|
Day Two
Nov 26, 2007 6:57:35 GMT -5
Post by episodeofblonde on Nov 26, 2007 6:57:35 GMT -5
Yeeow, sorry for the horrible formatting.
And welcome Tragic!
|
|
|
Day Two
Nov 26, 2007 7:04:33 GMT -5
Post by Tragic on Nov 26, 2007 7:04:33 GMT -5
-a "Spy"? ( )? Otherwise, good to have you back, Tragic, I know you're quite new to this game, and so I'm gonna give you some slack... but still. "Spy??" (>_O) Where did that come from? Ah.. bloody hell.. I happen to play in a series where the scum are known as 'Spies' and the lingo just simply slipped. (Probably because I was posting there just second before I started reading Day 2 and it was all still in my head.)
|
|
|
Day Two
Nov 26, 2007 7:21:05 GMT -5
Post by Captain Klutz on Nov 26, 2007 7:21:05 GMT -5
Summary of Kat's posts
Kats quotes in italics Day 1
#48 Comes in agaist the autolynch plan. Don't really have a rational argument to back me up, but it just doesn't sit right with me.
#57 Promises to do absolutely nothing if elected Governor.
#60 Make a random.org vote, Rugger for Governor.
#274 Reminds people bad ideas in previous games came from townies rather than scum. Was concerned that Pleo was still pushing his plan despite the various critiques.
Also didn't like NAF's lynch-the-lurkers plan, especially for Day 2 - For a Day One vote, unless and until other evidence is available, maybe, but by Day Two, there should be something he can use to base a vote on, even if it's a completely wrong vote. What's so bad about subjective voting anyway?
Wasn't happy with zuma's drunken posts: Also, I want to beat zuma mercilessly over the head for the multi-votes. Is that just me?
#343 Fluff like post regarding Pleo's plan.
#349 Following a reread, two issues jumped out (apart from Pleo and NAF):
Captain Klutz Seemed to be encouraging suspicions of zeriel for "the townies" and smudging Pleo for "us colonists" in the same post. I'd like to hear his thinking behind that.
and zuma For the voting and unvoting and revoting and sub-him request and no-sub-him request, which has been bugging me nonstop, and drives me to vote zuma.
Night 1 #35 Sorry to zuma
Day 2 #3 Bah!
My thoughts:
Nothing really of substance. She came out against both Pleo's and NAF's plans (but so did pretty well everyone else). The only other thing was asking Klutz to explain his suspicions of zeriel and Pleonast. No obvious reason for Kat to be targeted.
|
|
|
Day Two
Nov 26, 2007 7:46:21 GMT -5
Post by Tragic on Nov 26, 2007 7:46:21 GMT -5
... Nothing really of substance. She came out against both Pleo's and NAF's plans (but so did pretty well everyone else). The only other thing was asking Klutz to explain his suspicions of zeriel and Pleonast. No obvious reason for Kat to be targeted. If it still weren't so early in the game I'd worry over there being an anti-town powe that allows for Role investigations. Of course I also hate to rule this out simply becaues she was sacked on Night 2. If she hasn't done much to come out above the rest it makes me very nervous for the Role-bearers that she went so early.
|
|
|
Day Two
Nov 26, 2007 9:16:40 GMT -5
Post by storyteller0910 on Nov 26, 2007 9:16:40 GMT -5
Hi, all -
I have two substitutions to announce: the first has already begun to post - tragic, subbing for hazelnutcoffee. I haven't heard from Blaster Master since the game began, either, so I'm going to go ahead and sub him as well.
So, let's just imagine that Blaster Master has decided to undergo massive plastic surgery in honor of the town's first victim; please welcome back to the game zuma (Version 2.0).
I'll update the player list presently. Please continue your regularly scheduled discussion.
|
|
|
Day Two
Nov 26, 2007 9:50:51 GMT -5
Post by Tragic on Nov 26, 2007 9:50:51 GMT -5
Sorry - my bad. I was just eager to begin stronger than I did last time!
|
|
Death By Irony
FGM
The Former Mandate of Heaven/Current Gastard Night Mod
I'm my own mind-altering substance!
Posts: 109
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Nov 26, 2007 10:15:56 GMT -5
Post by Death By Irony on Nov 26, 2007 10:15:56 GMT -5
<snip> No obvious reason for Kat to be targeted. >.> Is that speculation on why somebody died? FoS Captain Klutz
|
|
Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Nov 26, 2007 10:23:29 GMT -5
Post by Santo Rugger on Nov 26, 2007 10:23:29 GMT -5
Depending on how things go, I may not have as much time as usual this week. People I'm suspicious of, in no particular order: Pleo zerial Cookies sinjin<snip> Governor- I actually believe the Governor SHOULD get to vote. He's a part of this community, and just as a player of the game, it's kinda fun to actually be allowed to PLAY. Just to get a role, and then be stuck to be used only in the case of tiebreakers kinda sucks Ok, I'm with you so far... Huh? You mean exactly like I've been doing?
|
|
Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Nov 26, 2007 10:24:05 GMT -5
Post by Santo Rugger on Nov 26, 2007 10:24:05 GMT -5
<snip> No obvious reason for Kat to be targeted. >.> Is that speculation on why somebody died? FoS Captain KlutzI think that's the antithesis of speculation.
|
|
|
Day Two
Nov 26, 2007 10:58:16 GMT -5
Post by Pollux Oil on Nov 26, 2007 10:58:16 GMT -5
Look who's back, back again...
Yeah anyway, so until proven otherwise, I assume normal scum faction, serial killer, and vig did the three kills. A vig kill on CatinaSuit would make the most sense since he had gathered a lot of heat near the end of yesterDay. Reading Klutz's post on Kat's posts, it didn't seem like Kat gave away anything that indicated she could be a power role, unless the scum picked up on something extremely subtle that I'm missing. Not going to try and speculate on anything further than that, though.
RIP the cat, kat, and monkey.
Seems like the Day is off to a relatively slow start. I'm still suspicious of mhaye, but I'm also suspicious of Diomedes since he's been acting a bit erratically. If I were pressed to vote now, it'd be between one of the two. However, I'll wait and see what Diomedes wanted to say at Night but didn't for fear of being killed before casting an actual vote.
|
|
|
Day Two
Nov 26, 2007 11:20:15 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Nov 26, 2007 11:20:15 GMT -5
Welcome back, zuma, and welcome Tragic.
Death by Irony: Would you care to explain why you find such speculation as a FOS-worthy offense? Or did I miss that somewhere?
|
|
|
Day Two
Nov 26, 2007 11:33:22 GMT -5
Post by Tragic on Nov 26, 2007 11:33:22 GMT -5
<snip> No obvious reason for Kat to be targeted. >.> Is that speculation on why somebody died? FoS Captain KlutzWell why do you think Kat was targetted? From what I've been able to read so far she didn't stand out in any way! It seemed like an odd target to me as well. If you have some insight would you kindly share it
|
|
|
Day Two
Nov 26, 2007 11:37:34 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on Nov 26, 2007 11:37:34 GMT -5
I believe he has stated that he can collect one sample per day for as long as he is alive, but he can only re-animate a sample in replicant form once. This is correct. I did collect a sample yesterDay Roosh and will continue to collect samples every Day until I create a replicant. At the moment I am not sure if letting the town know who I have collected samples from is a good idea or not. So until I see a compelling reason to share I am going to just sit on my choices.
|
|
|
Day Two
Nov 26, 2007 11:42:45 GMT -5
Post by Drain Bead on Nov 26, 2007 11:42:45 GMT -5
I'd say definitely do not tell. That information only helps scum. If they know who you have samples from, they'll simply kill people who have yet to be sampled. This is especially important if the samples expire after three days.
|
|
|
Day Two
Nov 26, 2007 11:45:37 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on Nov 26, 2007 11:45:37 GMT -5
>.> Is that speculation on why somebody died? FoS Captain KlutzWell why do you think Kat was targetted? From what I've been able to read so far she didn't stand out in any way! It seemed like an odd target to me as well. If you have some insight would you kindly share it My guess would be she was killed because she was a mod in the last game and therefore more dangerous then the average player. I would guess CIAS got vigged, because the scum killing him would be really very foolish as he was high on the suspicion list. Dunno why HM was killed, maybe someone thought she was a power role?
|
|
|
Day Two
Nov 26, 2007 12:10:34 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on Nov 26, 2007 12:10:34 GMT -5
I'm back and have time to do some analysis. Here's the final Day One post counts: - NAF1138 62
- Rugger, Santo 54
- ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies 40
- episodeofblonde 36
- Pleonast 35
- RoOsh 33
- CatInASuit 31 KILLED: Vanilla Colonist
- drainbead 25
- Diomedes 24
- hockeymonkey 20 KILLED: Vanilla Colonist
- zeriel 20
- mhaye 16
- atarus 14
- Parzival 11
- Death by Irony 11
- sinjin 11
- Captain Klutz 10
- kassia 10
- diggitcamara 6
- Kat 6 KILLED: Neuromancer (Pro-Town Investigator/Role Blocker)
- Yattara 4
- Hal Briston 1
Not sure how useful that info is, but it's something I'm thinking about it. Posted here in case anyone else might find it helpful. Roosh's vote-count summary is useful, so let me repeat it. Here is also the Final Vote Count for Day 1: zuma (6) - Cookies, Kat, Yattara, zeriel, Death by Irony, Sinjin Pleonast (5) - kassia, Santo Rugger, diggitcamara, Roosh, Diomedes CatinaSuit (4) - NAF1138, drainbead, hockey monkey, episodeofblonde zeriel (3) - CatinaSuit, Captain Klutz, mhaye Kat (2) - Pleonast, Parzival NAF1138 (1) - Hal Briston mhaye (1) - atarus kassia (1) - zumaNon-Voters: (2) BlasterMaster, HazelNutCoffee Known Townies bolded above. I want to make a first cut on who to vote for. I think scum are less likely to vote for Colonists on a Day One vote then Colonists are. Colonists have no real information to go on and so vote essentially randomly. Replicants may have a bias against voting for Colonists on Day One, since those voting to kill a Colonist are likely to come under suspicion. Voting for another scum is safer. Since we don't have any confirmed scum, I'll cast my first set of suspicion against those who did not vote for a now-confirmed Colonist: kassia, Santo Rugger, diggitcamara, Roosh, Diomedes, Captain Klutz, mhaye, Hal Briston, atarus. (I'll leave off the non-voters because they've been replaced for non-activity.) That's nine players, out of twenty-one remaining, about half. I'm inclined to toss off the top post-counts from Day One, since they tend to receive a lot of heat, especially on the first Day. From my list of nine, I'll remove Santo Rugger, Roosh, and Diomedes, who posted significantly more than the next highest on my list (24 vs 16). The players I'll focus on toDay are kassia, diggitcamara, Captain Klutz, mhaye, Hal Briston, and atarus. I'll go back and reread their posts, looking carefully with how they interacted with confirmed Colonists.
|
|
|
Day Two
Nov 26, 2007 12:44:58 GMT -5
Post by episodeofblonde on Nov 26, 2007 12:44:58 GMT -5
Like some others, I am wondering when Dio is going to share with us his MagicBag(tm).
NAF, I agree with db, there's no pro-Town reason at this point for you to reveal who you've sampled.
Re: Klutz's summary of Kat, etc. He seems to have done a good job there, so I won't repeat it for now. Would somebody like to do hockeymonkey?
I think speculating about why someone is killed is a bit different than noting there was no obvious reason why they were killed. It has been a scumtell in the past to muse 'now, why do we think so-and-so was killed?' which I haven't really seen anyone doing so far. We've been pondering what the 3 kills mean, but that's different.
Pleo, any reason why you are letting us know who you'll 'focus on'? Any scum in that group now might know to be on their guard...
|
|
|
Day Two
Nov 26, 2007 12:47:07 GMT -5
Post by episodeofblonde on Nov 26, 2007 12:47:07 GMT -5
Also, if someone wants to go thru zuma1.0 or CIAS' posts that might be worthwhile as well.
Welcome back zuma as well!
|
|
|
Day Two
Nov 26, 2007 12:51:34 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on Nov 26, 2007 12:51:34 GMT -5
Pleo, any reason why you are letting us know who you'll 'focus on'? Any scum in that group now might know to be on their guard... They can't change their posts from Day One. That's what I'll be rereading. I want to try vote informed and Day One is what we now have information about.
|
|
|
Day Two
Nov 26, 2007 13:09:34 GMT -5
Post by Hal Briston on Nov 26, 2007 13:09:34 GMT -5
Hi everyone, I'm back! So, anything interesting happen while I w....ummm...hey, what's with all the coffins?
Ah, crapperdoodle...not a good way to kick things off.
Ok, time for a whooole lotta back-reading.
|
|
|
Day Two
Nov 26, 2007 13:15:40 GMT -5
Post by diggitcamara on Nov 26, 2007 13:15:40 GMT -5
(snip) I want to make a first cut on who to vote for. I think scum are less likely to vote for Colonists on a Day One vote then Colonists are. Colonists have no real information to go on and so vote essentially randomly. (snip) Sorry, but that's simply not true. If scum really were less likely to vote for Colonists on a Day One vote, all we would have to do is find one scum and eliminate from the Day One voting list all those who (s)he voted against. There are ways to analyze Day One's voting patterns, but in my experience these patterns are seldom visible before Day Three. In other words: 1. You definitely should know better than that 2. You are (explicitly or implicitly) continuing on your "post-count-voting" 3. You have again earned a very strong FOS from me, Pleonast
|
|
|
Day Two
Nov 26, 2007 13:41:07 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on Nov 26, 2007 13:41:07 GMT -5
Sorry, but that's simply not true. If scum really were less likely to vote for Colonists on a Day One vote, all we would have to do is find one scum and eliminate from the Day One voting list all those who (s)he voted against. There are ways to analyze Day One's voting patterns, but in my experience these patterns are seldom visible before Day Three. 1. Do you have a reason behind saying "simply not true"? 2. We don't know any scum currently, so your suggestion is not possible in any case. 3. This is my Day Two voting tactic, making use of the information currently available. I will use a different tactic tomorrow. 4. Analyze how you like; I am not suggesting anyone else use this tactic. In other words: 1. You definitely should know better than that 2. You are (explicitly or implicitly) continuing on your "post-count-voting" 3. You have again earned a very strong FOS from me, PleonastI'm analyzing in the way I think best. My first cut was based on votes. My second was based on post-counts. My vote will be based on rereads of the posts. That is the information we have to work with and I'm making my thought process transparent. I don't see anything inherently wrong with this process.
|
|
Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Nov 26, 2007 13:56:38 GMT -5
Post by Santo Rugger on Nov 26, 2007 13:56:38 GMT -5
<snip> I'm analyzing in the way I think best. My first cut was based on votes. My second was based on post-counts. My vote will be based on rereads of the posts. That is the information we have to work with and I'm making my thought process transparent. I don't see anything inherently wrong with this process. I do. What if the person you find most scummy upon your reread isn't on your short list?
|
|
|
Day Two
Nov 26, 2007 14:44:26 GMT -5
Post by Drain Bead on Nov 26, 2007 14:44:26 GMT -5
Voting for another scum is safer. Since we don't have any confirmed scum, I'll cast my first set of suspicion against those who did not vote for a now-confirmed Colonist: kassia, Santo Rugger, diggitcamara, Roosh, Diomedes, Captain Klutz, mhaye, Hal Briston, atarus. This seems like faulty logic to me. I'm not sure if it's scummy logic, but it's sort of...well, here's my issue. Those people didn't vote for a confirmed colonist, but how do you know that any of them voted for scum? If voting for another scum is safer on Day One, you can't really analyze for that until you know that someone receiving votes on Day One was scum.
|
|
|
Day Two
Nov 26, 2007 14:52:35 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on Nov 26, 2007 14:52:35 GMT -5
What we know.
I know it is comming a tad late in the Day, but I have been unusually busy.
What we know (facts): 1. Above all, this is still just mafia. Everything else is here to confuse (entertain) us. 2. Color commentary counts. 3. At least 2 sides, colonists and replicants 4. It was important to have exactly 25 players at the start of the game. 5. We must elect a Governor on any Day that starts without one. 6. There is a group of mason type players 7. Some players have Day actions. 8. At least 3 factions with kill abilities at least one shot Night Kill abilities 9. Replicants are resistant to Night kills. 10. One of the pro -town power roles was a combo investigator/role blocker 11. 3 vanilla town and 1 power role are dead.
What we suspect (very probable): 1. A Blade Runner is in the game. Probably a cop, maybe a vig. MAYBE a cop vig combo. (I think that the combo is least likely because that is an insanely powerful role, but the color would indicate otherwise) 2. 4-6 mafia members. Some with power roles. I think 5 members total is most likely. 3. Probably third faction with a separate win condition from Colonists/replicants 4. Day killer of some sort. Possibly a Crazy Townie
Story wanna tell us what kind of investigator Kat was?
|
|
|
Day Two
Nov 26, 2007 15:08:54 GMT -5
Post by storyteller0910 on Nov 26, 2007 15:08:54 GMT -5
Story wanna tell us what kind of investigator Kat was? Kat had a menu of six different abilities; she was permitted to use one per Night, but could use each only once per game.
|
|
|
Day Two
Nov 26, 2007 15:31:21 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Nov 26, 2007 15:31:21 GMT -5
What we know. I know it is comming a tad late in the Day, but I have been unusually busy. What we know (facts): <snip> 7. Some players have Day actions. 8. At least 3 factions with kill abilities at least one shot Night Kill abilities 9. Replicants are resistant to Night kills. </snip> I need to re-read story's posts with respect to item #7, but I believe that #7 and #9 were stipulated in your alleged role PM (#7 is inferred by Pleo's claim as well, though his alleged day action would only potentially occur after he dies), which does _not_ mean they should be considered as "fact" by any "we". The same holds for item #8. There are precedents for multiple night kills coming from only one faction. You just created/moderated a game that had the potential for the scum alone killing 3 people in one night. It does not sit well wiht me that you would try to play such things off as "facts".
|
|
|
Day Two
Nov 26, 2007 15:52:03 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on Nov 26, 2007 15:52:03 GMT -5
My analysis of Day One posts by players on my short list. I'll summarize what I feel the important points each player has made and give what I feel is the suspiciousness of them. kassia, 10 posts - 49: Claims newbie status. (0)
- 90: Votes randomly for Governor. (+1)
- 296: Accuses me of preventing the development of alternatives, yet has no ideas herself. (+1)
- 306: Complains about that too much baggage and knowledge from previous games is making it hard for her. (-1)
- 440: Willing to vote for me even if I'm telling the truth because she doesn't think the role is useful. (+1)
Total +2. diggitcamara, 6 posts - 24: Disagreement with me about effectiveness of my Governor plan. (0)
- 31: Disagreement with me about time available for deciding electrocution. (+1)
- 96: Votes Rugger for Governor because of alignments in previous games (or, if he's kidding, no discernible reason). (+1)
- 384: Votes for me because he doesn't believe my role claim. (0)
Total +2. Captain Klutz, 10 posts - 204: Suspicious of zeriel and myself because of how we refer to Colonists. (+1)
- 245: Critique of NAF's voting tactic. (-1)
- 247: Brings up possibility of pro-Colonist Replicants based on reading of color text. (-1)
- 377: Votes for zeriel because of grammar suspicions. (0)
Total -1. mhaye, 16 posts - 9: Dislikes my Governor plan. (0)
- 130: Supports Rugger's push for me to be Governor. Dislikes NAF's voting tactic. (+1)
- 285: Shows misunderstanding of my Governor tactic (point iii). Shows misunderstanding of NAF's voting tactic (doesn't advocate wide use). (+2)
- 316: Votes zeriel for grammar and advocates electrocuting Cat if zeriel turns out scum. (+1)
- 340: Understands my Governor vote. (-1)
Total +3. Hal Briston, 1 post - 101: Calls NAF's voting tactic scummy because it's more likely to kill a Colonist. Votes for NAF. (0)
Total 0. atarus, 14 posts - 15: Doesn't like my Governor tactic. Predicts long-lasting argument that helps scum. (-1)
- 27: Modifies my Governor tactic to remove WIFOM without costing time. (-1)
- 151: Votes Rugger for Governor because of alignments in past games. (+1)
- 228: Warns about "Bad Idea Trap". (-1)
- 231: Slightly suspicious of me because I first expressed my anti-Governor opinions before the game started. (+1)
- Votes mhaye because of his arguments against me. (0)
- 439: Defends me with reasoning. (-1)
- 461, 471: Speaks against over-zealous lynch-mob against verbal players. (-1)
- 511: Suspicious of those suggesting recruitment is a possibility. (-1)
Total -4. I feel mhaye is most suspicious of the players on my short list. Thus, I vote mhayefor electrocution. I may change my vote if further information comes to light.
|
|
Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day Two
Nov 26, 2007 15:57:07 GMT -5
Post by Santo Rugger on Nov 26, 2007 15:57:07 GMT -5
Vote Pleonast
|
|
|
Day Two
Nov 26, 2007 16:03:44 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on Nov 26, 2007 16:03:44 GMT -5
What if the person you find most scummy upon your reread isn't on your short list? I only have time to reread a few players, the ones on my short list. This seems like faulty logic to me. I'm not sure if it's scummy logic, but it's sort of...well, here's my issue. Those people didn't vote for a confirmed colonist, but how do you know that any of them voted for scum? If voting for another scum is safer on Day One, you can't really analyze for that until you know that someone receiving votes on Day One was scum. I believe that scum are less likely to vote for Colonists on Day One and Colonists more likely. Thus, those who didn't vote for a Colonist are more likely to be scum. I don't know the alignment of all the vote-receivers, but making use of what I do know lets me improve my odds. I need to re-read story's posts with respect to item #7, but I believe that #7 and #9 were stipulated in your alleged role PM (#7 is inferred by Pleo's claim as well, though his alleged day action would only potentially occur after he dies), which does _not_ mean they should be considered as "fact" by any "we". You misunderstand my role. My power is a Night power. I plant the bomb at Night. I renew the timer at Night. It's at Night that it will explode if I do not.
|
|