I dunno, I don't think scum would aggressively push for an idea that doesn't even seem too bad. I mean, she drew unnecessary attention to herself by being quite condescending and I just don't think that's a scumtell by any means.

Unless she's a really bad scum, which I doubt.

youngminii

Australia7514 Posts

July 01 2010 16:02 GMT

#360

So if a DT checks someone that gets recruited on the same night, it's pretty much a wasted check?
:O

youngminii

Australia7514 Posts

July 01 2010 23:33 GMT

#443

You are forgetting DT can't check the first night.

I don't like the plan at all. It's too mechanical and gives scum too much control over the game.
ie. They can choose to recruit the roleblocked, they can choose to NK the roleblocked, they can choose to leave the roleblocked alone and NK someone else, they can choose to not NK anyone at all.

We don't get to see the roles of the dead players remember? What are you gonna do if the roleblockers are killed early or recruited early? What are you gonna do if the coroner(s) are killed early or recruited early? I mean if the coroner is recruited and this plan is in effect, we're fucked, scum will know that the coroner is gone but town won't.

There's also the possibility of having more than one DT, which will literally HALF our chances of finding the GF. I'm honestly guessing there's at least 2-3 Dream Catchers in this game and one of them will likely become a DT, so even if we have one DT to begin with, we'll hopefully have two later on. There's just way too many variables that the scum can take advantage of with Korynne's plan.

That said, I want to reinforce my point that I don't believe that Korynne is scum yet. There's no way in hell she'd be this adamant about a plan that so many people disagree with/are not sure about. It's drawing way too much attention and scum would never in their wildest dreams draw this much attention.

If we are going ahead with the RB plan, we might as well 'check' the top player.

##Mafia L

youngminii

Australia7514 Posts

July 01 2010 23:53 GMT

#449

Without the DT part, it seems like the best plan we've got. I agree, it sounds as if I'm saying this plan won't work because of a 1/18 chance or what-not, but I really think taking out the DT part of the plan will help out a lot, especially since DTs checking intuitively/down the list is just as good as everyone voting for someone to be checked.

Also, I dislike these mechanical plans at the start of a game because I honestly do believe there are too many things scum can do with it. Later on they become much more effective, especially with lesser inactives and once a lot of recruiting has taken place already.

youngminii

Australia7514 Posts

July 02 2010 00:21 GMT

#453

The truly inactives will be modkilled. So would we be lynching someone that hasn't posted too much content?
I don't think we're going to find someone likely to be GF or scum on D1.

youngminii

Australia7514 Posts

July 02 2010 02:01 GMT

#475

Well now that everyone's all good and dandy ^_^ we need to agree on a plan. We have 24 hours for our first lynch.

Plan L

Have a mason claim and jail chain him while he directs the scum hunt.

Pros: Confirmed townie that everyone can trust.
Analysis of the night hits is a possibility.

Cons: Sacrificing a jailkeep every night which COULD have been used to block recruitment or a night hit.

Plan K

Have a majority decided roleblock each night while lynching inactives.

Pros: Can pinpoint scum, slowly (giving DT time to do their checks).

Cons: Gives mafia too much control. If a top player is roleblocked then scum can simply choose not to hit anyone so that the town will lynch the top player.
Lets the GF recruit the roleblocked townie freely.
If the person to be roleblocked is a mason, then the GF gets a free mason recruit (which is nearly impossible otherwise).
Cannot analyse night hits if scum choose not to kill anyone.

I like L's plan better.

youngminii

Australia7514 Posts

July 02 2010 02:37 GMT

#480

On July 02 2010 11:33 zeks wrote:PS. I am an integral part in that plan so you don't want to lynch me first night. I hope I don't die like I did in HP mafia when I was gone a couple hours and suddenly everyone stacked on me for no reason. Serious. I'm more important this game than the other ones.

If you aren't mason, that was the worst thing to happen in this game. Period.

youngminii

Australia7514 Posts

July 02 2010 02:46 GMT

#483

So now that zeks has pretty much claimed, scum/GF is almost definitely going to target him.

Oh dear God. If he's jailer we're fucked. If he's mason, everything's sweet and dandy and we'll probably be forced to go with L's plan.

If he's any other blue role, we can jail chain him to protect him while scrapping L's plan or go ahead with L's plan but that almost certainly means zeks will be killed/recruited.

youngminii

Australia7514 Posts

July 02 2010 02:47 GMT

#484

EBWOP: a5j's theory would be nice..

youngminii

Australia7514 Posts

July 02 2010 03:02 GMT

#489

Holy Jesus yay.

Although I do find it a bit unfair that Korynne didn't get to defend her plan/other people didn't get to choose her plan, it looks like we're going with plan L.

But who do we lynch? Are we still going to lynch an inactive or someone who seems scummy?

youngminii

Australia7514 Posts

July 02 2010 03:18 GMT

#493

Likelihood they were first mafia recruit is a bad idea for the first day. There's almost no way of telling since they have no known allies. I would like to lynch based on scumminess but inactivity could plague us bad late game.

youngminii

Australia7514 Posts

July 02 2010 05:03 GMT

#505

On July 02 2010 13:41 Korynne wrote:
What if zeks says that, and then we're all like omg what if he's jail keeper? And then he goes on and says he's mason to make himself safe. If the real masons saw that, maybe the real masons both disagrees with L's plan and think that zeks could be jail keeper or some important role we don't want to kill? Just a possibility to throw out there.

Meh, WIFOM.

Also, we can confirm that people can PM each other by asking one of them to post an encrypted message in the thread, and then later on if we need to confirm the other guy (ex. if the first guy dies and the second guy is about to be lynched) we can have him give us the key to the message and the message will decrypt to say like, [...] is my mason partner or something like that. So if zeks dies, and then two people try to claim to be his mason partner, we can use that to verify it?

No objections here.

We can just use his post death post to do that.

I think the idea is to keep the second mason hidden until he's at L-1. If the first mason was to die, that would mean the Jailer was killed so it would be in our best interest for Zeks not to reveal the second mason in a death post.

youngminii

Australia7514 Posts

July 02 2010 05:16 GMT

#507

That's ridiculous YI. The masons would never let Zeks run wild acting as one of them. Fundamental flaw in your reasoning.

youngminii

Australia7514 Posts

July 02 2010 06:37 GMT

#513

There are serious issues if you think masons allowing scum to run around with a false claim is okay.

Hence, I vote to roleblock yellowink.
I don't really care who we lynch if it's an inactive.

youngminii

Australia7514 Posts

July 02 2010 16:22 GMT

#549

Yeah, YellowInk's posts look the scummiest, whether it be a bit too obvious or not.

I didn't even think of the possibility of mafia hitting the GF, wouldn't that be awesome. I don't think there's anything left to do but lynch the most inactive (elyas) and vote for someone to roleblock.

youngminii

Australia7514 Posts

July 02 2010 21:45 GMT

#591

I'm happy with going for a no-lynch (lynching elyas) for now. No one looks scummy enough to be lynched and the inactives are highly unlikely to be recruited by GF.
We have to decide who gets roleblocked asap because N1 is quickly approaching. Let me post up a tally for the roleblocker.

citi.zen - 2 (Korynne, BM)
Korynne - 2 (rastaban, Chezinu)
YellowInk - 2 (lakrismamma, youngminii)
rastaban - 1 (Hesmyrr)

I may have missed a vote or two but we need to break this tie. We need to clearly choose one person to roleblock and the time to vote is now.

youngminii

Australia7514 Posts

July 02 2010 22:54 GMT

#594

lol

youngminii

Australia7514 Posts

July 02 2010 23:36 GMT

#607

Well if we're doing the roleblocking plan, we have figure out a majority. Why is everyone so cluttered around? It's nearly N1, make up your mind and vote for a roleblockee and a lynchee.

I'm sticking with elyas because an inactive is an inactive, they serve almost no purpose to the game anymore.

youngminii

Australia7514 Posts

July 02 2010 23:57 GMT

#612

citi.zen - 2 (Korynne, BM)
Korynne - 2 (rastaban, Chezinu)
YellowInk - 3 (lakrismamma, youngminii, rastaban)
rastaban - 1 (Hesmyrr)

youngminii

Australia7514 Posts

July 03 2010 00:18 GMT

#616

citi.zen - 2 (Korynne, BM)
Korynne - 1 (Chezinu)
YellowInk - 3 (lakrismamma, youngminii, rastaban, Abenson)
rastaban - 1 (Hesmyrr)

To Roleblocker: If the majority doesn't change, please roleblock YellowInk.