Domebo Mafia: Welcome to Alphatown

[NAF1138]

NETA:

Rather, if we are sure that there are both then town can likely have a good shot at winning if the cop claims after his first investigation.


(Should I not be trying to break the game?)

[DaphneBlack]

Hello! I'm here.

I don't see a flaw in storyteller's analysis, so it looks like we are pretty likely to have four scum.

I also agree with Chucara that lynch-the-lurker on Day One is probably not a good idea. Of course, neither is lynch-the-loudmouth, necessarily.

[NAF1138]

Hello! I'm here.

I don't see a flaw in storyteller's analysis, so it looks like we are pretty likely to have four scum.

I also agree with Chucara that lynch-the-lurker on Day One is probably not a good idea. Of course, neither is lynch-the-loudmouth, necessarily.

Well, I know why Chucara thinks that (even though he didn't explain himself well) but why do you?

[DaphneBlack]

Nothing too complicated, I just think lynching someone who has not been interacting with others (ie lurking) makes for a less informational lynch, regardless of the result.

[Chucara]

NAF: You probably know that I usually support lynch-the-lurker at least on day one, but I don't really want to lynch anyone who hasn't shown up AT ALL. As this could simply be due to not finding their way to the new board. (I had to click Board Index to get here - not everyone might do that). Intentional lurkers, if we find any, I don't have a problem with lynching.

[DaphneBlack]

Can you really identify a pattern of 'intentional lurking' on Day One?

[KidVermicious]

I'm here, sorry all.

Lots of new blood, I mean, faces. Excellent.

Vote NAF, because I haven't been on the same team with him yet, and if I'm Town, he's Scum.

[Inner Stickler]

Hey! Some of us are on break and don't have any reason to get up before noon! It's hardly my fault that the game started 5 hours before I got up. Sheesh!

I don't have much in the way of suspicions to offer, my previous Mafia experience has been the meatspace version with cards and there I usually listen for movement at Night. I fear this strategy will not aid me in this online format, however.

[NAF1138]

With three Masons, the value of each individual Mason goes up to 2.5 points each. So with three Masons, it's:

Cop + Doc: 7 points
Masons: 7.5 points

Add seven vanillas (let's say), and that's 21.5 points. A Godfather and three vanilla scum, again, point out to 20.5 points for Scum, so this is ever-so-slightly in the Town's favor. Subtract out a vanilla (down to 20.5 points) and add a vanilla Scum (up to 25 points), and things are grossly imbalanced. So, if there are two Masons, there are probably a total of four Scum including the Alpha.

Don't make me check your math, do you mean 4 scum with 2 masons or 4 scum with 2 masons or both?

[Julie]

I don't have any problem lynching intentional lurkers either. But yes, this server move might cause some disruptions for some people and I don't want to lynch someone who hasn't had the chance to play.

[Julie]

Don't make me check your math, do you mean 4 scum with 2 masons or 4 scum with 2 masons or both?

You are all trying to make me an insane person, aren't you?

[NAF1138]

Yay for multiquote!

Nothing too complicated, I just think lynching someone who has not been interacting with others (ie lurking) makes for a less informational lynch, regardless of the result.

I disagree, but I don't know that it matters. You might not be able to identify a pattern of intentional lurking, but Day 1 lynches aren't about the candidate, they are about the people who vote for the candidate. As long as we don't lynch our Cop or Doc I am all for lynching whoever on Day 1. (Well, probably not any of the power roles come to think of it.)

Also, so we get it out of the way, I do feel strongly that the masons should claim immediatly if there are only 2 of them.

1) if one of them gets NK'd toNight then they are totally worthless
2) we don't want our cop wasting an investigation on you when they should be working to build an uber masonry.

Our cop may or may not want to claim toDay, that's on them. I think they shouldn't hang around too long waiting to claim though since if we know we have a doc, as long as the doc isn't outed or killed that cop is safe more or less forever.

NAF: You probably know that I usually support lynch-the-lurker at least on day one, but I don't really want to lynch anyone who hasn't shown up AT ALL. As this could simply be due to not finding their way to the new board. (I had to click Board Index to get here - not everyone might do that). Intentional lurkers, if we find any, I don't have a problem with lynching.

If someone can't find their way to the boards in the five days we have for Day 1, they should be lynched or subbed out. Do we really want someone like that cluttering up our town? I am not saying vote for the now. Like I said, I plan to wait until most people show up before voting for anyone, unless someone gives me a good reason not to. But come on, they have 120 hours to figure out how to get to the game.

Don't make me check your math, do you mean 4 scum with 2 masons or 4 scum with 2 masons or both?

You are all trying to make me an insane person, aren't you?

Whoops, 4 scum with 2 masons or 4 scum with 3 masons or both. That's what I meant to say. ops:

[storyteller]

Don't make me check your math, do you mean 4 scum with 2 masons or 4 scum with 2 masons or both?

Uhhhhhhhh... the daffodil is in the glen with Steve.

If there are 2 masons, I expect a total of four Scum.

--------------------------

Also, NAF's previous statement is not getting enough attention. Given that we have been assured of the following:

1. There is a Doctor;
2. There is a Cop;
3. There is no role-blocker, no redirector, and no other means by which a Doc's protection can be averted.

A claimed Seer will be quite powerful, if not counterclaimed. The GA can protect the Seer, leaving the Scum with no choice but to go Doc hunting while the Seer reports results every Day. If the Scum don't find the GA pretty quickly, they'll be in a deep hole (though Town will not be assured of a victory, of course, because of the existence of the Alpha).

If a Scum player opts to counterclaim the Seer - and they almost certainly will, they will almost have to in such a case to keep from getting steamrollered - then we have at least one Scum in hand, certainly, and the chance to play a bit of chicken to boot.

So let's talk about this. Should the Seer claim Day One? Arguments for? Arguments against?

[NAF1138]

Don't make me check your math, do you mean 4 scum with 2 masons or 4 scum with 2 masons or both?

Uhhhhhhhh... the daffodil is in the glen with Steve.

If there are 2 masons, I expect a total of four Scum.

--------------------------

Also, NAF's previous statement is not getting enough attention. Given that we have been assured of the following:

1. There is a Doctor;
2. There is a Cop;
3. There is no role-blocker, no redirector, and no other means by which a Doc's protection can be averted.

A claimed Seer will be quite powerful, if not counterclaimed. The GA can protect the Seer, leaving the Scum with no choice but to go Doc hunting while the Seer reports results every Day. If the Scum don't find the GA pretty quickly, they'll be in a deep hole (though Town will not be assured of a victory, of course, because of the existence of the Alpha).

If a Scum player opts to counterclaim the Seer - and they almost certainly will, they will almost have to in such a case to keep from getting steamrollered - then we have at least one Scum in hand, certainly, and the chance to play a bit of chicken to boot.

So let's talk about this. Should the Seer claim Day One? Arguments for? Arguments against?

I knew you would support me on that one (and psst, the mason thing was a typo. I wanted to know if you meant 2 or 3 masons since you used both in you numbers).

[Julie]

Also, NAF's previous statement is not getting enough attention. Given that we have been assured of the following:

1. There is a Doctor;
2. There is a Cop;
3. There is no role-blocker, no redirector, and no other means by which a Doc's protection can be averted.

A claimed Seer will be quite powerful, if not counterclaimed. The GA can protect the Seer, leaving the Scum with no choice but to go Doc hunting while the Seer reports results every Day.

Not a complaint, just an observation: When you mix and match terms like this, it's really hard for those of us who aren't fluent to figure out who is who.

[DaphneBlack]

I've been mulling it over (for twenty minutes!) and I think it makes sense for the Cop to claim either Day One or after their first investigation. I guess I'd slightly push for after-investigation, since as storyteller says, a counterclaim is almost inevitable and I think the investigation results might help us to evaluate the claims better.

[Hostile Dialect]

Well, the Seer is the only one who the GA ever has to protect in this setup, right? ISTM that if the Seer claims toDay, he'll be pretty much invincible. After that, we rout the vanilla scum and play cat-and-mouse with the Alpha. Right?

[storyteller]

Also, NAF's previous statement is not getting enough attention. Given that we have been assured of the following:

1. There is a Doctor;
2. There is a Cop;
3. There is no role-blocker, no redirector, and no other means by which a Doc's protection can be averted.

A claimed Seer will be quite powerful, if not counterclaimed. The GA can protect the Seer, leaving the Scum with no choice but to go Doc hunting while the Seer reports results every Day.

Not a complaint, just an observation: When you mix and match terms like this, it's really hard for those of us who aren't fluent to figure out who is who.

I'm sorry, that's fair. I will stick with GA, Seer, and Alpha for the duration.

[Julie]

I'm sorry, that's fair. I will stick with GA, Seer, and Alpha for the duration.

You rock. Thanks.

[storyteller]

I've been mulling it over (for twenty minutes!) and I think it makes sense for the Cop to claim either Day One or after their first investigation. I guess I'd slightly push for after-investigation, since as storyteller says, a counterclaim is almost inevitable and I think the investigation results might help us to evaluate the claims better.

It depends. If the Seer waits until toMorrow to claim, then there is an obvious problem: the Seer might die toNight. If we should happen to mislynch toDay (not certain, but not unlikely on Day One, either), and assuming we do not lynch a power role, and further assuming four scum, the bad guys will have a minimum 10% chance to kill the Seer toNight and prevent any investigations at all. If the Seer claims toDay, we have a 100% chance of getting at least one result in the absence of a counterclaim, and a 75%+ chance of getting more than one result.

But the real question is, how do we handle a counterclaim? Well, first of all, we most certainly do not lynch either candidate under any circumstances. A Wolf in the hand isn't really worth much, and it actually narrows the pool for the real Seer. The ideal play would probably be: we lynch a separate player, not one of the competing claimants. That Night, the GA chooses to protect one of the two possible Seer candidates. The Wolves have to choose, then. They can leave the real Seer alive, allowing him/her to produce investigation results that will, sooner or later, be confirmed. Or they can target the real Seer. But the latter is a very high-risk strategy, because if the GA guesses well and there is no kill, then they've wasted a Night's kill and we have ourselves a new mislynch. And of course, even if the Wolves target and kill the real Seer, it is at the cost of one of their own, as we will surely lynch the counterclaimant Day Two.

Upon reflection, I am very firmly in favor of a Seer claim toDay.

Well, the Seer is the only one who the GA ever has to protect in this setup, right? ISTM that if the Seer claims toDay, he'll be pretty much invincible. After that, we rout the vanilla scum and play cat-and-mouse with the Alpha. Right?

Well, it's not going to be quite that simple. The Scum will find the GA eventually; remember, they'll be looking for tells, too. Their chances of finding and killing the GA before the Seer can break the game are quite good. At best, this plan will net us three or four investigations, maybe one Scum, and 2-3 semi-confirmed Townies. But that's a good start.

[NAF1138]

Not a complaint, just an observation: When you mix and match terms like this, it's really hard for those of us who aren't fluent to figure out who is who.

Whoops, I was doing this too I think. Sorry, I will also try to stick with the actual role names rather than shorthanding into generic names.

Well, the Seer is the only one who the GA ever has to protect in this setup, right? ISTM that if the Seer claims toDay, he'll be pretty much invincible. After that, we rout the vanilla scum and play cat-and-mouse with the Alpha. Right?

That's the basic idea. We get just as much benefit if the Seer claims right now with less risk, but if the Seer claims tomorrow there is less chance of a counter claim, but some risk that they might get killed toNight.

When they want to claim is on them and how comfortable they feel.

Well, it's not going to be quite that simple. The Scum will find the GA eventually; remember, they'll be looking for tells, too. Their chances of finding and killing the GA before the Seer can break the game are quite good. At best, this plan will net us three or four investigations, maybe one Scum, and 2-3 semi-confirmed Townies. But that's a good start.

Their chances of finding the GA are reasonably good. If the masons also mass claim toDay then we have a minimum of 3 confirmed town going into the game Day 2.

Let's say we lynch town toDay and scum don't kill the GA toNight.

The game started with 16 players

Day 2 there will be 14, with 4 confirmed town and 10 unconfirmed. We lynch an unconfirmed and even if we force the GA to claim accidentally then its 5 confirmed by Day 3 and the game is over because confirmed town outnumber the possible numbers for scum.

[NAF1138]

This is assuming the scum don't do anything smart. There are ways around this for scum, but I (obviously) don't want to talk about them. A seer claim isn't an instant win, but it comes close.

[NAF1138]

Replace smart with, very clever, in that last post.

I don't mean to imply that the scum are dumb if they don't find a work around. I mostly know this stuff because I spent a lot of time reading mafia scum a couple of years ago.

[storyteller]

Their chances of finding the GA are reasonably good. If the masons also mass claim toDay then we have a minimum of 3 confirmed town going into the game Day 2.

Let's say we lynch town toDay and scum don't kill the GA toNight.

The game started with 16 players

Day 2 there will be 14, with 4 confirmed town and 10 unconfirmed. We lynch an unconfirmed and even if we force the GA to claim accidentally then its 5 confirmed by Day 3 and the game is over because confirmed town outnumber the possible numbers for scum.

Hm.

If I'm the Scum, and this is the way the Town goes, I'm saying, "screw the Seer and the GA." The Masons done claimed? Let's kill them. No matter how many successful investigations the Seer gets, (s)he can't catch the Alpha. And as observed way back in M2, that's all the Wolves need to win - the Alpha staying alive. Let the Seer semi-confirm as many Townies as (s)he can, we'll eliminate the real confirmed. So Night One, Mason #1, dead. Night Two, Mason #2, dead. Day 3 starts with maybe one Mason still alive (if there are three), plus the Seer. If we force the GA to claim, now we have THREE confirmed, not five, and the game is emphatically not over. GA dies that Night. Seer dies Night Four, having provided us with a total of three investigations. Odds are, at least two of them are Town readings, worthless at finding the Alpha. Mason #3, if there is one, dies Night Five.

It's not going to be that easy.

[NAF1138]

Their chances of finding the GA are reasonably good. If the masons also mass claim toDay then we have a minimum of 3 confirmed town going into the game Day 2.

Let's say we lynch town toDay and scum don't kill the GA toNight.

The game started with 16 players

Day 2 there will be 14, with 4 confirmed town and 10 unconfirmed. We lynch an unconfirmed and even if we force the GA to claim accidentally then its 5 confirmed by Day 3 and the game is over because confirmed town outnumber the possible numbers for scum.

Hm.

If I'm the Scum, and this is the way the Town goes, I'm saying, "screw the Seer and the GA." The Masons done claimed? Let's kill them. No matter how many successful investigations the Seer gets, (s)he can't catch the Alpha. And as observed way back in M2, that's all the Wolves need to win - the Alpha staying alive. Let the Seer semi-confirm as many Townies as (s)he can, we'll eliminate the real confirmed. So Night One, Mason #1, dead. Night Two, Mason #2, dead. Day 3 starts with maybe one Mason still alive (if there are three), plus the Seer. If we force the GA to claim, now we have THREE confirmed, not five, and the game is emphatically not over. GA dies that Night. Seer dies Night Four, having provided us with a total of three investigations. Odds are, at least two of them are Town readings, worthless at finding the Alpha. Mason #3, if there is one, dies Night Five.

It's not going to be that easy.

Yeah, like I said, there are ways around it, but I think that this is the best option to make the game hard for them.

[jali]

I'm unable to be the sacrificial virgin in this for...ah...personal reasons.

[DaphneBlack]

Hmm. I can see the benefits to the Seer claiming today seem to outweigh the risks, at this point.

jali, what sacrificial virgin? I didn't know we were that kind of town. I don't see any volcanos nearby, at least... :|

[Winston Smith]

The only problem I see with the Seer claiming is that I recall in previous games that the recommended strategy for the Guardian Angel is to protect him/herself every night, thereby better protecting the town (on the idea that self-protection is a sure thing, whereas if s/he protects the 'Seer', there's no guarantee it's actually the Seer).

NAF, Storyteller, you two seem pretty much experts. Is that the case, or were the games I was in just off the rails? (I've only played twice before, so I'm not really familiar with the ins and outs).

If the Seer claims, should the Guardian Angle automatically protect him/her, or protect him/herself?

[Winston Smith]

I was just quickly scanning up-thread, and reflecting on my last post, and I think it's really strange that Storyteller is promoting the Seer claim so soon. I already mentioned that I don't have a lot of experience in this game, but Storyteller seems like he's up to no good.

But NAF1138 seems to be on the same page as Storyteller, so that leads me to suspect they're in cahoots, and you all know what that means.

FOS Storyteller.

[DaphneBlack]

God I hope NAF and Storyteller aren't both scum. That'd be a disaster!

I don't think there's any good reason to assume that just because people agree they are 'in cahoots', nor for that matter if they disagree they must be on opposite sides.

I forget who said it before, but it pays to assume that the scum collectively are at least as smart as each of us individually.

[Winston Smith]

God I hope NAF and Storyteller aren't both scum. That'd be a disaster!

I don't think there's any good reason to assume that just because people agree they are 'in cahoots', nor for that matter if they disagree they must be on opposite sides.

I forget who said it before, but it pays to assume that the scum collectively are at least as smart as each of us individually.

Right, but assuming the Guardian Angel is going to self-protect, having the Seer claim means almost certain death for the Seer, our strongest asset.

Why would both NAF and Storyteller want this to happen? Why are they throwing in together, so early, and trying to get the Seer to turn him/herself over to the scum? Seriously, I can only think of one reason.

[KidVermicious]

Really, Winston? I'm guessing you missed the part where it was explicitly suggested that the GA protect the claimed Seer. Interesting.

For my part, I'm against it because scum are sure to jump on that claim, giving us a 50/50 shot of losing our seer before we get any results at all. We'd get a scum in trade, but I don't like that trade. I'd rather risk the small chance of losing our Seer to random NK, for the comparitively greater benefit of a three or four player reveal down the road.

Thats my 2 cents, anyway.

[DaphneBlack]

I don't think that part of the plan of getting the Seer to claim would be to have the doctor self-protect, but rather (since they would be unknown to the scum, hopefully) protect the claimed Seer (or pick one of two claimed Seers to protect).

On preview: why would we lose the seer before we get any results, Kid?

[RoOsh]

guys how do you multiquote?

If someone can't find their way to the boards in the five days we have for Day 1, they should be lynched or subbed out. Do we really want someone like that cluttering up our town? I am not saying vote for the now. Like I said, I plan to wait until most people show up before voting for anyone, unless someone gives me a good reason not to. But come on, they have 120 hours to figure out how to get to the game.

-NAF post #62.

This is a silly idea, the former part of it. Lynching a lurker because they can't find their way over here means they're inevitably town. Note, a Werewolf Mafia consists of at least 3 people (Actually, this I don't know: Do the Werewolves have their own boards/ Can talk at Night? I assumed Yes), so if there is an incompetent Scum out there, he's got at least one other person out there to help direct him over to these boards. Only the townspeople on their own will be unable to bumblefuck their way over here to find out where the game is. So I'm very ANTI lynching the incompetent lurker who never posts. Now someone who posts very LITTLE content and is lurking by not adding content, that's a different situation, but it was not the one that NAF was advocating against.

Next issue:
Seer Claiming Day One.

I'm against it.
It's a Terrible Shitty Idea. Because we've got SEVERAL people here who if scum know exactly what to do if you get a Seer claim day one- you counter claim him and go 50-50 with your chances now.
Day 1: The Seer Claims, a Scum Counters (not the Alpha). The Town is forced to lynch somewhere else, other roles may turn up (Masons) or just a townie is lynched most likely odds.
Night 2: The GA has to pick one that is the correct one now, as Scum now get all the advantages. They can do one of two things:
-They could play the odds and pick the REAL Seer, and hope that the GA has a 50-50 of getting it wrong. Then when Day comes up, they'll take the sacrifice of 1 Seer: 1 Wolf.
-They could also just start to search out the GA, the GA will protect one of the Seers, the Wolves get a free unblocked kill to take out the most useful person for their goals, and then during Day 2 the ScummySeer and the Real Seer both will say they checked out each other, and that both say the other is Scum. So that again puts us back to the Day 1 Scenario And WASTES the Seer's potential, as once again the WIFOM Sets in. Night 2 plays out like Night 1 with both options on the Table, and then Day 3 we have now 2 Seers who will have claimed to investigated someone, and they both found a Townie (As the Seer will have legitametely found one, while the Scum know that EVERYONE who isn't scum is a townie). So again, back to Day 1's scenario.
MEANWHILE, the whole time, the Scum are getting free unblocked kill attempts at the GA if the GA is trying to 50-50 the right seer.

--The Only way the Cycle is broken is if The REAL Seer hits a Mason and can state that X Person is a Mason or if a ScumSeer Claims that person X is a "Townie" but doesn't state they're a Mason when they are (which is why if a Seer finds a MASON, he should always try to use that to his advantage as that'll go a long way to helping "prove" who he is). Because up to that point every other result will be "townie" (as the Cop isn't going to try to reveal the identity of the GA- I hope). OR if the real Seer points out that X is a werewolf. In that case, we can lynch X and see then which seer is the Real Seer quite easily. (And if a Werewolf wants to try to bus one of their own to "authenticate" their seer status, I'm actually all for that, as that's 2 Werewolves for the price of a Townie and a Seer)- which early in the game, may not be a bad thing. But it's a HIGHLY unlikely scenario.

That's why I'm not for The Claiming Today.
My Idea/thoughts to come in the next post.

[RoOsh]

Trying to Help the Seer Out: Townie Cooperation
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
But yeah, the above post/reasons are where there Is NO real benefit to claiming Day 1 as a Seer.
The Seer should claim if he feels he's outed himself, if he has a Mason that he knows exists, along with other claims, or if he found a werewolf. Those are the major reasons I see it. Otherwise, just try the breadcrumb method or just wait a few days and see what the situation is.

By that token, A mason shouldn't claim RIGHT away if they're gonna be lynched- I think every PERSON before lynching should be given a "Seer period" maybe 12 hours where they announce they're going to claim or such in 12 hours- so that if they are a Mason, a Seer could potentially step up and ID them and prove his Seer Status and thus we can dismiss the lynching.

The purpose of that is that EVERYONE does this- EVERYONE before they claim- give time 12 hours or whatnot, so that the Seer does have a chance to do this, and if EVERYONE does it, then it won't look so obvious if a Mason does this as well. If Townies and Masons all step up and announce this, then the Seer doesn't have to pick and choose anything, but if the Lynchee IS actually a Mason, we can at least then use that to our advantage of confirming the Seer as well as confirming the Mason (NOTE: This strategy only really works if the GA is hidden, and thus able then to protect the seer at night) if that's not the case, then F it.
This way if we have 2 Seers as well, we could have a point where we could test the Seers, every lynchee Steps up and announced they're going to be claiming in time, and if either Seer has investigated them, they can try to announce that they have done so, and the result. The side effect though: A "he's town" means nothing in this case. It'd only help us if it's a mason claim, and it goes uncalled by the FakeSeer, or if its a Mason Claim and the REAL Seer Calls it.
It's a slim chance (as the Seer will have needed to investigated a Mason to really help us along here), but it's an idea at least on how to help the town along.

Thoughts on the "Magic Bag" Delayed Claim? (As I know many older players HATE the idea of a delayed Claim, but in an open game, there's no need to "make up" a role claim, so it doesn't really need to factor in here).

The only other thing is- we can't have last min. lynches then. We need targets up and early before a 24 hour deadline, that or a Seer with No Life.

[KidVermicious]

I don't think that part of the plan of getting the Seer to claim would be to have the doctor self-protect, but rather (since they would be unknown to the scum, hopefully) protect the claimed Seer (or pick one of two claimed Seers to protect).

On preview: why would we lose the seer before we get any results, Kid?

2 seers claim. One is scum, one is real. The scum know which is which, and will be targeting the real one, while the GA will have to flip a coin (barring a horrible claim by scum). 50/50 chance of losing our seer Night One.

[RoOsh]

If they even go that route. (see my post)

[RoOsh]

Dammit! I still don't know how to quote!
Clicking the Quote button off to the right does nothing- it just takes me to the reply box. What do I need to do?

[DaphneBlack]

Will the risk of a no-kill for the scum lead them to think twice about that? I dunno.

Roosh, I think your plan for the delayed claim is a little too inflexible. I certainly agree though that we should decide on a lynch target if at all possible well before the end of the Day, for time for claims and counterclaims, if any, to be digested. Last minute rush lynch have never helped the town.

[KidVermicious]

If they even go that route. (see my post)

Nod.

[Rabid Renaissance]

Dammit! I still don't know how to quote!
Clicking the Quote button off to the right does nothing- it just takes me to the reply box. What do I need to do?

Hit the other quote button. The one that appears between the subject and the avatar. The one with the exclamation mark next to it.

[NAF1138]

You want the seer claim to work against a counter claim?

SEER LISTEN TO ME! IF ANYONE OTHER THAN YOU CLAIMS TO BE THE SEER DON'T SPEEK UP UNTIL YOU HAVE CONCLUSIVE PROOF THAT YOU ARE THE REAL SEER

Now if the real Seer would claim now, we have no problems. If they are counter claimed we lynch the counter claiment. If a fake seer claims right now, we will find them out soon enough and catch 2 out of 4 scum in the process.

[Boozahol Squid, P.I.]

Oh and, are we sure there is a doc AND and investigator?

Because town can win if the cop claims.

There is a Guardian Angel. There is a Seer. From the first post. How do you figure Town can win based off of that?

[Boozahol Squid, P.I.]

(D'oh. SHould have looked at second page)

[NAF1138]

This is a silly idea, the former part of it. Lynching a lurker because they can't find their way over here means they're inevitably town.

No, it means they are stupid beyond belief and even if they are town I don't want them in the game. Sorry, but honestly, it's not that hard to find the board given five days. Either the player doesn't care or soudldn't be allowed in a room with choking hazzards unsupervised.

As far as normal lynch the lurker senarios, Day 1, I strongly believe (and I know that my opinion on this matter is controversial and not widely accepted), it doesn't matter one whit the alignment of the person you lynch. Lynching scum Day 1 gives town very little advantage if any. Lynching town Day 1 hurts town very little, if any (as long as we don't lynch a power role). What a Day 1 lynch needs to do is start developing vote patterns. And lynch the lurker is still disliked enough by enough people that it is likely to generate some real data.

[NAF1138]

You know, ain't it the way? In the post where I call people potentially idiots it's only right that I have to have that many typos and spelling errors.

[RoOsh]

No, it means they are stupid beyond belief and even if they are town I don't want them in the game. Sorry, but honestly, it's not that hard to find the board given five days. Either the player doesn't care or soudldn't be allowed in a room with choking hazzards unsupervised.

Hey, a townie body is a townie body. I don't give a crap about their intellegence as long as they're alive enough to contribute that +1 to Town rather than a 0. We can try to find replacements or substitutes or anything else. But simply WASTING a lynch on a most likely townie (as at this point i think both of us can agree, scum can't be that stupid even w/ supervision) is just not only a waste of a townie +1, but it's ALSO a waste of a lynch.

Now if you feel someone isn't really POSTING real Data, but only Fluff, then that's a better candidate in my book for a lynch than an absolute No Show.

Wheee! I can Quote! Thanks Kid!

[RoOsh]

In the post where I call people potentially idiots it's only right that I have to have that many typos and spelling errors.

I like to call them "Sandbags". Townies (usually, as I've never seen scum this bad) that NEVER post because they don't know how to or can't find the board- so an "idiot" lurker if you will.
They have a Use at least if you pile them up, but they contribute nothing otherwise of value. Here's hoping the term catches on.

[NAF1138]

No, it means they are stupid beyond belief and even if they are town I don't want them in the game. Sorry, but honestly, it's not that hard to find the board given five days. Either the player doesn't care or soudldn't be allowed in a room with choking hazzards unsupervised.

Hey, a townie body is a townie body. I don't give a crap about their intellegence as long as they're alive enough to contribute that +1 to Town rather than a 0. We can try to find replacements or substitutes or anything else. But simply WASTING a lynch on a most likely townie (as at this point i think both of us can agree, scum can't be that stupid even w/ supervision) is just not only a waste of a townie +1, but it's ALSO a waste of a lynch.

Now if you feel someone isn't really POSTING real Data, but only Fluff, then that's a better candidate in my book for a lynch than an absolute No Show.

Wheee! I can Quote! Thanks Kid!

Well sure, it's a scale. There might be better lynch candidates in which case, you know, lynch them instead. I only ever advocate lynch the absent if:

1) it looks like there is no other good lynch option (e.g. that or random lynch)
2) it looks like it won't be unanimous. If everyone votes the same way that doesn't really do the town much good.

And while they may be a warm body, if they don't vote they actually hurt the town. Particularly in the late game.

Now to get back to the Seer claim (and town winnnig in 3 Days), thoughts now that we have modified the basic idea?

On prieview:

I like the sandbag name! I am going to use it in the future.

[NAF1138]

1) it looks like there is no other good lynch option (e.g. that or random lynch)
2) it looks like it won't be unanimous. If everyone votes the same way that doesn't really do the town much good.

There should also be a 1.a) And it looks like the won't be force subbed.

Sub is always the better option, but the above assumes that subbing won't happen (for whatever reason)

Also, I think lynch is better for the town then modkill 99 times out of 100.