|
Post by storyteller0910 on Feb 29, 2008 16:30:47 GMT -5
What Cookies said.
OK, folks, I have a show opening tonight, so I'm headed to the theatre and will probably not post again until Sunday morning. One last thought for the evening:
I think that this game is exceedingly difficult, not just for the town, but for the scum, as well. My reading of the situation suggests that the most likely outcome of this game may well be a draw. If we mislynch, and then the scum pick us off such that they are left alone with a single townie, the result will be a draw (if a single townie ends up with two scum, why should he/she cast a vote at all? Better to end the game in a draw than in a scum win).
Accordingly, here's my open letter to the scum, which they will probably ignore:
Dear Scum -
Consider not killing at Night. If we, collectively, can't get our act together during the Day, a conscious decision on the part of the scum to forgo Night kills might be the only thing that prevents a draw. If this sounds self-serving, that's because it is. It increases the chances that the town will win the game. It also increases the chances of the scum winning the game. In a certain weird, twisted way, to quote my daughter's new favorite movie, we're all in this together.
|
|
|
Post by sachertorte on Feb 29, 2008 16:40:29 GMT -5
1 - Peasant Smurf (Cookies) 3 - Hal Briston (Santo Rugger, Pleonast, nesta) 1 - Santo Rugger (Hal Briston)
|
|
Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Santo Rugger on Feb 29, 2008 18:30:30 GMT -5
<snip> how do you propose accurately sifting out the scum from the peasants and docs in such a scenario? I hadn't really thought that through all the way yet, I figured we'd burn that bridge when we get to it. However, I think if everybody posts their Lists Today and Tomorrow, we should be able to see how the Lists have changed. And, as I've mentioned before, it's in scum's best interests to be honest with their lists, otherwise they won't be able to get other scum lynched. It will be more subtle than just they lists, I'm sure the three remaining scum aren't dumb, but I think it's a tool we can use to help us accurately sift them out. I don't think it'll be a problem sifting out the docs, though, because if it's not the two people I think they are, then I give up.
|
|
|
Post by Hal Briston on Feb 29, 2008 19:57:37 GMT -5
Ok, since I've A) reread the entirety of the game (and didn't skim this time), and B) I'll be away much of the weekend, time to get this out there now.
Although Rugger is mischaracterizing this as a "poor me" play, and has been way off base about me in just about every way, I'm rethinking him being scum. Since this'll likely be my last in-game post for this one, I'm throwing out everything previous and going with my gut. We'll start with:
Unvote Rugger
Next, my own suspicion list. As much as I've been talking about Pleo, my reread has convinced me he's probably what he's non-claimed to be. However, I'm doing a 180 on my previous post on storyteller. I'm thinking he's played a very smart, very concise game, but he's still on the wrong side. From top to bottom:
storyteller Smurf Cookies Rugger nesta mhaye Pleo
So...Vote storyteller
Happy lynching!
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on Mar 1, 2008 2:09:17 GMT -5
Wow. OK. That was... singularly unhelpful, as it comes equipped with absolutely no reasoning whatsoever. Congratulations, Hal, on making a vote that is profoundly unlikely to actually affect the outcome of the Day. I don't think it's scummy, per se - just unhelpful. Let me ask you a question, Hal. If I'm scum, what's my endgame, exactly? I'd have none. If I am scum, my inherent trustworthiness will ultimately be revealed as a scam - there'd be nothing I could do to prevent this. Then I'd be lynched, and lose the game. Think it through, and ask yourself - if I've played a "very smart, very concise" game, why I'd put myself in such a position: a position where winning is impossible and losing is inevitable.
For my part, I'm going to hold off on a vote until tomorrow. A bit of extra thought has pushed mhaye slightly above Hal on the suspicion list, but really my vote might go anywhere at this point.
I would like some clarification from the mods, though, on the likely course of action regarding Peasant Smurf. If he doesn't respond by the end of toDay, will he be mod-killed? Substituted? Left in the game?
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on Mar 1, 2008 2:14:07 GMT -5
You know, the more I think about this, the more angry it's making me. Hal's vote for me makes no sense whatsoever, whether he is scum or town. If this is the way this game is going to go down, we're dead in the water.
|
|
Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Santo Rugger on Mar 1, 2008 3:06:20 GMT -5
story, why do you keep saying you're innately trustworty?
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 1, 2008 4:26:36 GMT -5
story's trustworthiness (or worthlessness ;D) aside, I am also disappointed in the lack of creamy center to Hal's vote. It is as if he is phoning this game in, and I know sometimes that it cannot be helped. But to use the cliche...that post makes him even more a part of the problem and less of a part of the solution.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 1, 2008 4:44:44 GMT -5
Some thoughts about our lists...
I'm going to go out on a limb and talk about changes that may or may not show up, on the lists of those of us who survive the Today and the coming Night. Another reservation I have about some things that Rugger has said, is that changes to any given list have a pretty good chance of coming about due to a Peasant or Doc simply changing their minds, especially with whatever insight is brought by however many deaths occur between now and the next lists. They aren't necessarily going to change only in the case of scum jockeying for the end game, and any one of the scummies who presents a list or lists could get lucky and manage to select a list that doesn't have to change in order to maximize their chances of winning.
Inevitably some of you are going to think that perhaps I'm covering my own ass in case my list changes. Not much I can do about that. But the truth of the matter is that I am wary of the scum factions somehow using these lists as a fulcrum for leveraging their own selfish win condition(s).
I'm torn between being thankful that Rugger got some actual information on the table from a lot of people, and being paranoid about the Town having them used against our best interests, whether Rugger is directly or indirectly responsible for how the lists might be used.
|
|
Merestil Haye
FGM
Grudge Keeper
[on:Slumming it in the Middle-Earth][of:In the halls of Manw
Posts: 1,077
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Merestil Haye on Mar 1, 2008 9:24:14 GMT -5
DarkCookies, I think the reasons behind the changes will be as informative (if not more so) than the changes themselves.
Peasant Smurf is still high on my list, because frankly he's been flying very low. I know he had a busy period at work on Day Two. I'm hoping that it's the same sort of problem now, although I do wish he'd found time to tell us if that is the case.
I seriously considered voting for Hal last night. The reason I did not was that it would push Hal to the verge of the drop with one more vote needed to doom him, and I don't want to leave an opening for the discussion to be truncated.
We don't have an option to no lynch - in fact, I think that although we're not technically at LyLo (because even in the worst case of lynching a Zhang Today we can still construct scenarios which allow us three more lynches) the overwhelming likelihood is that without the cooperation of the factions, we're not going to get three more Days after this one. So in practice, we have to kill Today.
While it means I'll be shifting voting intention to ensure a lynch, it also means I'm going to take as long as possible to decide who to lynch. Hence don't expect an actual vote from me until this evening at the earliest.
|
|
Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Santo Rugger on Mar 1, 2008 10:57:19 GMT -5
<snip>I'm torn between being thankful that Rugger got some actual information on the table from a lot of people, and being paranoid about the Town having them used against our best interests, whether Rugger is directly or indirectly responsible for how the lists might be used. To answer the second part of this, I'll be dead soon enough, and then everybody will see my intentions were good. To answer the first part, I'm crossing my fingers that when/if the lists start to be used against our best interests, we'll be able to spot it somehow... but like I said, I think we'll have to wait to burn that bridge until we cross it.
|
|
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:
|
Post by Death By Irony on Mar 1, 2008 12:37:05 GMT -5
A voice booms from the heavens:
"Peasant Smurf is in the process of being replaced. Hopefully the issue will be resolved by the end of this weekend."
|
|
|
Post by Idle Thoughts on Mar 1, 2008 12:59:41 GMT -5
Can this day get any better/more dramatic? *eats popcorn*
|
|
|
Post by Pleonast on Mar 1, 2008 17:53:59 GMT -5
Yay, a moment to pop in.
Replace Smurf? I can't see how that's fair, no matter what team he's on.
While announcing our suspicion lists does help scum a little, it helps the rest of us get an idea of what the consensus is. Even if each of us is only half right about who's scum, the true scum will eventually bubble to the top. And the list forces the scum to make a statement we can hold them too. Altogether, the lists help us more than hurt.
I will be extremely surprised if Hal is not scum. And I'm still favoring Rugger and Smurf as the other two. But I won't rule out anyone else and will be looking for actions that show non-Town knowledge or motivation.
|
|
Merestil Haye
FGM
Grudge Keeper
[on:Slumming it in the Middle-Earth][of:In the halls of Manw
Posts: 1,077
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Merestil Haye on Mar 2, 2008 11:10:26 GMT -5
I finally finished the reread of Nesta and Storyteller's posts last night; it took longer (but doesn't everything?). It made me more suspicious of Storyteller and Santo Rugger, and with slightly raised suspicion of Nesta. Firstly, why did reading the posts of two players make me more suspicious of a third? The answer is found in D4.29. I don't know how Santo Rugger can say this about Nesta, since he spent most of Day 3 arguing that DarkCookies was a goon based on a reading of her reaction to the Day 2 Dawn post and what he saw as excessive care for how she was perceived in Day 1. That was a smear on Nesta. That doesn't mean it proves Nesta is a villager; it means that Santo Rugger put an unfair spin on Nesta's posts. That's enough for me to elevate my suspicion level of him slightly. Moving on to Nesta, while I found some of his posts suspicious in retrospect, I didn't find a smoking gun. The thing that pinged me about Nesta's posts was an apparent contradiction between two statements made on Day 1. Firstly in post D1.311, Nesta asserts that the aim of the villagers 1 was to find and lynch the six goons, and that the aim of the goons was to kill one of the fourteen villagers. So he's arguing here that the goons aren't (at this stage) interested at lynching other goons. Whereas in post D1.338 he says that he's been assuming the goons will try to lynch the enemy factions just like the villagers are. Why, then, did he say the goons are only trying to kill villagers in D1.311? They don't mesh well. To me, that's enough to keep him where he is in my list. Now we come to Storyteller. Why do I think he's more suspicious now than I did before? The issue centres around the aims of the goons as they've evolved in this game. In the early part of the game the main difference between the villagers and the goons is that the villagers are mainly interested in identifying goons to lynch them. The goons, on the other hand, are looking for goons from other factions to expose and get killed and at the same time identify village power roles to kill or neutralise. As the game evolved (across Nights 2 and 3) the goons lost the ability to eliminate enemy goons and, at the same time, their ally in the village that might, if steered properly, eliminate one of the factions for them. Now, they have to rely on lynches to win so they have to try and steer the players toward lynches of those they know or believe to be enemy goons. So how does this relate to Storyteller? Obviously, it means looking at his pursuit of Roosh, particularly on Day 2. When Storyteller went after Roosh, goons could hope to kill off one member each of a faction, so if Roosh were a goon, there were ways of dealing with him that didn't involve pushing for a lynch. A Nightkill, for example. So a goon didn't have to push for a lynch of a suspected enemy goon then. If Roosh were what he had hinted he was, was that any different for the goons? For two factions, exposing Roosh could actively hurt them. A confirmed villager reduces the pool of players the goons can hide in. This might not be terribly significant on Day 2, but why take the chance? For the Shu, neutralising the Zhang who could block their kills was important; but if Storyteller's thesis was correct, that had already happened. (Storyteller's argument was that, since Pleo stated the Voice of Heaven had told him such claims break one of two rules and since Roosh said it broke neither, one was lying and he thought Roosh was more likely to be. If that was correct, Roosh had already lost his powers). Thus there wasn't a lot of point for Storyteller to pursue Roosh if he was any sort of goon. If he were a villager, on the other hand, his motivation becomes clear; to stop the other power roles from thinking that they could safely follow Roosh's example and keep their powers. So, if I've just spent half a page proving that Storyteller was acting in the town's interests here, why does it make me more suspicious of him? Consider Storyteller's philosophy when playing scum. As we know from M2 (as far as I can tell the only example to date), he believes that the scum should behave like townies except when utterly necessary to advance their agenda. This game could be designed for that style of play. For the first 2-3 days a goon could forget about his role during the day and just play as if they were a peasant. From Day 3 though, the goons have had to consider how to steer lynches to get their rivals killed. So when Today he chose a period of the game to highlight how his play was so trustworthy, why did he choose Day 2, knowing as he does that good play by goons should be indistinguishable from good villager's play? Since his record can be explained either by his being a villager or a goon, I refuse to treat him as someone who should be fully trusted. Consequently my revised list of suspicion is Peasant Smurf Hal Briston, Nesta, Santo Rugger Dark Cookies, Storyteller Pleonast At this stage I am not going to vote for PS. If he is a goon, hopefully his replacement will have time to make an impact before Dusk sets, and allow us a better handle on the role PS currently holds. Neither am I going to vote for Hal or Nesta right now. The vote can wait until later tonight. While replacement of PS at this stage might not seem fair, so long as he is counted as in the game, he affects the number required to achieve a lynch while his inactivity reduces the ability to get the number of votes. The alternative is modkilling, but is that fair either? If PS is in fact a goon then modkilling him punishes his partner (who did nothing wrong) whereas if he gets modkilled before Dusk that changes the calculus of forces and cause the village to lose. At least this way we have a chance of getting a handle on the player. 1 Pleonast, right now I hate you. You've given me the idea of a possible Mafia game. I didn't want this monkey riding my back as well.
|
|
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:
|
Post by Death By Irony on Mar 2, 2008 11:23:01 GMT -5
A Voice Booms from the Heavens:
"Peasant Smurf has been replaced by Piratepete. His profile has been updated to distinguish him from his previous role as tragic's replacement. Please give him a rousing round of applause for being such a good sport."
|
|
|
Post by nesta on Mar 2, 2008 13:47:03 GMT -5
Moving on to Nesta, while I found some of his posts suspicious in retrospect, I didn't find a smoking gun. The thing that pinged me about Nesta's posts was an apparent contradiction between two statements made on Day 1. Firstly in post D1.311, Nesta asserts that the aim of the villagers 1 was to find and lynch the six goons, and that the aim of the goons was to kill one of the fourteen villagers. So he's arguing here that the goons aren't (at this stage) interested at lynching other goons. Whereas in post D1.338 he says that he's been assuming the goons will try to lynch the enemy factions just like the villagers are. Why, then, did he say the goons are only trying to kill villagers in D1.311? They don't mesh well. To me, that's enough to keep him where he is in my list. Looking back at those posts, I think the parts you are wondering about are: 1.311 and 1.338 [the first quote is of Pleo] Putting myself back in my Day 1 mindset I don't see the disconnect here, but that could easily be because I know what I meant. Earlier in the game I thought the scum would try lynch the other factions during the Day, but would try to kill townies at Night. I think I was wrong about this, though, since one of the factions killed piratepete (with the help of the Vig) on Night 1, one killed either Hawkeyeop or Diomedes on Night 2, and one killed diggitcamara on Night 3, so I don't think the scum have been trying to avoid cross-kills as much as I thought they would. My replies to Pleo on Day 1 were about our chances of lynching scum during the Day versus the chances of scum cross-killing during the Night. This discussion started very early on Day 1 where in post 1.28 Pleo said that a no-lynch might not hurt us because the scum have a high probability of cross-killing. To put it in context my initial reply to him was 1.40: I was trying to make a point about not counting on the scum to kill the other scum during the Night, not about the way they would play during the Day. In post 1.311 I wasn't saying they were trying kill townies during the Day, but rather comparing our chances of lynching scum during the Day to the chances of them killing scum during the Night. Maybe that's where the confusion is.
|
|
|
Post by nesta on Mar 2, 2008 13:53:16 GMT -5
Welcome back piratepete. I have to say that you are a braver man than I, subbing into this rat's nest of a game. Good luck to you, whichever side you're on.
|
|
Merestil Haye
FGM
Grudge Keeper
[on:Slumming it in the Middle-Earth][of:In the halls of Manw
Posts: 1,077
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Merestil Haye on Mar 2, 2008 14:17:36 GMT -5
Nesta.
Thanks.
Yes, you have isolated the exact passages that were pinging my scumdar. I've had the experience of being misunderstood when I clearly phrased a comment (or I thought I had, anyway) - so I think that maybe it was just a matter of your being too familiar with what you wrote.
I'll digest this (while I actually put some time in to Fluiddruid's game).
|
|
|
Post by piratepete v2 on Mar 2, 2008 15:02:52 GMT -5
Hi guys. Nice to be back. I think.
Well, hopefully this turn of events will simply things a little by removing the question of inactivity from the equation, but it's still quite a tangle.
I've been reading through the whole time, and Hal and Rugger are those who've been most consistently getting my hackles up. However, a re-read of Hal's content has not really turned up much, so that and the insta-hammer thing means I'm not voting for him, at least right now.
As for Rugger, he's been urging lots of information to come forward from everyone remaining, which is essential with so many independent scum left, and attacking more-or-less everyone, as far as I can see.
Really, I'm saying I got nuttin'. More rereading is clearly required, and I'll get on it. Really, the best thing to find is a player hounding one or two others, as has been pointed out: the sowing of suspicion against one's rivals is the only way to draw.
|
|
|
Post by piratepete v2 on Mar 2, 2008 18:07:32 GMT -5
That, of course, should read "*not* to draw". Akh.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 2, 2008 21:06:51 GMT -5
Welcome back, piratepete, though "I got nothin'" isn't what I was hoping for from a pair of fresh eyeballs. As you know, my vote is on your predecessor, and I'm frankly inclined to keep it there until we get some heavy lifting from you.
Some of the things that mhaye says in #134 are confusing to me.
Specifically his points of view that the scum could somehow a) deduce which player is which doc, and b) manipulate them to act on their behalf. I don't think the scum have any way of knowing which flavor a doc might be, even if they think they might find one somehow.
And why does his closing paragraph only include options for "if pete is a goon"? Does he honestly think (or even hope) a goon sub is just going to roll over right away with some huge tell?
|
|
|
Post by piratepete v2 on Mar 2, 2008 23:38:26 GMT -5
Ah, Cookies, interesting that you should be first to reply. I was wondering what your reaxion might be to my regeneration into this body. "Inclined to keep your vote on me until you see some heavy lifting"? Well, that's fair enough. Although it does kinda'amount to a lurker vote on someone that doesn't seem to be lurking.
Anyway, my reading started at a personal moment for me: my preincarnation's death (who was coïncidentally another peasant called Wang). And specifically, how someone would be brave enough to be specific as this:
(2.7)
Two questions arise: why assume it is NAF that was vigged? or, to put it another way more reminiscent of a crime novel, whom does it benefit if that is believed?
The same player (2.13) gave as justification:
More public? Well, perhaps slightly, in that the stampede was not an hallucination. But, as diggit pointed out, in the very previous thread, the blessèd Mod had spoken about kill colour. (N1.41) Indeed, only one day previously. A convenient thing to forget, perhaps.
So, how about this for an hypothesis:
Who does it profit if it is generally thought that NAF was offed by Chairman Mao? Assuming some degree of analysis of Day one, whoever was seen to be attacking NAF will be considered more eligible for the concomitant towniness points. All points not worth mentioning, were it not for the fact that the spinner of killers' identities was in fact quite a vocal NAF hunter in Day one. Yep, that's Cookies. It's perhaps even not too far to stretch to posit that the attack on metagamy votes in the first place was conceived as a deflection from the metagameish attack on hawkeye itself. Of course, now we now something extra about him.
In summary, Cookies = Sun Jian? Discuss.
|
|
|
Post by piratepete v2 on Mar 2, 2008 23:43:57 GMT -5
Oh, the real Mao was eager to try and point the misinformation out, of course (2.16). And as subtly as possible, although allowing herself a retrospectively mournful
Quite. In any case, someone wanted to bump her off by that Evening.
|
|
|
Post by piratepete v2 on Mar 2, 2008 23:52:34 GMT -5
Sorry to triple post, but I notice that nesta pointed all of this out in Day three, but with a much less confrontational tone. Sorry about that, but I can't stand Puccini.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 3, 2008 0:16:50 GMT -5
Much better. Unvote Pirate Smurf
Are you going to put that down as a vote, or are you testing the water with it first? There is not much time left, after all.
|
|
Merestil Haye
FGM
Grudge Keeper
[on:Slumming it in the Middle-Earth][of:In the halls of Manw
Posts: 1,077
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Merestil Haye on Mar 3, 2008 5:49:55 GMT -5
Some snippage from DarkCookies' post so I can focus on her questions to me. Some of the things that mhaye says in #134 are confusing to me. Specifically his points of view that the scum could somehow a) deduce which player is which doc, and b) manipulate them to act on their behalf. I don't think the scum have any way of knowing which flavor a doc might be, even if they think they might find one somehow. If you are asking about the "ally in the village that might, if steered properly, eliminate one of the factions for them," I'm referring to Mao. None of the Docs can eliminate a faction. Mao could have done. If HM was alive now, a goon who had discovered the remaining player in an enemy faction could hope that their case might be convincing to whoever was playing the Chairman and get her to off the bad guy at Night. It doesn't actually require knowledge of who the Chairman was, just that she was out there somewhere. But since, over Days 2-3, each faction lost a member and Mao died, none of the factions can use Mao to eliminate a faction any more. The only weapon left for a faction to eliminate other goons is the lynch. That is what I meant. Sorry if I confused you. Sorry about that. I reread the paragraph, and the last sentence (I assume that's the source of the problem - please tell me if it's not) only makes sense to me now because I knew what I meant when I was writing it. The last sentence of the paragraph reads "If PS is in fact a goon then modkilling him punishes his partner (who did nothing wrong) whereas if he gets modkilled before Dusk that changes the calculus of forces and cause the village to lose." I didn't make it clear, but at the word "wheras" I switched from assessing the change from the POV of a putative PS-the-goon's partner to the POV of a Villager. The only hint remaining is that the modkilling "would cause the Village to lose." How would modkilling a goon cause the Village to lose? I cannot see a way that it would do so. Whereas losing a villager that way means that the Villagers moves one step closer to the point where they can no longer win. Hope that clears up any puzzlement.
|
|
|
Post by piratepete v2 on Mar 3, 2008 8:18:15 GMT -5
Much better. Unvote Pirate Smurf Are you going to put that down as a vote, or are you testing the water with it first? There is not much time left, after all. I was testing the water, but I'm now not sure if I'll be back on before dusk, and I still really don't want to hammer Hal. So indeed: Vote Cookies( Which timezone is the deadline expressed in?)
|
|
|
Post by sachertorte on Mar 3, 2008 9:00:56 GMT -5
( Which timezone is the deadline expressed in?) The deadline is midnight Eastern Standard Time.* *Next week, the deadline will likely be midnight Eastern Daylight Time.
|
|
|
Post by sachertorte on Mar 3, 2008 9:07:04 GMT -5
1 - Cookies (Peasant Smurf) 3 - Hal Briston (Santo Rugger, Pleonast, nesta) 1 - storyteller0910 (Hal Briston)
|
|