Okay, let's take it from the top, shall we?
Santo- random votes koldanar. -My thoughts. :shrug: it's Day one. Not a fan of random voting, but meh. It's the very 2nd freaking post. I assume it'll be changed. And it's amusing to me.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
StoryTeller's Plan
At first glance. I'm suspicious of it.
But it's a big key thing. So i'll elaborate i guess. But i'll sum it all up.
In my mind, at first I thought you were making this plan because it SOUNDS Townie, "oh it's to make sure that we always meet our deadline!" sorta dealie. But... it's never really been a problem in our prior games here. We are a bloodthirsty crowd, and No lynches are fairly rare, they have happened, but mostly are unpopular.
So i disliked your bringing up an idea that really to me, didn't seem like an issue because it's never been an issue in the past. It just gives you "townie cred" because it sounds like a good idea, but it's really of no purpose. So initially I
FOS Storyteller for this distraction in my book.
However, if we had to go with a plan, yours (after further review) is the least damaging. So
I don't mind going along with Story's plan, but I'm suspicious of you bringing it up in the first place if that makes sense. As i don't know if your intentions are so pure for WHY you brought it up.
--The other thing I was suspicious of: The plan always scum to hide their votes- Hawk's even more so I feel.
This game we're dealing NOT With a single organized Scum GROUP, but 3 independent groups of 2 people.
Basically. There is NOT single Scum Group like old. The idea of looking in voting patterns and such, is NOT going to work this time. So, if you had ever stated that was a reason for this voting plan-
"To prevent manipulation by scum" that would have given me a hair trigger vote for you, story. Because in this game, we will not be seeing that on a grand scale.
*We're basically dealing with trying to find 3 Serial Killers, people.*
We've got to adopt that sort of mentality. Trying to look for "voting groups of scum" will not work, because there's only 2 people in each group, so "vote manipulation" kinda goes out the window. The only way it can be done, is on smaller scale of 1-2 votes. So in ties and such if a certain person is voted, we should check that out. However as for hiding votes, it can be done regardless of either
Storyteller or
Hawkeye's methods of voting. Just a warning.
That's why I prefer
Story's method, as it's the least "invasive' of the two methods. I would just prefer getting a majority to vote, and simply sticking with that rather than giving people a forced decision between 2 people. That gives a killing group an out. Each scum member could simply vote for one of the two people each time, and force the townies to be the ones to make the Hammering decision.
--The point of the game is to FIND SCUM. Not to waste time worrying about HOW to vote. This sort of bureaucratic junk isn't really needed in my opinion because it's not really helping us find scum (Hence the
Fos on Storyteller). We've been able to lynch SOMEone every time in Blade runner and in Firefly too, i don't foresee us not being able to lynch someone this game either. So i think we should try to focus on FINDING SCUM rather than trying to think about which plan is better or best, because that's just cutting into time (and especially when this issue gets raised and re-raised later on as the game continues, because I know this crap will stick around....)
Anyways, lets move on?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hawkeye's First Post: So I think the first question to deal with (or at least the one that first comes to mind) is how to handle role claims. My initial thought is to shoot first and ask questions later. S
ince none of the roles are verifiable and they lose affect after being claimed, we just are going to get a bunch of people claiming I have a role. Assuming no regular town member claims a power role, we have 11 individuals who would claim power roles to protect themselves (if we didn't lynch power role claims). 6 of the 11 are scum so the odds are slightly in our favor.
Given none of the town roles are especially powerful besides the Full Doctor, I think it worth the risk. Counter arguments?
A TERRIBLE first post in my opinion.
Two huge problems with it:
1. The roles ARE Verifiable. Verily so- by Death, and by the 50% Scum loss if they counterclaim method. Anyone who claims and is lying, should be counterclaimed. This leaves a 50-50 between scum and the true role. And in this game since the scum groups are in 2's, that means a loss of 1 scum is losing 50% of your TEAM. That's HUGE.
So a role claim is QUITE Verifiable- as in the absence of a counterclaim, treat the role as a certified townie.
2. The roles are not powerful? Really? I think they can be QUITE helpful simply by the fact that they are easily proven citizens in an open game. Having Proven Citizens is VERY VERY helpful for the Town, one because it cuts down on the pool of suspects, and two it forces the Scum to have to waste a night kill to kill them rather than the ability of trying to get them lynched.
Your whole quick dismissal of every power role in the game but the doctor was kinda suspicious to me. I'll give you a
FoS Hawkeye for now and keep you on notice.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hawkeye's 2nd post: he creates the counterproposal to Story's method.
I'll come back to this stuff under the storyteller discussion. But I will ask this:
You stated this:
"I think it best to give people the option of choosing between two candidates, rather then just one. Then individuals can at least avoid voting for someone that they really don't like the case for." in that post.
So
hawkeye: Why [other than your Out of game example] do you feel this is a problem?
Can't a person try to vote for who they liked prior to the Deadline, and try to sway others to do the same?
In other words, how is your plan UNIQUE From
Storyteller's?
I just see it as giving people an extra Day to play around with a forced vote between 2 candidates, so clarifications would be nice.
---I noticed that
Story brings this up in his
post 11. He clarifies some of the problems I see in your plan. Your rebuttal, sir?
--Your reply to
ST in
Post 16- I disliked it. You call for the idea of 2 votes then, 1 to find 2 candidates, and then 1 to find 1.
That's just stupid. I find endless bureaucracy stupid, and the more complicated the plans are the less likely they are to be implemented. And all smart scum have to do is be a good follower and just follow the rules and never come under suspicion. So basically your idea comes off then as being: "Well, we'll do 2 people first. And THEN We'll just use
Storyteller's idea to finish off".
-In the past, the majority thing has not really been a problem ever. There were always more people who wanted to see a lynch than a no-lynch.
That's why I view
Story's idea as the lesser of two evils currently, and don't really see the point of your amendments.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
Dio- randomvotes
HEP ? Unless he has a reason.
:shrug: again just noted.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hawkeye random votes
Roosh.
:shrug: alrighty.... any Reasoning yet, or will this be the post that you find your evidence in?
****On Looking back****
You voted me because I called you
Hawkeyepoop and the nickname caught on.
Fair enough. A valid first day vote. Same warning to you then that I give
Kat later in this post.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I just assumed that anybody that has any sort of power role can't even say "I have a role" because that constitutes being able to be bolt-zapped by Zeus (hey, he could be Chinese, right?) and lose their powers.
When I read it, I saw it like the BR of last game, they can't claim their OWN role, but they could make up something if they wanted.
However its really moot, as simply just CLAIMING and being unclaimed would create the idea of a "semi-Verifiable" Townie. And those are quite useful to us anyways even if they are just townies. It's like the power roles are in a Mason group of 1 in this game basically.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Story's post 19.The whole vig discussion was moot. As it seems the vig can just choose not to kill.
But a
FOS Storyteller because this plan would help BOTH Scum and Town, and either would propose such an idea under the premise that it looks like a "pro-town" idea. But it was proven moot later, but still. You brought it up, so bad you, bad!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
We may have similar problems with the scum in this game, since they're divided into factions. Story's idea will at least make it a little easier to see who was voting for a person because they wanted to, and who was voting for them because they had to.
I'm going to abstain from random voting for the time being--I want to see how the first few pages play out before I place a vote.
Very good point for
Story's plan vs.
Hawk's plan.
~~~~~~~~~~~
*
NAF Votes (See bottom of post) 1.21
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Pleonast posts some Math. (1.28) and leaves. (1.30)
-Delightful.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Kat votes
SRugger 1.34 for tradition's sake.
--Again it's Day one, so fine. But I expect a reasoned vote to be made at the end of the Day. If this is her final vote when someone else is lynched, then a
FOS her way.
~~~~~~~~~~
1.35
Cookies votes
NAF for metagaming.
~~~~~~~~~
Tragic- You won a game as Scum last time. This is your 3rd game. I think you can stop hiding behind the "I'm new to this type of game on these boards". Maybe if you didn't win last time. But you WON a GAME. You can't call yourself a newbie anymore, the shell is broken and you are marked woman. Hell. You've won more games than poor ol'
NAF here in the games you've played out of. ;D
~~~~~~~~~
Nesta- makes 2 very good back to back posts. (40 and 41)
on why not to no-lynch and on why the power roles are useful.
That's good posting right there. Not in volume, but in content.
~~~~~~~~~~
1.42
Atarus. Your tone this game seems different.
You're on notice. Not a FoS in my book. Just a huh. I've got my Eye on You!
(O_<) (For tradition's sake
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1.44:
Haweyeop's HUGE Post of the Day:
I thought I saw a scum slip in this post. But here it is:1.44:
Haweyeop's HUGE Post of the Day:
Well I have no problem saying I'm town in the other game,
so you are finding my tone different. I don't know that you are wrong on that, but I think your conclusion is flawed.
:coughs:
I pasted it at the bottom cuz it's important.
I voted for Hawkeye because of this post actually.
~~~~~~~~~
Then the rest is alot of posts on Voting between strategies.
Except for
1.53 by
NAF. Which is another critical post.
So i'll just combine it with my
NAF Thoughts down below:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
*Re: NAF-He metagame votes for
Hawkeye based on
HEP's "Tone". This whole lump of stuff is interesting.
Hawk's tone IS very different from his other game. However, I personally as a player dislike using out of game information that is CURRENT. I try to view each currently played game as its own little microcosm, mainly out of fair play to both sides. I really just felt icky with this whole issue, as I can see both sides to this issue, but just as a player, I can't support this sort of Meta-gaming.
1.53: by
NAF.
Re: cookies and her vote for meMy argument may have not been compelling, but that isn't the same as it seeming scummy.
Let me point out that meta gaming is almost always used by town. Scum has little need to meta game. In this game it might be different, what with competing factions, but if you are town your only objection to meta gaming should really be that it is rather unfair to the other players.
~snip~
Your vote strikes me as opportunistic.
If you are town...knock it off. In this game more then in many others, town doing scummy shit like that is going to lose us the game. Town doing scummy shit lost us the game in Bladerunner, and almost lost the town the game in Firefly.
I am not going to vote for you right now, mostly because I have a hard time reading you. And think that your scummy vote is less scummy, for now,
then hawk's tone. Which continues to strike me as off.
I've underlined the parts that strike me as odd:
1. The meta-gaming always been by Town. "Scum never Meta-game."
--I dislike these sorts of statements. They strike me as "Scum have never done X. That doesn't automatically make it Townie. Hell, the way we avoided suspicion in Blade Runner was simple: "Scum haven't Done X" so all the Scum did that game were the things that scum were thought NOT to do. Just reminding the Town that "Scum have never done X" is generally unhelpful in my book and tend to dislike that sorta thing.
2. "If you are Town, knock it off" -This to me feels like a threat. Why aren't you just gonna VOTE for her? You just tell her to knock it off, and say that her vote is SCUMMY. Yet,
Hawk's Tone is
SCUMMIER.
Both of these don't add up in my book. Threatening someone for voting for you? And then pulling away from it and sticking with your initial vote without revealing WHY you're voting for them?
Honestly... it's just... icky.
I was going to vote you actually, you were my #1 suspect before I spotted the
Hawkeye slip. But consider yourself
HEAVILY FoSed NAF.
These things don't make sense, and look scummy to me:
1. You vote for someone with a Meta-game vote (this is just icky, not scummy, however it's just not cool based on what you did next).
2. You then state/imply that "only Townies really meta-game". Therefore... hmmm... if you were metagaming. Oh! I understand now,
NAF!
Most uncool, buddy.3. You imply that if
Cookies is town she should not vote you, and that her vote is scummy for currently voting for you.
4. Yet,
Cookies Scumminess is LESS than the scumminess of the Meta-gaming of
Hawkie, and so you're not going to vote for her.
So my list of suspicions:1. Hawkeye
2. NAF
3. Storyteller.
On Notice:4. Atarus
O_<5. Kat, and anyone else who random voted early but stay with it at the end.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hawkeye, I'm waiting to hear from you eagerly about "what you meant" by the sentence below. Because I see it as a scum slip.
I'll repost that whole section here, as I think it's kinda important.
1.44:
Haweyeop's HUGE Post of the Day:
Well I have no problem saying I'm town in the other game, so you
are finding my tone different. I don't know that you are wrong on that, but I think your conclusion is flawed.
:coughs:
Um. So...
NAF vote for you with an unknown reason- because of your tone. It's different in that game than this one. Or its not. We don't know. Ooooh (Bad
NAF! Bad!)
-So you seem to agree that it [the tone] IS different.
And then state in that game you're town.
Are you implying that you're
NOT town in this game?
(
)
I just find your word choices interesting. You're town in
other game. but you acknowledge thusly Your Tone is different in this game. (
)
I'm reading that as You're town in the other game. But your tone is different in this game... because... you're NOT Town??
Did you just not mean to say this and quickly typed it out not realizing what you just said there? What the heck are you saying there, dude? Because this is a fucking HUGE slip in my book, dude.
Do you want to clarify yourself?Until you do... I'm going to have to
Vote HawkEye. for being the scummiest person on this thing.