|
Post by Silver Jan on May 6, 2013 15:50:45 GMT -5
I have claimed already but I don't mind doing so again. I am the Hunter, a basic villager. At halftime (or whatever) I cannot be NK'd but I can kill someone, it's just a one of thing that I can do. I am so distracted in this Game, even forgetting your claim, that I almost want to ask to be Lynched in your stead. I'm also Basic with a Power likely to be weaker than yours. I won't -- even if Players agreed to Lynch me toDay, they'd probably go ahead and Lynch you toMorrow anyway. I'm not sure how strong your Power really is -- you'll have to make your decision before any Halftime reveals and, if Witch is exposed on the Day before Halftime, that Witch will be Lynched anyway. With some other Halftime Killers around, you might waste cross-kill(s) on the same likely Witch. ... And all this assumes you really are Villager. It also assumes that I'm still alive It would be really handy if 2 witches were exposed before halftime.
|
|
|
Post by lauriern on May 6, 2013 16:00:32 GMT -5
Sai and Cookies have been on SilverJan pretty hard. As I said before, SJ seems frustrated Townie to me: I think this is just SilverJan being SilverJan and though what she's doing is very metagamey, her pointing this out, if she were a witch, would only point herself out as a witch. Doesn't make sense. Again, pointing this out, if she was a witch, would implicate her as being a witch. (If the witch boards are here on Idle.) If they are not here on Idle, no one will have the post discrepancies and the point is moot. On re-read, Pleo has done the same thing as Cookies an Sai and also voted her right out of the gate. Something feels hinky about all this. Going to re-read Day and Night 1 tonight. Have to cook dinner and feed my Mother's chickens since she's out of town
|
|
|
Post by swammerdami on May 6, 2013 16:42:48 GMT -5
I'm so distracted I didn't even realize my vote was a "Non-Deadline" (i.e. Hammer) vote. That wasn't my intention. Rather than changing it, I'll retract it altogether -- there still might be time for a bandwagon to develop on someone more Witchy.
Unvote: SilverJan
|
|
|
Post by JustBeingGinger on May 6, 2013 17:16:12 GMT -5
Sorry I have been absent. Have a lot going on and it's hard to focus on the game. So I don't know what to think about Silverjan, I have seen her play frustrated townie and defensive scum, and sometimes it is hard to tell the difference. Now with her claim of Hunter and the fact that she cannot be NK'd according to her claim, would put her in the townie column, that is if we don't have any vig style roles... This is also in believing her role claim. All of it is a bunch of ifs... I will have to see how the day progresses. I do not see how she could not open her other PM, I know mine has my alignment right in there... Very obvious. I don't like the comment on the post counts, seems a bit of grasping at straws and by no means does it mean anything in my book. There is not much to go on toDay other than the discussion about Silverjan
|
|
|
Post by JustBeingGinger on May 6, 2013 17:17:09 GMT -5
I am also somewhat confused on Deadline votes vs hammer votes. I get hammer votes. I am going to go reread stuff on deadline votes...
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on May 6, 2013 17:17:36 GMT -5
I don't think 'she seems like a frustrated Townie' is a very compelling counter-argument. Ymmv.
|
|
|
Post by JustBeingGinger on May 6, 2013 17:20:38 GMT -5
Notice I just made 2 posts and my post count did not change when I made the 2nd post... Just saying...
|
|
|
Post by JustBeingGinger on May 6, 2013 17:21:28 GMT -5
ok nevermind, I see it is running total and changes...
|
|
|
Post by swammerdami on May 6, 2013 17:35:41 GMT -5
... Now with her claim of Hunter and the fact that she cannot be NK'd according to her claim ... Can you point to this claim? As I read the rules, Hunter is "protected" only during Halftime, and that seems to be what she claimed a few posts ago. BTW, recently on Geeb, Moderators knew that a PM had never been read. I assume there is such a capability here; did Idle (or some other Admin) verify when/whether SilverJan read her 2nd PM?
|
|
|
Post by crys on May 6, 2013 18:32:47 GMT -5
I'm so distracted I didn't even realize my vote was a "Non-Deadline" (i.e. Hammer) vote. That wasn't my intention. Rather than changing it, I'll retract it altogether -- there still might be time for a bandwagon to develop on someone more Witchy. Unvote: SilverJanI agree something feels hinky about all this, but I'll be damned if I can put my finger on it.
|
|
|
Post by crys on May 6, 2013 18:34:47 GMT -5
Answering as I'm reading, what's a quick topic? reread your pm. If your pm was of the same basic format as my own there should be a link to a quick topic that we are never ever supposed to share.
|
|
|
Post by swammerdami on May 6, 2013 18:42:33 GMT -5
Answering as I'm reading, what's a quick topic? reread your pm. If your pm was of the same basic format as my own there should be a link to a quick topic that we are never ever supposed to share. With a grand total of one action in the entire Game, it seems not unlikely that the Hunter role is handled with a single PM from Player, rather than a quick topic. P.S.: Am I overlooking some "Remember me" click? I have to click Login often, even, as now, if I just did it recently.
|
|
|
Post by Mahaloth on May 6, 2013 19:04:05 GMT -5
I'm so distracted I didn't even realize my vote was a "Non-Deadline" (i.e. Hammer) vote. That wasn't my intention. Rather than changing it, I'll retract it altogether -- there still might be time for a bandwagon to develop on someone more Witchy. Unvote: SilverJanSo you are going to wait for a bandwagon to form? Why?
|
|
|
Post by JustBeingGinger on May 6, 2013 20:07:10 GMT -5
... Now with her claim of Hunter and the fact that she cannot be NK'd according to her claim ... Can you point to this claim? As I read the rules, Hunter is "protected" only during Halftime, and that seems to be what she claimed a few posts ago. BTW, recently on Geeb, Moderators knew that a PM had never been read. I assume there is such a capability here; did Idle (or some other Admin) verify when/whether SilverJan read her 2nd PM? I mean't that she cannot be NK'd during halftime.
|
|
|
Post by lauriern on May 6, 2013 20:07:40 GMT -5
I can't read anymore. I have work to finish and Revolution is on tonight. I've gotten through page 6 on Day 1. A couple of things have made me go hmmmm...but nothing major jumping out at me. If I have time tomorrow, I'll forge on. For now, I'm going to: Vote Cookiesfor: I don't think 'she seems like a frustrated Townie' is a very compelling counter-argument. Ymmv. That's all you got out of my post? What about the part that discredits one of your main "reasons" for voting SilverJan? My first post was ignored by the three of you that were riding another player for 2 days. I posted it again and the only reply was yours in the quotebox above....... hinky......
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on May 6, 2013 20:30:56 GMT -5
Multiple people said the same thing prior to you, lauriem. None of those statements filled me with a belief that SilverJan is a Villager nor do I have a desire to move my vote.
Further, you're voting for me because you thought I was the only person who responded to your post? That is a great way to spur more comments on your posts. Please translate my behavior and whatevef 'hinky' is into an actual case, and perhaps I'll have more to say.
|
|
|
Post by Mahaloth on May 6, 2013 22:18:32 GMT -5
I can't read anymore. I have work to finish and Revolution is on tonight. I've gotten through page 6 on Day 1. A couple of things have made me go hmmmm...but nothing major jumping out at me. If I have time tomorrow, I'll forge on. For now, I'm going to: Vote CookiesBullshit. This reeks of scum laziness and just an easy vote, with excuses to justify lack of involvement. Nope, not on my watch. Vote lauriern
|
|
|
Post by crys on May 6, 2013 23:32:54 GMT -5
I can't read anymore. I have work to finish and Revolution is on tonight. I've gotten through page 6 on Day 1. A couple of things have made me go hmmmm...but nothing major jumping out at me. If I have time tomorrow, I'll forge on. For now, I'm going to: Vote Cookiesfor: I don't think 'she seems like a frustrated Townie' is a very compelling counter-argument. Ymmv. That's all you got out of my post? What about the part that discredits one of your main "reasons" for voting SilverJan? My first post was ignored by the three of you that were riding another player for 2 days. I posted it again and the only reply was yours in the quotebox above....... hinky...... You can't read more now because you are going to watch revolution? You are voting cookies for making a true statement??? Honestly, Laurie that is bad play. Had you said you weren't finished rereading, but you had things to do and would try back to get back to it tomorrow, I would have probably let that go. Your vote for cookies makes no sense, is lazy, and extremely opportunistic. If anything after reading this that brings my train of thought to the point that you KNOW Jan is town and you are trying to blend in with the townies because you KNOW you are a witch. All you have done today is point out things that others have already said by saying they are "hinky" and then make a completely pointless vote looks to me like trying to look like you are scum hunting without actually scum hunting. Vote Lauriern
|
|
|
Post by gnarlycharlie on May 6, 2013 23:39:59 GMT -5
Let me ask again if anyone has studied previous games with rules like these, and can give hints on how to proceed. I'm at a loss. (I Google and find a previous game by Chocolate Pi, but lack the patience to review it.) For me, the death reveals are key to scum-hunting. We do have some limited reveals possible in this game due to roles like Gravedigger. I don't know how to advise Gravedigger, and of course the Gravedigger might be Witch anyway. I do think limited self-reveals or conditional reveals might help, eventually -- we might end up with a giant logic puzzle and a caveat like "ten of these speakers are Witches or Spies and likely to be lying." In addition to Gravedigger and Priest, there are other investigative powers before Halftime. Consider Inquisitor and Investigator. Either of these powers would be powerful in the hands of a Witch but, ISTM, much less useful in the hands of a Villager. Yet, AFAICT, the 20 non-Holy players are assigned the 20 non-Holy roles purely at random, without regard to alignment. yes, no-reveals are unusual but i don't think that this variant of the game will survive if it weren't balanced. Swammerdami , you are right. Reveals are the most important thing. So let's get down to it, I'm the Gravedigger. And for the record, we are down to 6 witches, because Peeker was the Elder Witch Summoner. I do not get Reveals from NK's, so I cannot say what alignment or role Patricia is. that's nice to know but assuming your truthful, i don't know why you're claiming this early. is there a protective role out there (sans Archangel) that i missed? SilverJan made a fuss about mechanics, and about there possibly being a scum board. All I have is a Quicktopic to talk to myself to regarding what I am thinking, and notes. I assume that possibly the mod would have one for each set of Witches. Her not seeing her second PM, I can see that happening, because i want to say that she had a second account as scum, which is how we got her in that game. i thnj the second PM went to that account. SilverJan- do you have two account on here? I get more of a frustrated Townie from Jan than scum, but that's just me. i get this feeling too. i'm doing a reread before voting.
|
|
Colby11
Administrator
Creator of Hell's Kitchen Mafia
Posts: 1,193
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Colby11 on May 6, 2013 23:44:54 GMT -5
I'm claiming because of two reasons
A- the Witches will keep me alive because I am not one of the powers that can hurt them badly, like the Bishop. Let a player live that isn't a threat to you, other than their vote, and go after players who can really throw your game
B- Peek's reveal gives us at least a starting point with vote patterns. It has nailed scum in the past.
|
|
|
Post by gnarlycharlie on May 6, 2013 23:50:49 GMT -5
I can't read anymore. I have work to finish and Revolution is on tonight. I've gotten through page 6 on Day 1. A couple of things have made me go hmmmm...but nothing major jumping out at me. If I have time tomorrow, I'll forge on. For now, I'm going to: Vote CookiesBullshit. This reeks of scum laziness and just an easy vote, with excuses to justify lack of involvement. Nope, not on my watch. Vote lauriern
i guess my reread will follow after this. it may be lazy but i don't see any scumminess. it is still my belief that most scum will play in a way that doesn't bring attention to them. so laurie's post seems townie to me. Mahaloth's outrage seems fake. his vote feels opportunistic.
Vote Mahaloth
|
|
|
Post by Sai on May 6, 2013 23:55:10 GMT -5
There are a lot of people that I'd really like to hear more from. It's also interesting that everyone defending Silverjan says that this is how she plays as a townie rather than that this is how a townie plays. This makes sense in that it's the only way Silverjan is defensible, but I don't have a meta read of my own and I've seen two people say that this isn't necessarily exclusively town play (links here - psychopathgame.proboards.com/post/107033/thread and psychopathgame.proboards.com/post/107022/thread). The other thing that interests me is that the strongest votes on Silver are my strongest town reads (read Cookies's and Pleo's interactions with Peeker D1. They're so obviously not partners I shouldn't even need to spell it out). I'm going to keep my vote where it is for now. Sai is still on my radar. Maybe Sai is a Spy, and trying to gain Witch credit? Maybe he's a witch trying to gain Town credit? Maybe he's just curious town. I can go any of the three ways on him right now. I don't follow the first part here. Spies shouldn't be trying to get "Witch credit" since that leads to getting voted for and forced to claim, and forcing a Witch to claim D1 wouldn't give "witch credit" anyways. The fact that you not only mention it but raised it as the first option is really weird. I don't see why anyone other than a Witch would want to fish for spies, but if you WERE a witch you'd already know whether or not I was on your list. It's potentially a towntell just based on the last bit, but I also don't think it helps the town to talk about it. Spy / Holy hunting isn't a useful pass time. _______________ so I got cut while posting. Luckily I was rereading I like Crys's recent post a lot of a lots, because if Silver IS town, what he says is pretty spot-on. Laurie's vote is lazy and opportunistic. That said there are two things about it that are, well, weird - 1) You've also been rather focused on defending Silverjan, so voting for Laurie in part based on her having an unnaturally easy 'town read' of Silverjan is a little odd in its own right. 2) The plurality of the players, including (as mentioned above) the obvtowns of the game are voting for Silverjan. If Silver's town, why would Mafia!Laurie not sheep that for the free lynch? Her opposition to it makes her stand out far more than, say, this post - psychopathgame.proboards.com/post/107026/thread that expresses agreement rather passively or this post psychopathgame.proboards.com/post/107033/thread that expresses nothing whatsoever.
|
|
|
Post by Sai on May 6, 2013 23:56:40 GMT -5
Bullshit. This reeks of scum laziness and just an easy vote, with excuses to justify lack of involvement. Nope, not on my watch. Vote lauriern
i guess my reread will follow after this. it may be lazy but i don't see any scumminess. it is still my belief that most scum will play in a way that doesn't bring attention to them. so laurie's post seems townie to me. Mahaloth's outrage seems fake. his vote feels opportunistic.
Vote MahalothAnd I got cut again. I'd like to point out that this post votes based on a claim of an opportunistic vote based on a claim of an opportunistic vote based on a claim of an opportunistic vote. That's probably the 2nd best thing to happen this game.
|
|
|
Post by Sai on May 6, 2013 23:59:35 GMT -5
Also I wish Pleo would post more. Not because I need to read him, but because his posts make me happy.
|
|
|
Post by swammerdami on May 7, 2013 2:20:24 GMT -5
There is a very simple tell that some of us have picked up on that helps distinguish Basic Villagers from Others. This is a big part of how we caught Peekers. I've been hinting about it. Witch-like people keep asking me about it. I saw little reason to inform the Witches of details but may be forced to later toDay ... but not in this post.I know Cookies is not Basic Villager. I know Cookies is not Spy. Therefore I know she must be Holy or Witch. She knows this too, obviously, but rather than being helpful, as Villager would, she just asks for the tell to be explained, so that other Witches may avoid it in future. When I ask whether she's Holy or Witch, she responds "You first" -- despite that I'd just mentioned I am Basic Villager!Swammerdam, ... cite your smears ... To smear, I think, is to spread lie or rumor deliberately, but I'm fact-finding and hesitated to reveal what I know for fear of outing Holy. But if you're not a Witch, the Coven already knows you're Holy, or soon will. The important question isn't how I know you're Holy or Witch, but which is it? Holy? Or Witch? With four Holy, and perhaps six unknown Witches, there's a 60% a priori chance you're Witch, but that's just gambling.
However, I think you gave away that you're Witch!!
The big clue that makes me think you're Witch is the way you snuck in mention that you aren't Spy, and then pretended it was a fluke oversight. No one paying attention has forgotten the Spies. But Witches have a strong motive to sneak in hints that they're not Spies, so that the other Witch faction will sense they're Witches. Vote: ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies... I'm glad the discussion got more interesting while I was asleep. I think there's other hinkiness afoot, and eventually we may be able to sort it out. (I even wonder if the Player who introduced "hinkiness" to the discussion did it hinkily to half-cuddle me! )
|
|
|
Post by Silver Jan on May 7, 2013 2:49:21 GMT -5
Answering as I'm reading, what's a quick topic? reread your pm. If your pm was of the same basic format as my own there should be a link to a quick topic that we are never ever supposed to share. Got it, I thought it was just a link to use when you were dead. I must say that I am awful at this game, RL not too good. I know I am supposed to vote soon but I don't know where to turn. Sai seems to have taken over the game, another Pizza? I keep changing my mind about his/her alignment.
|
|
|
Post by Sai on May 7, 2013 3:10:52 GMT -5
Except Cookies never claimed to not be basic. Like, you had this idea in your head that she did, but it's nowhere in the thread. I looked for it.
|
|
|
Post by Sai on May 7, 2013 3:17:22 GMT -5
Sai seems to have taken over the game, another Pizza? I keep changing my mind about his/her alignment. I don't understand this reference, but I sincerely from the bottom of my heart wish that other people would be active. Like, I do everything I can, from specifically questioning people to linking other peoples' posts to generate discussion and half the players still are just flat out inactive. And the posts that I am seeing? Well, as I said in my last post, Swammer's been hell bent on this idea that Cookies claimed not-basic, which just didn't happen. Like, really, it's like we live in different threads. silver, do you have any thoughts on Crys's case on Laurie?
|
|
|
Post by guiri on May 7, 2013 3:25:50 GMT -5
Swammer has noticed something about Cookies, that he believes others have noticed, which outs her as non-basic, and anyone who hasn't understood or asks him about it must be a witch and that's why he won't explain what the tell is - because then the witches would stop doing whatever it is that Cookies did. I'm not seeing it, I'm guessing it's a reference to her early D1 comment about there being no vanillas.
I'd like him to explain exactly what he noticed, why it makes Cookies more likely to be non-basic that others, and that way maybe he'll convince others to join him. Even if we only catch one witch based on this tell, we'd be doing pretty good for D2, a bird in the hand and all that...
|
|
|
Post by swammerdami on May 7, 2013 3:53:12 GMT -5
I am a Basic Villager. The phrase "Basic Villager" occurs in the Subject line of my role PM. The same phrase is repeated, in bold face, early in the body of my role PM. Anyone who is a Basic Villager knows that he/she is a Basic Villager!Anyone who thinks Basic Villagers might not know that they are Basic Villagers has not seen a Basic Villager role PM.... I think it is tough to make a call between whether what Peeker said was a non-basic-townie tell or him not realizing that he was a basic townie because his role came with a power. Q.E.D.
|
|