|
Blazinghand
United States25559 Posts
On January 05 2012 02:41 layabout wrote:
The benefits are situational but the cons for me are too strong to justify public claims, at least until the acolyte dies.
I agree with this statement. Although this won't be relevant until Day 3 (after Night 2, the first even-numbered night) it's a good thing to know.
On December 28 2011 15:42 ZBot wrote:
Vote count for the Day 1 Lynch.
With 18 alive, 10 votes are required to lynch.
Current votes:
Dirkzor (1): Blazinghand
The Day 1 deadline is at January 08 2012 10:00. (That's approximately 3 days, 7:15:47 from now.)
OK guys! so the vote totally isn't secret :D
Glad we cleared that up.
For now I'm going to park my vote on a lurker.
##Vote: Erandorr
Something I found out when casting your vote: Make sure you remember to put "purgatory" in your PM title..
|
As you already mentioned the game only started 10 hours ago so I'm sure people would post if they could.
If we can't be sure that a player is an angel/demon I think the safe lynch is bluelightz.
His play in Student mafia was weak and so far this game he has posted nothing but one liners. Hopefully he will have solid content when he returns but I am not too optimistic. I just don't think I will get a good read on him and he's not somebody I would want at lylo, the only downside to lynching him is that it may not give us as much information as many other lynches.
Perhaps he would be a good n1 target for the town demon hunter?
|
Blazinghand
United States25559 Posts
Don't go lynching anyone but Bluelightz if you think he's a legit valid scum. It doesn't matter whether he's an angel or a demon or what. In fact, given that he was staggeringly bad in Student mafia (though he WAS a replacement) it might be good to kill him just because even if he is town he could be useless.
I think we should lynch whoever is the scummiest. If Bluelightz feels scummy to you, put together a case on him and cast your vote like a man. If you think he's probably scummy, and that he'll contribute poorly (as he did in Student mafia), put your money where your mouth is. I can respect that.
|
What I'm saying is that even though I have a null read on him (he hasn't posted anything of value yet) he's not somebody that I would expect much from and could be a liability to the town later in the game. I don't think I'll get a solid read on him as I wasn't able to in student either and he's not somebody I would want in Lylo.
The issue is that the last game I played in the town pretty much unanimously agreed that one player was acting scummy and he flipped town leaving the town basically as clueless on day 2 as we were day1. He seems like a solid lynch to me but if he flips town We'll be left with less information than I'd like. I basically answered my question from the end of my last post, he's a good demon hunter target (not like the angels will kill him for us) but maybe not the best for a lynch.
|
Blazinghand
United States25559 Posts
So, you have a better target in mind? I'd rather lynch someone who I have a feeling is going to be useless than someone random. There's no doubt that someone who might be useless is an acceptable demon hunter target, but I don't see why we couldn't just lynch him and let the demon hunter do his own thang, you know? Also, If he somehow IS scum they could totally bail him out with some purgatorying from the demon hunter, but nothing stops the lynch.
|
I guess you're right there, if he is a demon they could be saved by the transport and if he is an angel he wouldn't die.
If he is sent to purgatory I would assume it was done by demons but their intentions are unknown, maybe they want to save him maybe they want to force a mislynch.
|
Blazinghand
United States25559 Posts
Yeah so really, if we want a killing of Bluelightz to be effective, it should be done via lynch rather than DemonHunting. He'll only die via Demonhunting if he's a townsperson ._. though it's possible the Demons will just choose not to bail him out as a demon, or will choose to bail him out as a townsperson, WIFOM WIFOM WIFOM etc.
I think our best opportunity for directing the Demon Hunter, if any, would be to present him with a list of targets he should be shooting at, rather than a singular target, or else we run into the purgatory problem.
|
Some things to think about:
If the town seer claims after finding a single angel we have a 2/3 chance of reducing their kp, 2/3 chance of making it much safer to claim corruption, and a 100% chance of getting a lot of good information after the angel flips. There are no abilities in the game which make the reads come back incorrect. The angels also DO NOT have a roleblocking ability, so they then have to decide if they want to target the seer and risk missing a kp if the seer is sent to purgatory or leave him be. Obviously this becomes much riskier if we have already lost our channeler. I'd be interested to hear if other people think having the seer claim after their first angel find is a good idea as well.
The sage on the other hand probably shouldn't claim unless he has 2 demons identified. If he claims with only one identified, 0% chance of reducing kp or reducing the corruption ability, demons have a roleblock ability, angels can kill the sage to make demons a larger threat to town thereby reducing focus on them. Still gain information obviously, but overall seems like a much weaker play than the seer claiming after finding an angel.
The demon hunter is not only useful against demons. His attacks kill anything that isn't an angel....meaning if his target lives and wasn't sent to purgatory, he has successfully identified an angel. However, since he poses a significant threat to both angels and demons, I don't really see much of a reason for the demon hunter to ever claim, except perhaps to avoid a lynch if he fucks up and appears scummy. So please don't do that.
On Bluelightz:
I will go check out his filter in the newbie game to see what all the fuss is about.
|
Blazinghand
United States25559 Posts
On January 05 2012 03:55 HarbingerOfDoom wrote:
On Bluelightz:
I will go check out his filter in the newbie game to see what all the fuss is about.
You're in for quite the ride.
|
Sup, I'll read the thread soon, I'll post when I have something to say.
|
Blazinghand
United States25559 Posts
On January 05 2012 03:58 risk.nuke wrote:
Sup, I'll read the thread soon, I'll post when I have something to say.
Welcome aboard!
Revised "post or die" list:
Erandorr
Layabout
Mr. Wiggles
|
Blazinghand
United States25559 Posts
Alright, well, Keeping that "post or die" list in mind, I decided to take a look at BL (BlueLightz) filter.
Here's his posts so far, this game:
On January 04 2012 15:51 Bluelightz wrote:
Well, helo guys anyway what do you think on how should we approach the day 1 lynch?
Useless post
On January 04 2012 16:20 Bluelightz wrote:
I think that the channeler should use his/her ability as a medic power as well as being a roleblock power
Only a useful post compared to the previous post
On January 04 2012 18:37 Bluelightz wrote:
I wont be available till around [unparsable timestamp format]
This post actually says nothing
On January 04 2012 18:38 Bluelightz wrote:
EBWOP: I wont be available till around 1:00 AM GMT+7
finally succeed at saying "brb"
On January 04 2012 18:46 Bluelightz wrote:
But but but I can't acces internet on a plane!
"brb"
On January 04 2012 18:49 Bluelightz wrote:
Sorry then XD
"brb"
Bluelightz has been remarkably, profoundly unuseful this game, without even making a nominal attempt to be useful during the 3 hours he was active. Maybe he's just bad, or just didn't have time. Maybe he'll come back in a few hours and stun us with his astounding post quality.
Or maybe he's anti-town, either by being scum or by being worthless.
I think he's anti-town. His posts speak for themselves-- they are his verdict and his damnation. Let's kill him.
##vote Bluelightz
|
Blazinghand
United States25559 Posts
|
Grackaroni: Stop trashing new players. I don't even know what you are talking about as the previous game (Student mafia) was his first game, he subbed in and was SCUM and he still has over two days to contribute. We aren't going to be lynching or shooting anyone purely based on one game partial meta and the fact you presume that you won't be able to read him well. In fact based on posting so far I would be much more willing to lynch you Grackaroni just for suggesting something like this. Further, town being "pretty much unanimous" doesn't make the lynch correct; it can just as well mean town players are as bad as the player being lynched. If bluelightz doesn't contribute by the end of the day we can re-evaluate.
|
Blazinghand
United States25559 Posts
Oh I don't care about Bluelightz' Meta. I just think his filter is terrible atm so I'm making a case against him. I think currently this makes a fair amount of sense. I am admittedly worried about the three players who haven't posted, though.
|
Blazinghand
United States25559 Posts
On January 05 2012 04:15 syllogism wrote:
If bluelightz doesn't contribute by the end of the day we can re-evaluate.
I assume you mean an IRL day or something here right? We're not made out of time. Bluelightz had 3 hours, and he spent them making one-liners and posts that were literally meaningless. I consider this play to be anti-town. I don't care who does it-- you could have done it, and it would be anti-town. Then he bails. Given that he knew he had to bail in a few hours, he could have made a post with, well, content.
But he didn't.
|
On January 05 2012 04:19 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2012 04:15 syllogism wrote:
If bluelightz doesn't contribute by the end of the day we can re-evaluate. I assume you mean an IRL day or something here right? We're not made out of time. Bluelightz had 3 hours, and he spent them making one-liners and posts that were literally meaningless. I consider this play to be anti-town. I don't care who does it-- you could have done it, and it would be anti-town. Then he bails. Given that he knew he had to bail in a few hours, he could have made a post with, well, content. But he didn't.
No, I meant the first in-game day, that is to say up to 72 hours. Get used to certain players not immediately establishing their innocence, because that is going to be the norm. Whether bluelightz is going to be one of them remains to be seen, but there are "veterans" who to some extent do it every game. The fact that it's anti-town does not mean the optimal play is to lynch them every game for it. If you can pressure them to contribute, that's fine.
Also is Mr. Wiggles actually playing? I see he edited his only post to say "can't", but he is still on the player list.
|
Bluelightz
i think...:
he lacks confidence in his own abilities
that he may try to lurk
that he has not tried to help
that what he has written makes sense from a "town that has to get on a plane and will have limited internet acess" perspective
he has provided us with very little that can be analysed effectively
i do not think that there you can make all of those inferences + Show Spoiler +"profoundly unuseful" and "anti town"
BH at this point in time nearly any case you can come up with needs to forced and isn't necessarily helpful
You seem to like throwing your vote around but do you really think that at the current moment in time everyone should vote for bluelightz to kill him, possibly end the day and let night actions happen?
if i were the type i might accuse you of "trying to gain town cred by forcing a case based off of thin air."
i will not do that. 
|
What i think we should do today:
I think that we should agree within the next few hours to commit to lynching a lurker day 1.
The benefits of lynching a lurker day1:
1)Town blues can be active to prevent a day1 catastrophe
2)Town green can be active, which along with the blues would prevent a day1 town lynch.
3)In order to avoid being lynched angels and demons will also have to be active
4)If people take this seriously then there should be no lurkers, town does not need to worry about lurkers and there will not be a lurker townie mislynch day 1.
5)In the absence of lurkers then the day 1 lynch can be on somebody scummy + Show Spoiler +(as you cannot lynch a lurker if there aren't any) + Show Spoiler +we also shouldn't no-lynch because that gives the angels a free kill and a no-flip for town
6)If we manage to force activity then we can establish a strong town atmosphere and force people to take stances, give opinions and provide useful information that can be analysed.
We would essential transform lurking from a viable scum tactic to actively playing against your teams win condition.
Cons (that i have thought of):
1)if somebody does lurk there are likely to be townie
2)sometimes things IRL come up and a player may be force to lurk for a period of time that would not warrant a modkill but would get them labelled a lurker.
4)(some town) people can get bored with day 1 and struggle to make relevant posts and may lurk
5)By making non-town active they could confuse influence manipulate and/or derail the thread to town detriment + Show Spoiler +but if they can do it after being forced to be active it is likely that they could do so anyway
by providing a way for blues demons and angels to escape the lynch, in the event that vanilla town make up the bulk of the lurking players, we could inadvertently create a list of actives that is dense in demons angels and blues, because the demons and angels know their own teams they can potentially utilise this list better.
I aim to create an effect similar to what happened in student mafia in which BH pressured non-contributors and townies stepped up and began offering information which made them easier to identify and there was a strong pro-town atmosphere.Whilst the situation is different i wish to achieve a pro-town result and i believe that we very easily can.
This is not me advocating a lynch all lurker policy simply (what i believe to be) an effective way to utilise the day1 lynch to create a better town atmosphere or by lynching a player that town can ensure is definitely not a townie.
Please consider this, and try to look at it objectively
|
Blazinghand
United States25559 Posts
On January 05 2012 04:27 syllogism wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2012 04:19 Blazinghand wrote:On January 05 2012 04:15 syllogism wrote:
If bluelightz doesn't contribute by the end of the day we can re-evaluate. I assume you mean an IRL day or something here right? We're not made out of time. Bluelightz had 3 hours, and he spent them making one-liners and posts that were literally meaningless. I consider this play to be anti-town. I don't care who does it-- you could have done it, and it would be anti-town. Then he bails. Given that he knew he had to bail in a few hours, he could have made a post with, well, content. But he didn't. No, I meant the first in-game day, that is to say up to 72 hours. Get used to certain players not immediately establishing their innocence, because that is going to be the norm. Whether bluelightz is going to be one of them remains to be seen, but there are "veterans" who to some extent do it every game. The fact that it's anti-town does not mean the optimal play is to lynch them every game for it. If you can pressure them to contribute, that's fine.
The #1 goal of a town player should be to establish their innocence. Look, regardless of whether "oh bluelightz isn't establishing his innocence" or whatever, just look at that filter. That is an unhelpful dude. I don't have a solid scumread atm, but we've got 3 lurkers and one guy who's posted like 6 one-liners and said nothing. This is fine because probably the lurkers are asleep-- but ideally we have a sweet day1 discussion and get some juices flowing.
I will not stand for an inactive crappy town.
I will NOT get used to players not establishing their innocence.
I will hunt down and kill all the scum whether in doing so I earn YOUR approval or not.
On January 05 2012 04:27 syllogism wrote:Also is Mr. Wiggles actually playing? I see he edited his only post to say "can't", but he is still on the player list.
On December 28 2011 15:49 Mr. Wiggles wrote:Can't 
Is Mr. Wiggles playing?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
