordinate amount of conversation well into Day 2.
|
|
|
Post by special on Apr 22, 2010 9:24:17 GMT -5
Holy crosspost, Batman!
At this point: 1. I'm not happy with Pleo's soft-claim still. I've noted storyteller's thoughts that it's just a dumb Town move rather than a Scum move.
2. I'm not happy with NAF's fishing for a doctor claim instead of pushing Pleo to claim. I'm also very much not happy with his vote for shaggy with the reasoning based on reactions to the vote.
3. I'm not happy with ducduc's participation
4. I'm not happy with fisheroo not participating but voting.
5. Storyteller scares me. He's made a case against NAF that is very convincing. I'm usually scared when he's convincing.
At this point, I'm thinking our Scum could be NAF and fisheroo. Or storyteller and Pleonast. Or ducduc and cookies...or...or....or....honestly, just about anyone.
unvote Pleonast vote NAF
[/color]
|
|
|
Post by Pleonast on Apr 22, 2010 9:40:59 GMT -5
And since no one else has made one, I'll do the color-coded player and vote lists.
Colors: unknown, town, scum.
PLAYERS 01. NAF 02. Cookies 03. Special Ed 04. Luv 05. Total Lost, Investigator killed Night One 06. Shaggy 07. Sister Coyote, lynched Day One 08. Pleonast 09. Fisheroo 10. ducduc 11. Storyteller 12. Zuma 13. Peekercpa
DAY ONE - 13 players Sister Coyote - 3 (Pleonast, Total Lost, Fisheroo) Pleonast - 2 (luv, shaggy) Story - 1 (special ed) Cookies - 1 (Story) Total Lost - 1 (NAF) zuma - 1 (Cookies) No Vote - 2 (Sister Coyote, ducduc, zuma, peekercpa)
|
|
|
Post by zuma on Apr 22, 2010 9:47:21 GMT -5
vote: Pleonast[/color]
It just seems that we are getting so bogged down in the Pleonast soft-claim, and NAF's reaction to it, that I think at this point I want to put some pressure on Pleonast to claim. I've also worried about having somone claim before Pleonast which might give Pleonast the opportunity to claim whatever the first claimer did not.
I'm not entirely comfortable with this vote, but Pleo taught me that votes are cheap in my first mafia incarnation. So that's my vote for now.
|
|
|
Post by zuma on Apr 22, 2010 9:49:05 GMT -5
And since no one else has made one, I'll do the color-coded player and vote lists. Oh, I've missed those
|
|
|
Post by Pleonast on Apr 22, 2010 9:54:35 GMT -5
It's possible Total was killed simply because she was the second voter on Sister and scum wanted revenge while avoiding me. This weakens my case against storyteller, but not enough to remove my vote unless I find a more suspicious player.
I still think pursuing non and low participants is a useful tactic. Ducduc really looks bad on this account, no posts ToDay, and no vote and low participation YesterDay. I'm giving the newbie a break, but that only goes so far. Please, please, ducduc, vote and participate!
There is another low participant that stands out: luvbwfc. Their posting is low and the vote on me shows lack of even keeping up with the game. This bothers me, but isn't enough to switch my vote (too bad we can't multi-vote).
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Apr 22, 2010 9:58:42 GMT -5
so story you think that they are both scum, then? i mean, i know of another way that he would be sure but that sure as heck would lead me to NOT vote for NAFI think he's obviously implying that it's possible NAF knows Pleo is telling the truth (if Pleo is indeed telling the truth) because either 1. NAF and Pleo are both masons (no reason to be cryptic at this point as now both you and story have raised the possibility and frankly I'm sure others have considered it as well) or 2. NAF is scum and therefore knows Pleo is town. Honestly I was considering the same possibilities, in addition to the possibility that both are scum. But I'm considering a hell of a lot more possibilities regardless. Obviously if Pleo is telling the truth he will not be lynched without claiming first, and giving the rest of us enough time to possibly counter-claim, so I'm not so sure what NAF's fear of people voting for Pleo is. The whole Pleo thing is starting to annoy me because it continues to occupy an inordinate amount of conversation well into Day 2. well, kind of duh i wasn't going to say that they could both be masons because of the grief people sometimes get for stating the obvious. but now that i reflect i forget we are on idle's board and no one here is a slouch. but i don't have a freaking clue how NAF being scum would lead to believing that pleo is a power role (that's the way i read story's post - NAF knows that pleo is power). and frankly the only way that i see that being a possibility is that he figures they are both scum or that they are both masons. i mean, i figure story is voting NAF because he figures that both he and pleo are scum not because he figures they are masons and by story's definition scum equals power role. that's not how i would define it but i was just attempting some clarification on his definition. that's why i asked the question the way i did. and i am going to put a vote down subject to more discussion, but i think we are well past half way through this day so ..... vote fisheroohe has two posts. one kind of a half ass defense of pleo and then the vote for shaggy based on, near as i can tell, "me too" or "looks kind of safe". and fisheroo's motivation is pure speculation on my part since the vote for shaggy just kind of popped up.
|
|
|
Post by zuma on Apr 22, 2010 10:13:04 GMT -5
[quote author=peekercpa board=ding thread=1340 post=62495 time=1271948322
but i don't have a freaking clue how NAF being scum would lead to believing that pleo is a power role (that's the way i read story's post - NAF knows that pleo is power). [/quote]
If NAF was scum (and if Pleo was not scum) he'd know Pleo is a power role because townies should not have a reason to lie. I hate to even mention this considering the minor lies I told as a townie in the GB bastard game, but this is a basic game so there should not really be any reason for a townie to lie here.
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Apr 22, 2010 10:13:15 GMT -5
and i am getting back into my pricklish nature so bear with me and also to add some additional thoughts to talk about - even if they are only things that i care about. i know i didn't vote Day 1 because of some rl stuff but i kind of wonder why sis wouldn't have at least tossed a vote down on pleo to make it 50/50. can't speak for the other non voters, however. that one just really stands out to me though.
seriously, parking a vote on pleo as a result of his soft claim would have been an easy out for scum, right?
or am i totally missing something else?
|
|
|
Post by fisheroo on Apr 22, 2010 10:19:49 GMT -5
Busier than hell at work at the moment, still reading along.
Vote for Shaggy was because he spent a heck of a long time defending himself.
I will vote for Pleo though, if it makes his stupid strategizing go away.
|
|
|
Post by fisheroo on Apr 22, 2010 10:22:03 GMT -5
And the hand wringing about his claim. I think Pleo is town, and probably some sort of role, but enough of this fucking around.
I don't like lynching who I think is town, but enough is enough. It's too distracting to town, obviously.
|
|
|
Post by zuma on Apr 22, 2010 10:25:53 GMT -5
I like you fisheroo. Enough is enough indeed.
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Apr 22, 2010 10:30:18 GMT -5
If NAF was scum (and if Pleo was not scum) he'd know Pleo is a power role because townies should not have a reason to lie. I hate to even mention this considering the minor lies I told as a townie in the GB bastard game, but this is a basic game so there should not really be any reason for a townie to lie here. once upon a time in a land far away there was a player know as pedescribethe jedi took away his milk and confiscated his oreos and yet his behavior continued unabashed. {to be continued}
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Apr 22, 2010 10:35:50 GMT -5
It's too distracting to town, obviously. <snipped> having been on the receiving side of this argument way too many times to calculate i am going to totally fucking disagree.
|
|
|
Post by zuma on Apr 22, 2010 10:37:30 GMT -5
And as we are discussing NAF, I'm not even sure how this goes into play, but looking back on this, I found his insistance that there would only be 2 scum out of 13 weird. And he brought up C-9, which I went back to mafiascum to double-check.
C-9 games were 2 scum, 5 townies. As much as NAF likes to discuss balance in games, I find 2 scum/11 townies imbalanced, especially since it was already confirmed that we had a cop role.
It bugs me because he used his belief of having 2 scum as a basis for attacking shaggy.
I liked his looking for possible scum based on who he thought would vote for total lost of course, but I can't get over how he thinks there would be just 2 scum while bringing up C9 games which were 2 out of 7. I'd dismiss it except for the fact that he claimed that it was necessary to accept that to accept shaggy being scum.
I'd like NAF to address this (although I won't be voting for him today I think).
|
|
|
Post by fisheroo on Apr 22, 2010 10:53:22 GMT -5
It's too distracting to town, obviously. <snipped> having been on the receiving side of this argument way too many times to calculate i am going to totally fucking disagree. Sorry, I am in work mode at the present, not Machiavellian scheming paranoid multiple layer Mafia thinking mode. At work I solve problems- this whole Pleo thing seems to be an irritating problem with no discernable benefit to town. And I personally have yet to be convinced this is anything other than Pleo's "I is so smrt" strategy.
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Apr 22, 2010 12:01:34 GMT -5
that's fine fishy
it's just that i am trying to clarify in my mind what some folks are up to.
i didn't understand story's conclusion, i don't get the whole NAF string theory (later to be appended with the correct definition that he was trying to accomplish) thingamabob and i don't get your vote.
and i still don't get what the fuck pleo is up to.
of all of these yours was the most problematic, to me.
but i can assure you this, if ducduc doesn't get in here pdq then that is where my vote will land.
|
|
|
Post by NAF1138 on Apr 22, 2010 12:13:31 GMT -5
I am not a mason, and I do not believe that there are any masons in the game. I also believe that if there is a doctor in the game or masons that there is no reason not to claim at this point. But I am not a power role of any stripe.
Story your case against me is not only weak but actually surprising considering that it ignores most of what you know about my previous play style and what I have done and advocated as a vanilla townie in the past.
I am also fairly surprised that Pleo has not full claimed as I can see no advantage to not claiming right now, but that is not really an issue.
For the record, I have always advocated the following rule for smart townies:
YOU DON'T LYNCH CLAIMED POWER ROLES ON DAY 2! EVER!
Remember your Marvel game story? Where, (was it Boozy?) a power role was lynched after claiming on Day 2 or 3? Remember I said pretty much the same thing? Sure I was third party then, but you know as well as I do that I was playing neutral/pro town during the Day.
In a mostly open setup like this on Day 2 a soft claim might as well be a full claim. It's not like there are a thousand possible roles he could be hiding in. He is either a mason or a doctor, probably a doctor.
Cripes story. Really?
|
|
|
Post by NAF1138 on Apr 22, 2010 12:22:37 GMT -5
And as we are discussing NAF, I'm not even sure how this goes into play, but looking back on this, I found his insistance that there would only be 2 scum out of 13 weird. And he brought up C-9, which I went back to mafiascum to double-check. C-9 games were 2 scum, 5 townies. As much as NAF likes to discuss balance in games, I find 2 scum/11 townies imbalanced, especially since it was already confirmed that we had a cop role. It bugs me because he used his belief of having 2 scum as a basis for attacking shaggy. I liked his looking for possible scum based on who he thought would vote for total lost of course, but I can't get over how he thinks there would be just 2 scum while bringing up C9 games which were 2 out of 7. I'd dismiss it except for the fact that he claimed that it was necessary to accept that to accept shaggy being scum. I'd like NAF to address this (although I won't be voting for him today I think). I was wrong and didn't check my facts. Somewhere along the line I had told myself that a c-9 setup was for 12 players not 7 and my feeling was that the difference of one player wouldn't effect the balance. I was going off my knowing that C-9 is fairly close to balance and that smaller games have different rules for balance than the larger ones I am used to thinking about. Three scum out of 13 feels to me, on a gut level, like too many. I didn't put much more thought into it than that. Maybe I should have. I do think that my case against Shaggy is weaker if there is more than one scum left. I think it makes sense that Shaggy, acting alone, would "randomly" pick TL because they are friends. I know he did this to his own wife in Alien Taste, so I can see him doing it here too. I do not see TL as being a prime target for anyone else in this game right out of the gate, unless of course someone did pick up on her being a cop. For now I am going to say it is less likely that she was picked as a cop. In the interest of full disclosure, my vote for her yesterDay has the good chance of picking her as a power role. A lot of my early scum catching techniques (including my reasoning for her vote yesterDay) tend to catch power roles as often as they do scum. So depending on who the scum was, they might have picked up on it but I still feel better about Shaggy based on his posts in conjunction with the, admittedly meta-gamey, extrapolation of motive for TL's kill.
|
|
|
Post by Idle Thoughts on Apr 22, 2010 12:42:39 GMT -5
Pleonast - 3 (Luv, Cookies, zuma) NAF - 2 (Storyteller, Special Ed) Shaggy - 2 (NAF, Fisheroo) Storyteller - 1 (Pleonast) Fisheroo - 1 (Peeker)
|
|
|
Post by NAF1138 on Apr 22, 2010 13:46:32 GMT -5
Hey, NAF, I have a question - You seem pretty determined that we should not lynch Pleonast as a claimed power role. My question is this: To what extent should a soft claim allow a player to escape being lynched? For how long? Oh, I missed this. I have an answer to this one. Until Day 4. If Pleo still is unwilling to provide a claim by Day 4 then we can string him up. Why until Day 4? Because by Day 4 we will have enough other information that we can accurately judge wether or not that's a dumb move. Right now there isn't enough information to know how smart a move it is, so we assume he is truthful until about Day 4. I'm not saying let him go forever, but in the early game it's stupid to lynch a claimed power role even with a soft claim.
|
|
|
Post by NAF1138 on Apr 22, 2010 13:48:48 GMT -5
NETA: It's stupid doubly stupid in this case not only because the odds are in favor of him actually being a power role, but because a lynch on this particular claim will net us less information because the cases that build on it are built on tissue. Everyone who votes for Pleo can fall back and say "well shit, he shouldn't have soft claimed I guess. Good thing we had a lynch to burn. Sucks that we are out a Doc (or a mason, but I really don't think there are masons in this game)" and we learn almost nothing. Not nothing at all, but almost.
|
|