|
Day One
Jul 23, 2010 8:30:23 GMT -5
Post by bufftabby on Jul 23, 2010 8:30:23 GMT -5
Hrm. vote idle thoughts
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 23, 2010 9:12:40 GMT -5
Post by sachertorte on Jul 23, 2010 9:12:40 GMT -5
I'm not seeing the jump with Eureka from "being defensive and worrying about death" to "must be scum" Argh. This kind of commentary is not helpful. The notion is not that Eureka is defensive therefore she is scum. (1) Moley's argument is more descriptive than that. You should read it again. (2) While Moley is very confident in his assessment, the game doesn't work that way. We rarely reach a point of "Must Be Scum." The only time that happens is through powers or confession. Eureka's behavior is evidence of her being scum. (BTW, I think I use the word 'evidence' differently than many, if not most. I use it in a Bayesian sense). (3) If you are going to require "must be scum" for Eureka, are you going to require that level of confidence for everyone? I agree that over-concern about how oneself is perceived in the game is a scum tell. This is evidence, not proof. We rarely have proof positive.
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 23, 2010 9:14:26 GMT -5
Post by The Real FCOD on Jul 23, 2010 9:14:26 GMT -5
I snipped bits and pieces from this quote. @idle Thoughts: I am highly suspicious of this information. 2 Cabal seems way underpowered unless they can recruit. Even then, 3 Cabal seems low in a 25 person game. I was Cabal in C2 and while I can't remember the total numbers, there were 5 of us and it was still an uphill battle. 2 seems kind of cruel. Especially with 7 wolves. @idle Thoughts Part 2: Also, the preemptive "I think Wolves are most likely to disagree" thing is very subtle but smudgetacular. Just sayin'. @idle Thoughts, Part 3: There you go being smudgetacular again! Although, this was almost a blatant accusation of people being wolves so I'm not sure it's a smudge. Anyway. This blatant goading of anyone who exists that can disprove your list is fishy. Especially since one of the roles missing is the Magician, which is useful to figure out who is doing nightkills, and a scum who has a nightkill would be very glad to have a Magician step forward and "disprove" your list so they can avoid attacking them. Warlock is missing too, which would be another useful thing for a scum to know about. And yes, I'm aware that scum knowing any role would be helpful to them, but Magicians and Warlocks are the most associated with kills and having horrible effects for the Nightkillers. Witchdoctors, too, actually, now that I think about it, since the resurrections will also identify the Nightkillers. So the missing town roles are the Magician, someone who can discover the identify of a Nightkiller. A Warlock, who can curse a Nightkiller into dying. A Witchdoctor, who can resurrect the killed AND identify the Nightkiller if successful. And a Vig, who is the only town method of Nightkilling. For some reason, this strikes me as very very suspicious. J'ACCUSE, Idle Thoughts, J'ACCUSE. I don't like idle's approach. It smacks of possible role-fishing, and I'm suspicious of anyone who presses so hard for people to trust him, when there's no reason I know of to do so. Perhaps no one's voting for him for lying yet, because that would expose that they were not on the list, thereby narrowing the pool of what their possible role is. I don't know that he's lying; I don't know that he's telling the truth. But his approach rubs me the wrong wrong wrong way. See, the way Idle is playing is exactly the way Idle always plays. I agree that it seems like he's fishing (and maybe he is). His approach in this game rubs me the wrong way too. However, with Idle that doesn't mean he's scummy. His approach almost always rubs me the wrong way, LOL. Just saying. I still don't know for whom to vote. Maybe I'll be inspired soon. --FCOD
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 23, 2010 9:28:10 GMT -5
Post by sachertorte on Jul 23, 2010 9:28:10 GMT -5
If the list info I posted was false, than obviously people would know I was lying at this point...so if there's people who "know I'm lying" and are not believing me, why don't I have anyone voting for me yet? Well, not necessarily. For one, the people who know you are lying could be scum (i.e., the number of their faction is wrong). They might know you are lying, but not really want to say anything forceful about it. And two, Townies who know you are lying might not want to confront you about it. Furthermore, there ARE people pushing back on Idle Thoughts. While they may not be up to the voting level, there is non-zero pushback. While I agree with Idle Thoughts that his actions don't really jive with his being a liar, there is a significant difference between knowing you are lying and wanting to vote for you for it. Furthermore, I point out that Idle Thoughts can both be telling the truth about the list and be scum. Assuming the list is true... (1) Was the list reveal pro-town or pro-scum? On the pro-town side it provides information, most importantly about the scum factions. On the flip-side, the list reveal is also pro-scum in that it provides a comprehensive list of the Town power roles. Personally, the more I think about it, the more I would have liked Idle to release the list, but redact the specific Town role information. To me, that would have been more clearly 'pro-town.' (2) If Idle Thoughts is scum, then what is his plan? While it is fair to note that there could be 'some secret nefarious plan,' it is also fair to note that pointing out the possibility of a nefarious plan is itself a nefarious plan. In other words, general paranoia needs to be kept in check before it runs out of control. Right now, with the evidence so far, the plausible 'scum plot' I see is for Idle to use the list to gain Townie Cred. Even this plan is not so wonderful in a 4 faction game. Let's assume Idle is scum and everyone believes he is Town now. What happens at Night? A Vampire afraid of killing a Necromancer might love to kill someone who is clearly not the Necromancer. A werewolf afraid of accidentally targeting a vampire might decide that Idle is a good safe choice. Not such a great plan. Bottom line, there are a lot of risks and little benefit to what Idle Thoughts did. Do I know he's town? No. He could have been careless and forgot about the massive amounts of cross killing that can occur at night. As for the Secret Power, why don't we ask him? And please note the careful wording of the question: Idle Thoughts, is the information about roles in the game labelled as a Secret Power? Notes: (1) I am NOT asking if Idle Thoughts possesses the Town's Secret Power (2) Historically, the secret power has been explicitly labeled as such.
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 23, 2010 9:46:30 GMT -5
Post by bufftabby on Jul 23, 2010 9:46:30 GMT -5
I don't like idle's approach. It smacks of possible role-fishing, and I'm suspicious of anyone who presses so hard for people to trust him, when there's no reason I know of to do so. Perhaps no one's voting for him for lying yet, because that would expose that they were not on the list, thereby narrowing the pool of what their possible role is. I don't know that he's lying; I don't know that he's telling the truth. But his approach rubs me the wrong wrong wrong way. See, the way Idle is playing is exactly the way Idle always plays. I agree that it seems like he's fishing (and maybe he is). His approach in this game rubs me the wrong way too. However, with Idle that doesn't mean he's scummy. His approach almost always rubs me the wrong way, LOL. Just saying. I still don't know for whom to vote. Maybe I'll be inspired soon. --FCOD Oh, believe me, idle's play doesn't surprise me, but I don't like to develop a complacence toward people's play that routinely rubs me the wrong way, as I feel that gives them too much leeway to use a "but I always play this way!" sort of excuse, and use that excuse to their advantage. This isn't to say that this is a "principled" vote, because it's not. For right or wrong, my eyebrow is raised toward him. This also isn't to say that you would excuse his behavior now based on his behavior in the past; I'm just sayin'.
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 23, 2010 10:00:34 GMT -5
Post by Sister Coyote on Jul 23, 2010 10:00:34 GMT -5
Witchdoctors, too, actually, now that I think about it, since the resurrections will also identify the Nightkillers. As someone who has played a Witchdoctor in the past, the person who is resurrected can identify their Killer -- but there's actually nothing says they have to tell the truth, and the Witchdoctor themselves can only confirm that they resurrected the resurrectee.
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 23, 2010 10:48:33 GMT -5
Post by The Real FCOD on Jul 23, 2010 10:48:33 GMT -5
Oh, believe me, idle's play doesn't surprise me, but I don't like to develop a complacence toward people's play that routinely rubs me the wrong way, as I feel that gives them too much leeway to use a "but I always play this way!" sort of excuse, and use that excuse to their advantage. This isn't to say that this is a "principled" vote, because it's not. For right or wrong, my eyebrow is raised toward him. This also isn't to say that you would excuse his behavior now based on his behavior in the past; I'm just sayin'. I understand. One thing for which I typically look as a scum tell is a drastic change of playstyle. He's not pinging that for me this game. I do find it his actions suspicious, as usual, just not enough for me to vote, yet. --FCOD
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 23, 2010 11:46:28 GMT -5
Post by Nanook on Jul 23, 2010 11:46:28 GMT -5
Argh. This kind of commentary is not helpful. The notion is not that Eureka is defensive therefore she is scum. (1) Moley's argument is more descriptive than that. You should read it again. (2) While Moley is very confident in his assessment, the game doesn't work that way. We rarely reach a point of "Must Be Scum." The only time that happens is through powers or confession. Eureka's behavior is evidence of her being scum. (BTW, I think I use the word 'evidence' differently than many, if not most. I use it in a Bayesian sense). (3) If you are going to require "must be scum" for Eureka, are you going to require that level of confidence for everyone? I agree that over-concern about how oneself is perceived in the game is a scum tell. This is evidence, not proof. We rarely have proof positive.Underline mine. I understand perfectly well what his, and to some extent your, argument is. I guess I wasn't clear enough in my last post. Moley is very much saying must be scum, and you are saying strong scum tell. The part I underlined is where you and Moley and I are disagreeing. Logically, it should be a scum tell. Town shouldn't be afraid to die if it furthers the cause right? But my experiences tell me otherwise, espcially with new players, doubly so with new players that have a power role. I've gotten on players in the past for that sort of attitude. Meeko, some others who's names I'm forgetting, and I was wrong every time. That's not to say I think Eureka is definately Town, or even probably Town. But I do disagree completely with you and Moley's premise. As for Idle, this is exactly the type of thing he does in every game it seems. It seems to me if he's telling the truth about the list, he almost has to be Town, and that it is the Town secret power. I just can't see that kind of information NOT being one side's secret power with the set up Pleo uses, and I'm having a really hard time thinking up a good reason to give that power to one of the other sides. Let us assume for a moment Idle is telling(most of) the truth about the list. Wolves? What do the wolves care about the exact composition? Knowing the Town roles is nice, but they don't care about the Cabal at all, and only care about the Undead if the Undead are close to winning themselves. Giving them full knowledge doesn't make a lot of sense. Undead? Can't see it. Especially since they started with a zombie. I would guess that their secret power is that zombie plus some sort of protection/knowledge to avoid the Vamp on Necro violence we've seen in previous games. Cabal? The Cabal only really care about Witches, and they know there's 3 Witches based on their own existence. Anything else is superfluous. Plus, if Idle is telling the truth about the make up, then knowledge of that is a pretty crappy balance to there only being 2 cabal. I know he could be lying about the numbers, but I still think it would be a crappy power. I was Cabal in C2, and our power in that game was a one shot, unstoppable kill. That's a hell of a lot more powerful than simple knowledge that your side doesn't really have much use for. Which leaves Town. That kind of knowledge is huge. Look back at the end of C2 and C3. Both games came down to Town needing to finish off the cabal before finishing off the Wolves. Knowing how many of each existed to start during that hunt would have been critically important information. I definately think, IF he's telling the truth about the existance of the list, then he is definately Town. Of course, he's Idle. There is nothing stopping him from making the whole thing up from scratch. In which case he could be just about anything.
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 23, 2010 12:09:59 GMT -5
Post by Idle Thoughts on Jul 23, 2010 12:09:59 GMT -5
Well, not necessarily. For one, the people who know you are lying could be scum (i.e., the number of their faction is wrong). That would mean I got the number of Town (and the exact roles) correct, though. What are the chances of that unless I really did get the info, the info was true, and I am Town? This makes no sense. Perhaps you'd like to explain a case where it would make sense? As I said above, seems to me that if I were a different (Town) role, and I knew someone was lying who posted a list like I did, I'd start, right away, calling them a liar. I'd have someone to vote for the first Day and every Day afterwards until I or they were dead. Real Town has nothing to lose by calling me a liar if their role isn't on my list. In any set up where people only can guess the exact number of scum (which is virtually ANY set up) and that COULD have a collection of various roles, I think it benefits Town MORE. I mean, it all of eliminates Wolf/Undead/Cabal claiming extra false roles. I already answered this in an earlier post. No, it didn't. I didn't get ANYTHING about a secret power.
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 23, 2010 12:44:59 GMT -5
Post by sachertorte on Jul 23, 2010 12:44:59 GMT -5
That would mean I got the number of Town (and the exact roles) correct, though. What are the chances of that unless I really did get the info, the info was true, and I am Town? I don't want to belabor the point because, at the core, I'm more inclined to believe Idle Thoughts right now than not. But my point is, we don't know why someone might or might not feel comfortable calling you out as a liar. But I restate, even if Idle Thoughts is lying scum, I doubt that he is lying about this list. Depends on the role; depends on the person. While I agree with you that it makes more sense to out you as a liar, I'm not everyone else. Different people approach the game different ways. For example, I disagree with your revealing the Town roles. Does that make you automatically scummy? No, it is a difference in opinion about what is important. I agree that publishing the numbers of all scum factions was 100% the correct move. But why is eliminating false roles immediately a good thing? Did it occur to you that you might have waited until after someone claims to publish the Town list? (I'm talking about the Town roles only here). If you really are Town, would it not have been glorious to sit on the Town information and make scum sweat out a false claim? What if you got lucky and our first forced claim claimed a role NOT on your list? Wouldn't that be worthwhile? What if the first claimant claimed one of the unique roles on the list? At that point you could point out that the role is on your list and is unique, allowing for a possible counter-claim. We want scum to lie. And then we want to catch them in that lie. Your list was an excellent tool to do just that, but by publishing it, you gave scum all the info they need to conform to your list when claiming. Again. I point out that this is merely a difference of opinion. At its core I agree that preventing scum from claiming something that would never be counter-claimed is a positive move. I only wish you had waited until after we got some claims out on the table Today. (so much for not belaboring the point.)
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 23, 2010 13:06:49 GMT -5
Post by Idle Thoughts on Jul 23, 2010 13:06:49 GMT -5
Fair enough...I read your post and points and don't have much to add. I asked, you rebutted, okay, I concede to your points.
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 23, 2010 15:34:40 GMT -5
Post by Red Skeezix on Jul 23, 2010 15:34:40 GMT -5
Real Town has nothing to lose by calling me a liar if their role isn't on my list. The exception to this is a possible vig. This was mentioned before upthread (iirc storyteller, but I could be wrong), but it's my opinion as well that a vig should not counter your list. I'm of the opinion that they should just vig you, while retaining their cover.
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 23, 2010 16:39:42 GMT -5
Post by Idle Thoughts on Jul 23, 2010 16:39:42 GMT -5
But there's not a vig in the game.
Since I really got that info/list and I believe in it and --I-- personally, know I'm not lying...I can say with the utmost certainty that that issue isn't valid. There is no vig in the game.
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 23, 2010 16:45:02 GMT -5
Post by Idle Thoughts on Jul 23, 2010 16:45:02 GMT -5
Oh, and another thing..who is talking about a vig countering my list?
it doesn't reveal who is what just by saying "yes, I'm a role on that list".
People who are really Town would have nothing to lose by doing this. Only people who are wolves or cabal or undead (because then it takes away places to hide...extra false claims they could make). If you all knew that my list was the stone cold truth, nobody could make a false claim of something not in the game. You'd be able to use it as a handy dandy guide for the rest of the game. You could mass claim, even, later on...and weed out those lying. Seriously, what are the wolves and undead and cabalists going to do if they have to mass claim and my list is KNOWN to be true? They'll have to claim something on the list, obviously, which would, at the WORST, create situations like two people claiming the same thing.
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 23, 2010 17:48:36 GMT -5
Post by Sister Coyote on Jul 23, 2010 17:48:36 GMT -5
Since I really got that info/list and I believe in it and --I-- personally, know I'm not lying...I can say with the utmost certainty that that issue isn't valid. There is no vig in the game. Idle -- You do realize most of us believe you'd say exactly the same thing if you were lying, right? And that your certitude does not engender my confidence? And that the whole point of an extrapolated vig is folks feel that if there is one, who therefore knows that you are lying, it is best that they not rise to your bait. Right?
|
|
Gir!
FGM
EVIL Demon Goddess Mod
What? Kat is sweet and innocent!
Posts: 691
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day One
Jul 23, 2010 20:29:50 GMT -5
Post by Gir! on Jul 23, 2010 20:29:50 GMT -5
As I just mentioned, I now think Idle was truthful, with my "missing Cabalist" hypothesis being at best the 2nd most likely possibility. Kat!, do you agree Idle is being truthful? If not, what's your guess for the details of his ploy? I'm inclined to believe, for now, that Idle is being truthful about the list. Idle tends to die early, so he tends to counter that by oversharing as Town.* It's a high-risk claim to make if he's lying, and I believe (at least for now) that the list itself is accurate based on the lack of a vigilante. If Idle made up the list himself, there'd be a vigilante on it. Interesting that you are so positive that Idle is Town. I'll keep my "X is Townie" lists exclusive to proven Townies (usually limited to dead ones) and stick with "leaning Town for now". But I don't like beer. *Keep in mind that Idle also has a tendency to deliberately mimic his Townie playing style while scum, and quite well, too. Remember the 72 point posts.
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 24, 2010 0:18:31 GMT -5
Post by Idle Thoughts on Jul 24, 2010 0:18:31 GMT -5
IF THERE'S A VIG OUT THERE, KILL ME. I DARE YOU. HEY, VIG, YOU'RE A MORON! "DUHHHHH", SAID THE VIG, "WHAT DO I DO? I'M SO DUMB I CAN'T EVEN WIPE MY OWN ASS!"
I'm safe. There's no Vig. : ) No, no, don't worry about me..I'll be perfectly fine. Coyote, yes, I know...that is why I used the word "I". I am sure. You aren't, obviously, because you don't know that I'm Town yet.
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 24, 2010 1:31:29 GMT -5
Post by Mister Blockey on Jul 24, 2010 1:31:29 GMT -5
Holy massive walls of text batman! So er I didn't get to play much of the other conspiracy game I was in and I'm a little lost in all of this except for one thing. I bloody hate metagame. I hate, hate, hate it. I design all my games to combat it as much as possible.
Geez I feel guilty because I'm exhausted and going out of town and I just don't have the will to dredge through all of that again with a fine toothed comb, and by the time I'm back I'll have an evening to catch up before the day ends. That said I need to get a vote in. I think I'm going to wait and attempt something tomorrow though. I have time for one more foray before my trip.
Oh, also: Idle you tend to die quickly so you play like you tend to die quickly which prompts people to kill you quickly and so on and so on. It's a self fulfilling prophecy isn't it.
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 24, 2010 2:09:23 GMT -5
Post by Idle Thoughts on Jul 24, 2010 2:09:23 GMT -5
I didn't always. In fact, in a recent game, I lasted to about Day Five or Six (the one before the last one). And I lasted most of the last Conspiracy game..killed on Day Three but then brought back to life and stayed in for the rest of the game.
I think I've just played in so many that I have a more carefree ("well, if I live, I live and if I die, I die") attitude now and for the last 10 games, or so, that I've played in. Before, when I actually used to try and cared about the game, I'd last full games, usually.
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 24, 2010 2:47:06 GMT -5
Post by moodymitchy on Jul 24, 2010 2:47:06 GMT -5
IDLE THOUGHTS you say "you" know the list you have to be true and correct... I don't doubt that you believe the information to be correct and that you've done what you feel is best with the information you have been given... I'm not getting why you are absolutely certain of it? What's to say that another "factions" special power was to be able to "make up" a list and send it to a player of their choice?? Still don't know what to make of it all at the moment way too many possibilities but i will try someting that I feel someone like you would try but I don't think I'll get a great deal of satisfaction from it.. DEAREST MOD..... WAS IDLE THOUGHTS GIVEN A LIST OF ROLES AS EXTRA INFORMATION...
AND IF YOU CAN ASNWER THAT... ANY CHANCE OF TELLING US IF IT'S TRUE OR NOTI quite expect no response from that but it's got as much chance as you asking people to come forward if they aren't on the list you have posted
|
|
Gir!
FGM
EVIL Demon Goddess Mod
What? Kat is sweet and innocent!
Posts: 691
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day One
Jul 24, 2010 8:33:01 GMT -5
Post by Gir! on Jul 24, 2010 8:33:01 GMT -5
I'm not getting why you are absolutely certain of it? What's to say that another "factions" special power was to be able to "make up" a list and send it to a player of their choice?? Doubtful. Idle was given the list in his role PM: Okay, I have extra information that I think everyone should know. I was told this, in my PM: I was just told this extra information along with my role. If it's a list made up by another player, Pleo had to be positive that the player was online while role PMs were being sent out and that the player was going to get the list turned in before it was Idle's turn to receive his role PM. And he stated beforehand that they were going out in the order of the player list, so he couldn't just put off sending Idle's role, he had to send it in order. Yes, he could have lied about the order that he was sending them in, but mods shouldn't make even that small a lie in a nonBastard game. No, the chance of that being answered is 0, and the chance of people coming forward if they aren't on the list is greater than 0 (I couldn't say how much greater than 0, because it would depend on which player it was, what role they had, and me knowing more about math and statistics than I actually do. Plus, you know, the list could even be true! )
|
|
Gir!
FGM
EVIL Demon Goddess Mod
What? Kat is sweet and innocent!
Posts: 691
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day One
Jul 24, 2010 9:32:30 GMT -5
Post by Gir! on Jul 24, 2010 9:32:30 GMT -5
<font style="font-size: 12px;">Okay, I have extra information that I think everyone should know. I was told this, in my PM: So there you go. Seven wolves, total. That's a lot. Something else to think about: If the list is accurate, then Undead has another advantage built in (in addition to Zombie Frood). They've got 2 un-Night-killable members, because only Vigs can Nightkill a Vampire.
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 24, 2010 13:28:58 GMT -5
Post by Mister Blockey on Jul 24, 2010 13:28:58 GMT -5
So thinking on it I want a vote before I leave. I hate meta, especially because one tiny wrong conclusion throws the whole thing into basically random. That may be clouding my vision a little, but I also get a little suspicious when someone tries to control the discussion from the start of the game. So Vote Sachertorte.
It's day one, I'm as best caught up as I'll be before leaving, I don't like your style with this and you seem to be trying to direct the conversation from the beginning in a way that exposes you as little as possible. That's good enough for me.
I may be able to get on in the next two days but I'm not going to go out of my way to do so. So accusing or questioning is going to go unanswered until Monday night most likely.
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 24, 2010 13:39:25 GMT -5
Post by special on Jul 24, 2010 13:39:25 GMT -5
<font style="font-size: 12px;">Okay, I have extra information that I think everyone should know. I was told this, in my PM: So there you go. Seven wolves, total. That's a lot. Something else to think about: If the list is accurate, then Undead has another advantage built in (in addition to Zombie Frood). They've got 2 un-Night-killable members, because only Vigs can Nightkill a Vampire. and just 1 seer to try to find them compared to 3 detectives to try to find the wolves. Though, the witches could also find out if they were Undead if they investigated, at least I think they would, wouldn't they? Here's some thoughts I've had in looking at Idle's claim (insert standard disclaimer here that if he's lying then blah blah blah) and the roles. Since I've really only lasted 1 cycle in Conspiracy, I'm not as familiar with the roles as most people. So if my thinking is in error, please enlighten me. So, that Un-NightKillable Vampires seems to be an Undead advantage. The folks working against them are the Vicar and the seer and potentially the 3 witches with an investigation The Wolves have an advantage of numbers. Working against them are 3 detectives, so they can be easily ID'd when they kill and a Detective can more easily come out and claim knowing that there are 2 more detectives to continue his work. I think the Town has an advantage in some good confirmable members. 3 witches, 3 freemasons, and a Scotsman. I don't see much going for the Cabal. They'll need 7 Wolves, 3 Undead, and at least 2 witches dead before they can win. I'm guessing their secret power is quite a power. Enough with the game set-up conversation. A summary of the game play so far. 1. I've already commented on sachertorte's thinking story, FCOD, and I might make good targets. In no way, do I have any read on sachertorte for it. He could easily be a Wolf, Undead or Cabal and know those 3 are safe lynches for his side. Equally, he could be Town and not aware of the alignment. 2. I've also already commented on how I think Eureka's comments are more likely newbie-tells than Scum-tells, but that doesn't rule out Newbie-Scum which is a strong possibility. (obviously about half the players are not Town.) 3. I tend to believe Idle is telling the truth, but I'm not closed to the idea that it could be a gambit of some sort, but I think it will become apparent sooner or later. Like sachertorte, I'm still struck with the thought that it should be a mostly true list. For example, Idle might be a 3rd Cabal trying to make their numbers seem smaller and perhaps making the Wolves seem more dangerous?? idk, and I'm not worrying about this right now. 4. I was a little confused by Kat coming to the defense of story, FCOD and myself. 5. I'm glad the "send a message' and "no worse than random' discussion didn't turn into a Debacle. 6. As for nphase's vote for bufftabby. I see bufftabby playing like she usually does. However, she's quite frequently difficult to get a read on. I'm puzzled by nphase's quick vote, however. That doesn't seem like her. 7. septimus, in post 92, seems to be making newbie-tells like Eureka. I'm not certain why these comments ping me a bit more. I think perhaps it's because septimus' points were 1) I'm not Cabal. 2) Maybe Idle messed with the number of Cabal. 3) Could this even be the Cabal secret power? 4) I'm new, I'm going to make mistakes, so I'll probably be left alive as I'm obviously a liability for my side. Yeah, that's icky. 8. Bufftabby's vote for Idle pings me a bit. It's true he could be role fishing, but in all, it hardly seems worthy of voting for him. It is Day 1, and bufftabby almost always does something that makes me think she's Scum. (I've learned as I've played, that there are some players who just seem scummier to me probably based on their posting style. Bufftabby, Sister Coyote, and Dirx fall into this category. I have learned to temper my suspicion.) 9. As I was typing this, Blockey voted for sachertorte with what seems to be a policy vote. Icky. 10. Here's the post count for Day 1 as for now. sachertorte 18 Idle Thoughts 15 Kat! 13 redskeezix 11 Sister Coyote 10 Honest Moley 9 metallicsquink 8 nphase 6 FCOD The Platypus 6 eureka 5 Zømbie Frøød 5 bufftabby 5 stanislaus 4 Special Ed 4 BillMc 3 septimus 3 Nanook 3 Mister Blockey 2 Pleonast 2 moodymitchy 2 storyteller 2 duvsie 1 Inner Stickler 1 MentalGuy 1 peekercpa 1 Pollux Oil 1 Merestil Haye 1
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 24, 2010 15:41:15 GMT -5
Post by sachertorte on Jul 24, 2010 15:41:15 GMT -5
I also get a little suspicious when someone tries to control the discussion from the start of the game. In other words, lynch the players that are participating. Apparently, bringing up points of discussion is a bad thing. As policies go, this one sucks. Are you going to vote to lynch anyone and everyone who proposes an idea? That's a recipe for zero discussion and zero innovation. Good luck with that. (pssst, if you look at any and all games I've ever played in, you'd find the exact same behavior. Just thought you ought to know.) Riiiight. By participating a whole bunch, I'm exposing myself as little as possible. Are you insane? Do you honestly think that by outposting other players by an order of magnitude I'm less exposed? I was going to vote for Eureka, but now I kind of want to OMGUS vote instead. Because that is really sucky.
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 24, 2010 15:46:07 GMT -5
Post by septimus on Jul 24, 2010 15:46:07 GMT -5
septimus, in post 92, seems to be making newbie-tells like Eureka. I'm not certain why these comments ping me a bit more. I think perhaps it's because septimus' points were 1) I'm not Cabal. 2) Maybe Idle messed with the number of Cabal. 3) Could this even be the Cabal secret power? 4) I'm new, I'm going to make mistakes, so I'll probably be left alive as I'm obviously a liability for my side. Yeah, that's icky. My points (2) and (3) were thinking aloud, believing that to be pro-game and pro-town(*). Point (1) was strictly whimsical and intended to amuse. That frequent (poor) attempts at humor is my style can be seen in SDMB threads. The first part of Point (4) was simple candor, the second part another poor attempt at humor. (* - As Kat! points out, the scenario in (2) and (3) may make little sense. I now think Idle is Town and have seen no non-Town scenario for his point that makes much sense.) I'll try to cut down on the pointless humor. I do take the game seriously; in fact I dreamed about it during Night Zero! (The dream was diffuse and ill-remembered; I do recall my name appearing on someone's Lynch List in the dream! )
|
|
Merestil Haye
FGM
Grudge Keeper
[on:Slumming it in the Middle-Earth][of:In the halls of Manw
Posts: 1,077
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day One
Jul 24, 2010 18:19:49 GMT -5
Post by Merestil Haye on Jul 24, 2010 18:19:49 GMT -5
My thoughts on the game so far, part I : Idle Thoughts. Idle Thoughts claimed that Pleo had given him a list of roles, and presented the list in in D01.013, My initial reaction was that the list strained my credibility; however it took a while to pin the problem down. The problem is that three Detectives is massively unfair to the Wolves. Detectives can only identify the killer if that killer is a Wolf (in C2, the Cabal's kill would have registered as “Cabal” and not given a name. Vampires, of course, cannot be traced to a kill.) However, the history of Conspiracy is littered with Werewolf disasters. The Wolves have been eliminated by endgame in every single game. They need a power- up, not three Town players who can only hurt Werewolves with their powers. For that reason, I'm a bit sceptical of the statement. I think that Idle did get this list, because there is no reason for anyone to make it up; anyone guessing the setup is almost certain to make a mistake and leave out an existing role. If Idle is lying, he's tweaked numbers on the roles. If that is so, it's going to take quite a bit of time to disprove it – if Idle's doctored it by inflating the number of one existing faction to hide the size of another (for example, saying there are only two Cabal when there are really 4, but inflating the number of Detectives from 1 to 3) then we won't catch the lie until the faction of the third dead Cabalist is revealed. It seems unlikely to me that Idle would risk misstating the number of Cabalists or Wolves unless he was a member of the misstated faction; after all, if he got the number of Wolves wrong, the Wolves would know that Idle was wrong, and therefore he was a liar. The result is likely to be that they don't kill him, but try and get him lynched. Consequently, even if you assume Idle is lying, the majority of his list is likely to be right – and if he's telling the truth it's spot on. It's worth noting (for new Conspiracists) that it is quite likely that Town players might indulge in a bit of obfuscation. Most Town players are a danger to one or more of the non-Town factions, and are trying to hide from them. Detectives try to hide from Wolves, Vicars from Vampires, and Witches from all three nonTown factions. Thus one of the normal antiTown pointers isn't available in this game. I'm not a great believer in a post covering multiple screens, so I'm going to pause here and address some other points in a separate post.
|
|
Merestil Haye
FGM
Grudge Keeper
[on:Slumming it in the Middle-Earth][of:In the halls of Manw
Posts: 1,077
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day One
Jul 24, 2010 18:27:52 GMT -5
Post by Merestil Haye on Jul 24, 2010 18:27:52 GMT -5
Part II of my extended reaction to Day 1 to date. In the previous post I examined Idle's list; on to other stuff, starting with Storyteller's reaction to Idle.. Storyteller said this in D01.019, with reference to Idle's declaration. Pleo is very, very big on saying what he means and meaning what he says. Idle's information is not of the open setup information we have received. According to the moderator, this means that if Idle is truthful, he is the possessor of his faction's secret power. This is correct. However, it doesn't mean that no-one else has that faction's secret power. In the last game, the Town's secret power was given to the two Witchdoctors. Neither knew the other, but both had the identical secret power. Pleo could have done the same sort of thing here. Nevertheless, the basic point is correct. Pleo really does take care when drafting rulesets. In Conspiracy, a power that is not in the rules is a secret power (his has certain implications for other powers). I doubt that Pleo would just hand out game setup info willy-nilly. If he did, that's a secret power. One note to Eureka's first post in D01.022. Because something is unlikely doesn't mean it won't happen. Two players is terribly small for a faction in this game (the Vampires are pretty much immune from any type of kill except the lynch and the Vig, so a small size works for them). In C1, the Cabal had three members. One was dead by the dawn of Day 2 (lynched, I believe) and both the others died from Nightkills in Night 3 – the Wolves targeted one and the Vampire the other. Having two members, in this game, is an open invitation to a quick exit for the Cabal. If there really are two Cabal, their secret power rocks. Eureka does seem interested in self-preservation, but, if they are honest, so are most people. I know I am. I enjoy playing, and in order to play one must usually be alive. There have been some exceptions to that. Notably, the Cabal and the Witches in this very game. Personally I think we need to give Eureka a bit more rope and see if she hangs herself with it. MetallicSquink asks in D01.064 how alliances would work. In Conspiracy 1, Santo Rugger (an Omega Wolf) and CatInaSuit (a Vampire) attempted some coordinated action in about Day 5, because by that time the Cabal was dead (and known to be), and the Wolves had been badly fragged. The Undead weren't in much better state. They had to discuss the alliance in game, though, which meant the other players knew what was happening. I guess the point I'm making is that you shouldn't rule out open anti-Town alliances later on. Another example, in C3 I nearly claimed right at the end of a late Day – 6, I think – with the suggestion that DarkCookies kill a Townie, probably the Vig, who I had been keeping a muzzle on for a Day or so. This would have amounted to a confession of Cabal membership. Unfortunately, DarkCookies killed me instead of a Townsperson, and the Townies were able to polish off the remaining two bad guys quickly. I'll finish off second reading tomorrow.
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 24, 2010 20:56:32 GMT -5
Post by MentalGuy on Jul 24, 2010 20:56:32 GMT -5
After spending the time to reread, I have decided to cast some more votes. Some of my observations below. Well, gosh. Idle's list is interesting, but it's only useful if we know whether we can trust it or not. I'm worried by his repeated requests for people not on the list to come forward. It's blatant role-fishing. But what's really interesting is the roles that are missing from the list - Magician, Warlock, Witchdoctor and Vig. These are essentially who Idle is asking to come forward and identify themselves. I can see that the Wolves would be interested to know who to avoid killing, or who might try to kill them. It seems a little sacrificial, but if Idle is right about numbers (and he'd want to be at least partly honest in feeding us a false list) then it might be worth it to flush out roles that will slow down their kills or thin their numbers. Moreover, if we do get suckered by a false list, then we could be in a lot of trouble. What if we have two Seers, for example? One claims, another believes Idle and so "counter"-claims and we end up mislynching. Possibly twice. Or what if there are only 2 Detectives, and we blithely accept the claim of the 3rd? I don't see why Idle would have such a list, or why, having it, he'd just reveal it like this. He hasn't really given any explanation for either. But I can see why a non-Town role would like to get us talking about what roles we do and don't have. Pending a good explanation of why Idle got this list, and why he's shared it, I'm very suspicious. I may be just be playing to my own bias here, but I believe it is very unlikely for a scum to pull this gambit, since Idle would be dead immediately after (at the latest) someone was confirmed and not on the list. Especially this early in the game. I believe Idle's list is most likely true. It has been my experience in general that Town players are more likely to do this type of thing anyway (though I have never played Conspiracy, so that might affect the equation some). I tend to think that the player's trying to create doubt about it have a reason they don't want the list believed. You could look at the past role list in numerous ways - about half the folks had a town role as their first choice, but non-town for a subsequent choice -- so I think you are town..or you are not :-) If we are voting for folk based on roles on past games, we may as well vote on who killed you in previous games. I am not sure why this didn't strike me more the first time I read it. Again, I believe we have a misrepresentation. Sach was not focusing on the players that had a town first and nontown after, but on the players that had chosen specifically non-town roles exclusively. Who killed you in previous games is a matter of what has happened in the specific game, while what roles you preferred is a matter of personal preference and could reasonably be expected to remain the same (especially if a player did not get that role before). Vote BillMcUnderlining mine. I found this example somewhat curious. Why did you select that as your example? Do you think that particular example is likely? 1. For one thing, I wanted everyone to know that I am not a Cabalist! ;D 2. I chose a specific example for clarity and tried to pick one that made sense (or rather, least nonsense). It seemed likely that Idle would belong to any knowable faction he fudged. The number of Wolves seemed high, and number of Cabalists low, but wouldn't a faction member prefer to under-state rather than over-state his faction size? Hence the idea of a missing cabalist. An "invisible" Town role would be the obvious place to "hide" that hypothetical Cabalist. 3. There were flaws I knew of when I posted: would Idle risk the post if he were a Cabalist? Would that knowledge be too tiny of a Secret Power for Cabalists to have? I did wonder if Idle was involved in a game-balancing discussion and could therefore guess the approximate composition without the alleged PM. I'm a rank newbie, and will doubtless say many stupid things. (This may help my personal survival, as I'll be viewed as a liability rather than asset to my faction.) Also, I don't know how to lie, so am happy I didn't get a scum role. While they are both newbies and I find them both suspicious, I find this post scummier than Eureka's. Septimus may have been joking (I remember a joking remark getting me in trouble in my first game), but I think he is just trying too hard to be seen as Town. Vote septimusIn regards to nphase's vote on BuffTabby, I certainly would not have voted for BuffTabby in that situation, but I do believe that nphase feels she(?) does have a read on these types of things and I don't see her vote as suspicious. And since I also feel Eureka looked scummy Vote Eureka
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 24, 2010 21:17:02 GMT -5
Post by MentalGuy on Jul 24, 2010 21:17:02 GMT -5
You are correct, "I don't know if that is the case, but to say he is not making any attempt to progress towards winning this game is silly. " would be a misrepresentation had I actually said that. What I actually implied was that his plan would not produce results in that direction. The egg's on my face as I was wrong, and his plan is surely providing lots of discussion. But I didn't misrepresent sach, since I was giving my opinion and not restating his. You mention that my post was "filled with misrepresentations". Yet you mention only two which were in fact not misrepresentations at all. Sach had a plan, I disagreed with it's efficacy. Sach believed that it was no worse than random, I made a statement that statements like that in general irk me for the reasons I've stated. I meant to address this in my previous post but it is probably just as well that I make it separate. Your quote was You used the phrase "as opposed" implying that Sach had no interest in "making any attempt" to progress toward winning the game. I will concede that technically your statement is ambiguous, but it takes an accusatory tone toward Sach that makes me believe you were looking for an early accusation that you could build on. I will also concede that the random discussion is not a misrepresentation. I feel that in most games most first Day votes are essentially random, though, and Sach was simply saying that his plan was as good a reason to vote for someone as most first day votes are.
|
|