Domebo Mafia: Welcome to Alphatown

[Julie]

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.

Why would this happen? The real seer has no reason to check out the fake seer and no reason to lie and say s/he did.

[NAF1138]

Why would this happen? The real seer has no reason to check out the fake seer and no reason to lie and say s/he did.

It doesn't really matter, since I don't think the counter claim thing will happen if the second claiment knows that they will be lynched out of hand.

The reason why Ro0sh would come up with such a convoluted theory though...

[RoOsh]

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

What's your modification?
Because if its seriously your ranting about "the Real Seer should just claim first! OKREADYSETGO!" then you sir... need to quit sniffing glue.

[RoOsh]

Why would this happen? The real seer has no reason to check out the fake seer and no reason to lie and say s/he did.

This is true. Actually. Good point- I should have thought of that actually. But the point still stands then, just go to the Day 3 scenario instead- where both will claim X and Y are Townies.
And we have to go through the game wondering, what do we do now? We still have to wait for a Mason/Werewolf claim from one and not the other to test the theory out.

And Naf- Convoluted Theories and Me? Why Never! That's Unpossible! :ugeek:

[Chucara]

Hmm.. I don't really know what to make of the seer claim. I really can't see the logic in the doc claiming.

I came into the discussion thinking that a seer claim would be bad, but there are some pretty decent arguments for the claim. All in all, I can't really see how it wins or breaks the game no matter which it is. It *is* late, so I'll just ponder the options before giving a final answer.

On a side note - I can't promise intense participation this weekend (and most of monday) as my girlfriend are very close to trading up our apartment for a house and I have a birthday(not mine) tomorrow saturday. I *think* I will be around sunday, but no promises.. Just a heads up.

[NAF1138]

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

What's your modification?
Because if its seriously your ranting about "the Real Seer should just claim first! OKREADYSETGO!" then you sir... need to quit sniffing glue.

No sir, today is a bad day to quit. Maybe tomorrow.

But yeah. It works like this.

-Seer claims, we trust him until we have reason not to. If he isn't the real seer we will have reason not to eventually.
-If someone counterclaims without being able to offer at least 1 scum as proof we lynch them.

This fixes things for a variety of reasons.

If scum fake claim first then they have to be damn careful not to kill anyone they suspect might be a power role or they risk outing their seer as fake. All good for us. We don't actually need the seer to win. Really, we don't. Take a look at the latest mini game from Blocky over on Idle's boards if you want proof that this game can be won without a detective and won handily.

Again, the masons have claimed (in an ideal world and if there are only 2 of them. NO MORE THAN 2 MASONS SHOULD BE CLAIMING)

WORST case the seer is forced to claim before they have found any scum and we lynch them. All their investigations have been confirmed and we catch scum at the same time.

There is really very little downside for town here. This is a fairly proven method of breaking open games.

@chucara

No, the doc must NOT claim for this to work.

[NAF1138]

NETA (not edited to add): It's good to have you back in a game again RoOsh.

[NAF1138]

Oh yeah, I am almost never around on weekends. I might be on and off a bit, but odds are I won't be here. It's why I tend to spam the thread with every passing thought I have on Fridays.

[fisheroo]

Can you guys speak English, please? Maybe type a little slower for us N00bs?

Cause I don't want to die.

[RoOsh]

-Seer claims, we trust him until we have reason not to. If he isn't the real seer we will have reason not to eventually.
-If someone counterclaims without being able to offer at least 1 scum as proof we lynch them.

The fear I have though, is if its the fake Seer, then the GA has now left himself AND the real seer exposed.

If the Real seer doesn't claim, he's hidden, and the GA most likely will protect himself until a better target is presented.
If a Fake Seer Claims, now we have both real roles exposed and we've lost a chance of protecting either of them. Unless the GA is ballsy and simply doesn't PROTECT the Seer, real or fake going for some WIFOM there.

If it's a Real Seer, then okay, he may be protected by the GA, but now he's also exposed and the GA is locked into protecting him (and this is where the Ballsy selfprotective GA gets risky).

My thoughts: I wouldn't want the seer to claim Day 1. There's just NO point to it really, unless the Wolves have a dead bead on the guy in the 1/14 or 1/15 or 1/13 chance that they can take to try to kill him by random shot/by guessing.

I'd say let the two power roles stay hidden for the FIRST Day at least and then Day 2, when the Seer may have something of use to offer, then consider this idea. Though the one benefit to this plan is that you're forcing the scum to go into action right now, and so that could be one benefit, if the scum can't talk during the Day, then this plan MAY have gotten the jump on them. But the Idea that the seer though is being told what to do- most uncool, Naf. Most uncool. :x :mrgreen: FoS NAF.

However... i see where you're going with the plan. I just have to wonder about your intentions. As it's a great plan if we catch the Wolves with their pants down. If not, then not so much.

And it's good to be back. :geek: I missed you guys.

[Inner Stickler]

No kidding, fisheroo! This is really complicated! Help a brother out. The issue under discussion is the viability of the Real Seer claiming on Day 1 that they are the real seer? The hitch being that this guarantees a werewolf will also claim seership? Do the werewolves know who the other werewolves are at this point? Crazy game.

[DaphneBlack]

If a Fake Seer Claims, now we have both real roles exposed and we've lost a chance of protecting either of them. Unless the GA is ballsy and simply doesn't PROTECT the Seer, real or fake going for some WIFOM there.

Hi Roosh,

if a Fake Seer claims, how are both real roles exposed?

[NAF1138]

Can you guys speak English, please? Maybe type a little slower for us N00bs?

Cause I don't want to die.

Sorry. Don't want to scare off the new folks, so I will just let Roosh's most recent post hang out for a while.

What do you want explained more slowly? I get that we have been a fairly insular group for the last...2 years?, and we have a lot of shorthand that we have developed. My problem is I don't always see when stuff doesn't make sense to outsiders. So just ask away. Someone will be happy to explaine.

[fisheroo]

Who are the power players?

Are all conversations able to be seen by everyone?

[Julie]

No kidding, fisheroo! This is really complicated! Help a brother out. The issue under discussion is the viability of the Real Seer claiming on Day 1 that they are the real seer? The hitch being that this guarantees a werewolf will also claim seership? Do the werewolves know who the other werewolves are at this point? Crazy game.

That is one possible hitch, and what NAF was trying to avoid by saying that the seer should not claim second without proof.

Option 1:

Someone claims to be the seer. The Guardian Angel protects the claimed seer in the night. The claimed seer survives until the next day and then has a claimed result of his/her first claimed investigation.

Option 2:

Someone claims to be the seer. Someone else claims to be the seer. Neither have proof, so the GA has to choose one to protect (or not). One or both survive until the next day and then each have a claimed result of their first claimed investigations.

Option 3:

Someone claims to be the seer. Someone else claims to be the seer. Neither have proof, so we lynch the second claimant because there was no reason for the real seer to claim second while there was a reason for a werewolf to do so. (For the most part, a werewolf wants to muddy the waters while a townsperson wants them clear.) Lynch, get result, act accordingly.

Option 4:

No one claims to be the seer. The GA slaps a protect on someone at random or on himself. The seer might die if the werewolves get lucky.

Does that make everything make sense?

[Julie]

Who are the power players?

Are all conversations able to be seen by everyone?

Some players have special powers. The seer can "see" who is townsperson and who is villain (scum, as they're often called). They can only "see" at night, and can only investigate one person at a time. So the seer doesn't know anything yet.

The guardian angel can protect one player a night, including him or herself.

The Alpha werewolf looks like a townsperson to the seer.

Those are the roles with "powers."



Two groups have no powers but have information:

Scum knows scum.

Masons know Masons.



All of the conversations by the good guys are visible to all. The bad guys can talk without us seeing during the "Night" while we're not talking in this thread.

[NAF1138]

Who are the power players?

Are all conversations able to be seen by everyone?

Ah, Power roles.

Gottcha.

Ok, so power roles are the group of town players who have extra abilities. In this case:

-the seer- able to investigate the alignment of another player, (town or wolf)
-the Gardian Angel- GA for short, able to save someone from being Night Killed (NK'd)
-Masons - Confirmable as being town because they know who the other masons are

The seer may sometimes be called "the cop" the GA may sometimes get called "the doc." But we are trying to be good about not doing that.

The only thing everyone can see is what is posted to this thread. Unless you are told otherwise by CIAS you shouldn't talk about this game anywhere but in this thread.


Scum have powers too, but probably won't be called "power roles"

[NAF1138]

Oh, and this is probably a good time to link to the wiki again.

http://wiki.flyingcowofdoom.com/mafiaWiki/Main_Page

[NAF1138]

Ok, I am (mostly) gone for the weekend soon. So...see you all on Monday.

[Boozahol Squid, P.I.]

I'm really not seeing the benefits of the seer claiming Day One. What possible benefit can it have, other than, I suppose, giving the GA someone specific to protect each night?

On Day Three or so, when the Seer has a reasonable pool of information to work with, I can see an unforced claim by the Seer in order to preserve that information against luck by the Scum. But Day One? I just don't see the upside of the best-case scenarios versus the dangers of us flim-flamming about with multiple seer claims.

[RoOsh]

Hi Roosh,
if a Fake Seer claims, how are both real roles exposed?

Ooh, I like the politeness. Exposed as in vulnerable at night to being killed. Not as in exposed identity wise. (GA protects Fake Seer and not themselves, Real Seer gets no chance of protects = Both exposed)

[RoOsh]

The only upside i really see now to the plan is that if the Scum are caught off guard by this and haven't spoken with each other, then they might not be able to quickly counterclaim or such. But that's easily nullified if they have an experienced player in their midst.

Then again this is a newbie game, so that could be unlikely- but I'm not willing to take that chance.
That said- I'm willing to pipe down a bit, and let other voices be heard.... I do have a tendency to uh... speak up a lot when excited.

And i do love helping out players, so if you have ANY questions on anything, feel free to ask me nicely and politely, and I'll do my best to answer them. I tend to respond to things in the same tone that they're given (hence though it may seem heated between me and Naf, I don't mind the guy at all, *though I do think he's playing suspicious, but now I have to think about this as it could be a decent plan but I think the benefits aren't equal to the risks. Afterall, where is storyteller's ideas on this?
But yeah, I'm a nice guy, I swear, feel free to ask me any sorta Qs about the game or what not.

[fisheroo]

Lynch him.

[PrecambrianMollusc]

Lynch him.

Lynch who?

I really don't have a lot to add, I am not convinced it is in our seer/cop whatevers best interest to claim now. Same for the masons, if they claim it just narrows the pool down within which the scum have to find the seer/cop or guardian angel/doctor.

[fisheroo]

That was a smartass comment.

[jali]

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.

I don't know about this. If we accept this theory, then a lurking scum will be safe.

I'm a newbie so maybe I don't get it but I don't like the "absolute" theory.

Couldn't the intentional lurk be a scum strategy to save a wolf?

[DaphneBlack]

jali, don't edit!!!

I did see the post before the edit -- it was just the first line of the current post.

[jali]

jali, don't edit!!!

I did see the post before the edit -- it was just the first line of the current post.

Thanks Daphne. Forgot about that rule. Wont happen again.

[DaphneBlack]

Is there really any chance that any of the players won't be able to find their way here? It seems unlikely. If someone doesn't post at all, though, I'd say that's more not playing than intentionally lurking. People disagree on that though.

I think another interesting thing that's been discussed is NAF's idea that what matters on day One is who votes for the lynchee (and for others?), and that lynching scum day One isn't necessarily to our advantage. I know he's not around on the weekend's but I'd like to discuss this more. NAF seemed to be advocating we select someone at random to lynch, and that this would be more helpful than finding a reason to lynch someone, whatever it might be. What he didn't explain was how this would be more useful to town. Does anyone else agree with NAF?

On other issues, I remain undecided on the Seer claiming issue. Right now, though, I still think a Seer claiming before results would lead us, on average to fewer results.

(On preview: just don't want anyone getting modkilled day One!)

[CatInASuit]

Ok, I'm going to make it clear for everyone from this point on.

NO EDITING OF POSTS.

jali - Consider yourself slapped with a very large wet trout.

[NAF1138]

I think another interesting thing that's been discussed is NAF's idea that what matters on day One is who votes for the lynchee (and for others?), and that lynching scum day One isn't necessarily to our advantage. I know he's not around on the weekend's but I'd like to discuss this more. NAF seemed to be advocating we select someone at random to lynch, and that this would be more helpful than finding a reason to lynch someone, whatever it might be. What he didn't explain was how this would be more useful to town. Does anyone else agree with NAF?

Hey, I had 5 minutes to check up on the game. I am specifically NOT recommending lynching someone at random. What I am saying is that it doesn't matter if we catch scum or not on Day 1 and that we should recognize that we probably won't, so we SHOULD be punishing anti-town behaviors even if we aren't positive that the player exhibiting the behavior is scum.

Only on Day 1 by the way.

[jali]

Ok, I'm going to make it clear for everyone from this point on.

NO EDITING OF POSTS.

jali - Consider yourself slapped with a very large wet trout.

[wiping scales off face] Sowee.
Does baby talk help?

[DaphneBlack]

I think another interesting thing that's been discussed is NAF's idea that what matters on day One is who votes for the lynchee (and for others?), and that lynching scum day One isn't necessarily to our advantage. I know he's not around on the weekend's but I'd like to discuss this more. NAF seemed to be advocating we select someone at random to lynch, and that this would be more helpful than finding a reason to lynch someone, whatever it might be. What he didn't explain was how this would be more useful to town. Does anyone else agree with NAF?

Hey, I had 5 minutes to check up on the game. I am specifically NOT recommending lynching someone at random. What I am saying is that it doesn't matter if we catch scum or not on Day 1 and that we should recognize that we probably won't, so we SHOULD be punishing anti-town behaviors even if we aren't positive that the player exhibiting the behavior is scum.

Only on Day 1 by the way.

Okay. I guess I was reading your recommendation as a stronger one than it really was. I agree that it is pretty unlikely we'll get scum day One. I guess I'm still a little unclear on how that will be more help for future voting records than a more 'traditional' approach but maybe that wasn't what you were trying to say.

[Hostile Dialect]

What he didn't explain was how this would be more useful to town. Does anyone else agree with NAF?

I don't. Personally, I'm partial to the idea of lynching the ones who chit-chat nervously without adding anything to the strategy conversation. I know this whole werewolf thing has got everyone on edge, but the only reason for someone to be that nervous during the Day is they're worried about getting lynched, I figure.

[Boozahol Squid, P.I.]

I don't. Personally, I'm partial to the idea of lynching the ones who chit-chat nervously without adding anything to the strategy conversation. I know this whole werewolf thing has got everyone on edge, but the only reason for someone to be that nervous during the Day is they're worried about getting lynched, I figure.

Nervous chit-chat and fear of getting lynched are both actions that can be townie, particularly for new townies. One of my favored actions while scum was to get involved heavily in discussion of rules, while avoiding discussions of direct suspicions of other players. YMMV, of course.

[jali]

[quote=Boozahol Squid, P.I.]

I don't. Personally, I'm partial to the idea of lynching the ones who chit-chat nervously without adding anything to the strategy conversation. I know this whole werewolf thing has got everyone on edge, but the only reason for someone to be that nervous during the Day is they're worried about getting lynched, I figure.

Nervous chit-chat and fear of getting lynched are both actions that can be townie, particularly for new townies. One of my favored actions while scum was to get involved heavily in discussion of rules, while avoiding discussions of direct suspicions of other players. YMMV, of course.[/quote:gmqtj3tq]


Right.That makes sense - a false feeling of security toward one who helps me think it out. I'll keep that in mind.

[Boozahol Squid, P.I.]

Right.That makes sense - a false feeling of security toward one who helps me think it out. I'll keep that in mind.

Don't worry. You can always trust Boozy. I'm as towny as they come.

[DaphneBlack]

Why isn't that real comforting?

[Julie]

Oops, I edited a post, too. But it was an explaining post and I had made a mistake and didn't want there to be any confusion. Don't hit me!

[CatInASuit]

Oops, I edited a post, too. But it was an explaining post and I had made a mistake and didn't want there to be any confusion. Don't hit me!

I had noticed, which is why I am making it clear for everyone.

Preview is your friend.

Edit is not your friend and will get your character removed from the game.

[storyteller]

[quote=Boozahol Squid, P.I.]

I don't. Personally, I'm partial to the idea of lynching the ones who chit-chat nervously without adding anything to the strategy conversation. I know this whole werewolf thing has got everyone on edge, but the only reason for someone to be that nervous during the Day is they're worried about getting lynched, I figure.

Nervous chit-chat and fear of getting lynched are both actions that can be townie, particularly for new townies. One of my favored actions while scum was to get involved heavily in discussion of rules, while avoiding discussions of direct suspicions of other players. YMMV, of course.[/quote:1d6ljenp]

One of the most certain things in this game is this:

Any action can be Townie, and any action can be Scum. Voting for Town? Voting for Scum? Talking a lot? Lurking nervously? Discussing the game setup extensively? Dogging one player to the exclusion of all else? Refusing to take a stand? All can be Scum tells, all can be Town tells. The trick, I think, is to try to view the motivation behind each action, which is relatively difficult. Getting caught up in a mindset of "Action X = Scum" or "Action Y = Town" is a road to mislynch.

More broadly, sorry I've been absent for a few days. Weekends are generally going to be not so good for me from a participation standpoint, but I'll try to catch up and post again later today.

[jali]

Any action can be Townie, and any action can be Scum. Voting for Town? Voting for Scum? Talking a lot? Lurking nervously? Discussing the game setup extensively? Dogging one player to the exclusion of all else? Refusing to take a stand? All can be Scum tells, all can be Town tells. The trick, I think, is to try to view the motivation behind each action, which is relatively difficult. Getting caught up in a mindset of "Action X = Scum" or "Action Y = Town" is a road to mislynch.

I pretty much agree with this right now. I may change my mind, based on... whatever. I'm on the verge of paranoia and maybe I'm thinking about this too much.

Are the helpful ones scum posing as good guys? Are the good guys afraid to post, based on comments made upthread? Are they posting to prove they're not lurking?

There's nothing I can see to determine scum. Help me folks - I'm still confused after reading and re-reading this thread.

[jali]

I don't. Personally, I'm partial to the idea of lynching the ones who chit-chat nervously without adding anything to the strategy conversation. I know this whole werewolf thing has got everyone on edge, but the only reason for someone to be that nervous during the Day is they're worried about getting lynched, I figure.

Isn't everyone afraid of being lynched? Why do you feel this is a werewolf thing?

[Hostile Dialect]

Isn't everyone afraid of being lynched? Why do you feel this is a werewolf thing?

Gut feeling, I guess. Everyone's afraid of getting lynched, sure, but some people are so nervous they're just chattering, posting fluff, and some people are trying to get at the root of the thing.

That said, I've never done this before, so I could be wrong.

[Julie]

Some people, like me, chit-chat in order to seem like we're playing a game, not locked into policy negotiations with a rogue nation.

[Bear_Nenno]

I'll be at home if anyone needs me.

[KidVermicious]

Any action can be Townie, and any action can be Scum. Voting for Town? Voting for Scum? Talking a lot? Lurking nervously? Discussing the game setup extensively? Dogging one player to the exclusion of all else? Refusing to take a stand? All can be Scum tells, all can be Town tells. The trick, I think, is to try to view the motivation behind each action, which is relatively difficult. Getting caught up in a mindset of "Action X = Scum" or "Action Y = Town" is a road to mislynch.

I pretty much agree with this right now. I may change my mind, based on... whatever. I'm on the verge of paranoia and maybe I'm thinking about this too much.

Are the helpful ones scum posing as good guys? Are the good guys afraid to post, based on comments made upthread? Are they posting to prove they're not lurking?

There's nothing I can see to determine scum. Help me folks - I'm still confused after reading and re-reading this thread.

The keys to finding scum are hidden motivations and inconsistencies in arguments. Some specific actions or strategies are sometimes viewed as more scummy or townie than others, but declaring that "x is always a scumtell" is a pretty good way to start a fight. Which is not always bad... pretty much any conversation is good for getting folks on record with opinions, which can be evaluated for scum-tells.

Which is why scum like to lurk, which is why I'm in favor of lynching lurkers, barring a tastier reason.

[KidVermicious]

Isn't everyone afraid of being lynched? Why do you feel this is a werewolf thing?

Gut feeling, I guess. Everyone's afraid of getting lynched, sure, but some people are so nervous they're just chattering, posting fluff, and some people are trying to get at the root of the thing.

That said, I've never done this before, so I could be wrong.

Generally speaking, only scum are afraid of getting lynched. It's not intuitive, but there's a silver lining when it comes to lynching Town players. Vote patterns are a great way to find scum because scum will generally vote different when it's one of their buddies on the block, as opposed to a Town player.

If a Town player has screwed up and is facing a lynch, at least they can go to the rope knowing that scum are creating data in the vote record. Scum have no such assurance, and my theory is that scum are more reluctant to risk votegetting behavior, and more afraid of getting lynched.

In general.

[DaphneBlack]

I agree that townies *shouldn't* be afraid of getting lynched (unless it's a lynch-or-lose situation). But it seems to me a lot of town players will nevertheless fight for their survival more strongly than would perhaps be optimal. But this fear can have a real chilling effect which can make it really hard for town to get things done. Being afraid to get into a conflict with someone is not pro-town, in my opinion, even if it is understandable.

It seems like the one major substantive conversation we've had so far has totally died, which is interesting. There's not been a lot of the 'usual' Day One topics (except a bit of lynch-the-lurker conversation). Has anyone not yet posted?

Hostile Dialect, how are you determining 'nervousness' exactly? I can't say I've noticed anything that I would characterise as 'nervous' posting.

[jali]

I made it a point to post after reading the "lynch the lurkers" posts way back when. I wonder who has done the same.

I'll need to read this all again. So far, I sort of see some of the logic, but I haven't read any "tells". It should be interesting to see who proposes the first candidate. I wish our seer would help.(cue scum claiming to be seer). I guess I'll read, and try to figure this out.

I have wolfbane in my pocket, along with a clove of garlic, some holy water, some silver bullets and a cross.