|
I won't have time to read zare's filter carefully enough before the deadline, so in case I die tonight I would like to say this:
Lynch Spaghetticus.
Either he or zare or both of them are scum. This is simple logical deduction from the actions and votes of day 2. Again for the cheap seats: scum would not have split their vote 3 ways and if you think that scum bussed Mocsta it means I am scum.
Spag bandwagoned Trotske at the end of day 2, this alone is reason enough for a lynch. He has not provided an explanation for this action, nor had he delivered on his promise to start "taking names".
Simply put, while I'm still on the fence about zare there is simply zero town motivation for Spag's actions.
|
On January 18 2013 06:11 Sn0_Man wrote:
Lots more sense but I'm still pretty sure you are wrong.
Lets say JSL and Mocsta were scum.
A) who is #3?
B) Why would JSL not vote to save himself day 1 (I guess moc promises to save him in scum QT?) and save mocsta day 2? (Admittedly a smurf *may* be suicidal but that seems weird).
Wait, so you think JSL is scum or not?
Because your post makes it look like you think he's not, and zare also thinks he's not, so... where's the disagreement?
|
On January 18 2013 05:53 Trotske wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2013 05:19 zarepath wrote:
Sorry, what did you mean to say, then? I'm confused now. What I Was trying to say was that your townie claim on JSL is not as solid as your posts seems to make clear you think it is. Your reasoning is that he could have voted me and saving his scum mate, but by doing so when I showed up townie the biggest case that was around was on mocsta after I was lynched aka he is next in line of fire even more so since he was pushing for my mislynch. So by hammering me JSL not only would kill mocsta next lynch in the process but would also be under more scrutiny form hammering me. I am not trying to say he is scum just that he is not a confirmed townie like your post said. does that make more sense than my other post?
By saving Mocsta and lynching you, all they do is create suspicion around them, they don't guarantee a lynch especially since they go into day 3 with a 3-vote power against 5.
Speculation time:
yesterday you die, then I get NK. OE is modkilled, maybe replaced, but maybe not. Oh. Suddenly scum are 3 against 4 which means barring a unanimous scumlynch, they win. I think casting suspicions on themselves is a pretty decent tradeoff for winning the game.
|
R.I.P. Sn0_Man
Just so we're clear, Sn0's death doesn't mean anyone gets a free pass re: roleclaiming and explanations.
I'll start, since I have the most powerful role with the best power of them all:
+ Show Spoiler +
I would like to see all of your claims before making a case.
@Zebezt: You need to get off your tunneling of Laguerta and make a case against JSL if you insist on going that route for today's lynch. I also want to hear an explanation of why you didn't consolidate with town on Mocsta when it was clear a JSL lynch wasn't going to happen.
In that regard, until you step up...
##Vote: Zebezt
|
On January 18 2013 09:40 JacobStrangelove wrote:
Vt
"Lynch Spaghetticus.
Either he or zare or both of them are scum. This is simple logical deduction from the actions and votes of day 2. Again for the cheap seats: scum would not have split their vote 3 ways and if you think that scum bussed Mocsta it means I am scum."
So why the vote on Zebezt?
Because I want to pressure him? Why else? There's like 40+ hours left in the day, I'm not going to park my vote and twiddle my thumbs in my ass for the rest of the day. We require information.
|
On January 18 2013 12:51 Spaghetticus wrote:Okay there have been some developments, seemingly a lot of them on me. I have limited time (two hours before I need to be at the bus-stop), so I'm going to quickly draw your attention to my position and the posts that support it. I will be gone for at least 9 hours, finishing just before midnight, meaning when I do get back my contribution will be limited due to sleep. Once I awaken, I'm hoping my mother has better internet than she used to as it was unstable last time I was there. I should definitely be back to posting full strength by the the last half of Day Two. My Day Two Voting Explanation Post Show nested quote ++ Show Spoiler +Book-keeping: Why did Spag quick-switch?
Let's ignore the fact that I was blatantly wrong not to vote for Mocsta for just a second. Recall that I was:
(1) - Going to lynch one of the lurkiest players
(2) - Was going to wake up in order to control the lynch
(3) - Had already short-listed Zebezt and Troske
When I woke up at 10:00, I believe there was Acid and I on Zebezt, two on Mocsta, and two on Troske. Now, while I did not want Mocsta lynched, I did not particularly care who got lynched between Zebezt and Troske. At two votes each, I could leave it at 2/2/2, or exercise my influence on the vote, and make it 3/2/1 making it significantly less likely that Mocsta got voted.
While I was wrong, and glad I was was, as Mocsta making power plays end-game with no fear of being inspected could pretty much instawin scum the game, my reasoning is the same as pretty much every other day one/two lynch I've ever done. I don't get my first choice of lynch because I don't wield that much influence, so I need to settle for going for the next best thing: protecting the people I consider more catchable/valuable end-game.
Acid is absolutely correct to expect me to step up and start taking names, the time has truly passed for LAL. I will note that I have a commitment to my Mother to go down to my hometown and supervise some Youth reachout gig at 5pm tomorrow for an unspecified amount of time. I don't have a license and the public transport is terrifyingly bad, often taking a lot longer than it should. This will hinder my contribution somewhat, but should not be too big of a deal. I will reallocate my time spent on rousing lurkers to making cases.
I'm going to go and gorge on lasagna and cider to celebrate, this is a big win peops! I believe it was Zarepath who complained that I hadn't justified my actions (It might have been Acid). This was wrong. My justification is strong, and I believe that if I had acted any other way I would have been acting to the detriment of Town (with the information available). I have done similar moves in previous games, and given the same scenario I would do the same again. Someone stated they didn't like me saying I didn't care who died between Zebezt and Trotske. At the time I had equal reads on both, and they are still on my 'dar with the addition of JSL. I really didn't care which one was lynched, I think narrowing my scope down to two people is sufficient. I never have the confidence in my scum reads others seem to have (yes I'm talking about previous games), I am known for my cautious scum reads, and voting for reasons other than tunneling the one person. I believe Shz or Zarepath can give you the meta-read. The interplay between myself and Mocsta was more cautious than normal. We just threw away XXXIV with in-fighting between Mocsta and myself, his jabs throughout the entirety of that game being damnright nasty. That he approached me with what I interpreted as some composed humour this time around was a relief. I wanted Mocsta around day Three, as I didn't think there was any chance of him slipping past us if he were scum come day three. I mean, could you honestly see him surviving given that last big case? At the time I voted, I had skimmed over it the night before, given some denunciation to make sure that it didn't gain traction in the eyes of some of the newer players, and went to sleep. When I voted in the morning, I voted without rereading the case (it was even worse than what I thought), switched my vote to improve the chances of me getting my way, and went straight back to sleep. I don't know if I would have switched my vote to Mocsta if I had reread the case, but I'm pretty sure I wouldn't. --- Two out of my three biggest town-reads died in the night: Sn0 and Omni. This leaves only Shz as confirmed town in my eyes. There is no way that he would make the hammer vote on Mocsta if he were scum, the bus was too unnecessary. The only way Shz is scum is if Trotske is also scum. That way, Shz was choosing which of his buddies to lynch, not whether to lynch one of his buddies. If Trotske flips town, Shz is confirmed town 100% no question. Of who I think is scum, I think at least one is hiding among Trotske, Zebezt, and JSL. I'm leaning towards Trotske in this position based off Mocsta's erratic behaviour. Town was in a bad position prior to Mocsta's lynch, three deaths in one cycle is bad. Why would Mocsta act so erratic if there wasn't another scum on the chopping block? If there was only town up for killing, all he had to do was play consistently and we would dig ourselves an even deeper hole. Instead he stepped up and made a bizarre case against a strongly confirmed town. Scum are more than capable of bussing their buddies, but why would Mocsta take such massive risks to protect someone that was town? It looks to me as if he was making a distraction to try and destabilize the vote on a buddy. Voting Troske now also has the benefit of establishing Shz as 100% town if he does flip green, and gives us a strong lead on a third scum if he flips red. ##Vote: TrotskeI will be open to discussion when I get back, but I need to start packing and make my way to the bus-stop.
There's one major problem with your reasoning: Mocsta makes his bullshit case on OE at a point in time where Trotske has 0 votes.
After Mocsta votes for OE, this is what happens:
- Sn0_Man is the first to pick up on my case and votes for Trotske
- zebezt makes a case against Mocsta, then votes for laguerta/JSL
- I make my own case against Mocsta, and vote him
- Trotske votes for Mocsta
- Mocsta votes for Trotske!
Look at this sequence here. Why, at this point, would two scum vote for each other when neither of them is on the chopping block? They're each at one vote before they effectively OMGUS each other. What's the strategic value here, if they are both scum?
And then, something very telling:
- zarepath votes Trotske with no explanation, only a promise
- Sn0_Man correctly senses that something is up and unvotes Trotske
- zebezt refuses to consolidate on Mocsta
- You come in and vote Trotske, again with no explanation
- JSL votes no-lynch
- Sn0_Man votes Mocsta
- Shz votes Mocsta
Now, what does this tell us? Couple of things.
1. I don't buy Trotske as scum. My case was good but so were the defenses, including - but not limited to, his own. He was also the first to follow me on Mocsta. Due to his reaction to Mocsta's post, it's possible it was an OMGUS, but even so... scum OMGUSing scum? If you look at the sequence, the last 2 votes on Mocsta come quite late and with a bit of reluctance from the voters. Without Trotske's initial support, there is no consolidation later on.
2. You and zarepath look scummy as hell and the only reason I'm not calling both of you out as the scum team is because
3. Zebezt's refusal to consolidate, despite agreeing that Mocsta is scum and despite his target having virtually no chance of being lynched that day, makes him look very fishy indeed.
Another point against you: you are willing to potentially sacrifice a townie, when we are 5-2, only to "100% confirm" someone who is like 90% confirmed.
|
On January 19 2013 07:18 zebezt wrote:
Lol.. I almost miss Mocsta. It's kinda dead in here. Partly my own fault. Too damn busy.
Been reading spag's filter.
He doesnt say much useful stuff. He did encourage people to look into a case on Mocsta though.
Not really. What he did what suggest that people "tear apart" the case Mocsta made on Omni. This looks scummy to me now that we know Mocsta's alignment, because we know Mocsta's case was misdirection and steering players towards examination of that case is more misdirection: it diverts attention from true scumhunting.
Also note that Spag himself doesn't waste any time analyzing the case while asking us to do it. All the little things add up.
Slightly positive.
On the whole he feels scummy to me though. For someone that said he was gonna contribute a lot, he hasn't really made that happen yet.
Tomorrow i'll probably write an overview of my case against Jacob.
Tomorrow we'll "probably" lynch you if you don't start being useful, so I suggest you *definitely* make a real case against JSL.
|
On January 19 2013 08:40 Trotske wrote:Let's go through our lynch options. Here are my reads on, in my opinion, the viable lynch candidates. JacobStrangelove + Show Spoiler +On January 18 2013 12:07 JacobStrangelove wrote:Show nested quote +On January 15 2013 02:19 Spaghetticus wrote:
(3) - OmniEulogy is confirmed town. He has changed his meta from scummy to actual pro-town. This is a read from a more complex dialogue outside of the game, but put simply:
- he has played deliberately scummy in previous games in order to give himself room to work with when he actually rolls scum
- I warned him that while I have been avoiding him in game I had decided to tunnel him as I could no longer take the bullshit, along as communicating several reasons for why a better player would play to the best of their ability every game
- He improved his style when he did not need to. I was not in the game to tunnel him, and if he rolled scum he would have had three games worth of established scummy play to work with, all but guaranteeing him a scum victory if he rolled scum.
If he rolled scum he would be under zero pressure to change his style and we would be looking at a clusterfuck of WIFOM and OMGUS instead of the rational play he is demonstrating.
While this turned out to be true I think this might have been a scum slip, even with all the evidence town are normally far more careful with reads. For example with this evidence I would say most likely town and would think of the possibility of having improved his play to appear more town not remaining scummy to appear more town. (although I haven't seen him play before I don't think?) Also in general Spags meta is way off... he is the only other australian and while he has given reasons for being less active you would have thought he would have at least chimed it (it's almost 1pm Australian time) So in other words his meta is off, he isn't posting much (which is a separate issue from meta while being connected) and he isn't following though on his non LAL policy. A LAL policy is really easy for scum to talk about because it requires no evidence beside from lack of content. Also he posted this Show nested quote +
I want you there on day three because you are active, and if you are scum you will slip as a result. If you downgrade your activity I will shit on you for motivated lurking. It is clear that I want you to stop wasting time being a victim, and I am not the only person with these thoughts. You are not responsible for other people lurking, but you are responsible for hiding their posts with tirades of self-pitying crap.
Is seems he has taken up the mantle of motivated lurking.... after being so bold and aggressive against them has he realised he can't keep up?
FOS# Spaghetticus This is JSL's only post I could find that has any real input into who could be scum. I'm not sure if this makes him scummy or just a lazy town but I do find it odd that laguerta and JSL playing from the same role PM seem to be playing the same style.
Well, at least he's not trolling us. The few posts he has made manage to have more sense and quality than Zebezt's entire filter, for example.
Spaghetticus + Show Spoiler +On January 18 2013 13:24 Trotske wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2013 12:51 Spaghetticus wrote:Okay there have been some developments, seemingly a lot of them on me. I have limited time (two hours before I need to be at the bus-stop), so I'm going to quickly draw your attention to my position and the posts that support it. I will be gone for at least 9 hours, finishing just before midnight, meaning when I do get back my contribution will be limited due to sleep. Once I awaken, I'm hoping my mother has better internet than she used to as it was unstable last time I was there. I should definitely be back to posting full strength by the the last half of Day Two. My Day Two Voting Explanation Post + Show Spoiler +Book-keeping: Why did Spag quick-switch?
Let's ignore the fact that I was blatantly wrong not to vote for Mocsta for just a second. Recall that I was:
(1) - Going to lynch one of the lurkiest players
(2) - Was going to wake up in order to control the lynch
(3) - Had already short-listed Zebezt and Troske
When I woke up at 10:00, I believe there was Acid and I on Zebezt, two on Mocsta, and two on Troske. Now, while I did not want Mocsta lynched, I did not particularly care who got lynched between Zebezt and Troske. At two votes each, I could leave it at 2/2/2, or exercise my influence on the vote, and make it 3/2/1 making it significantly less likely that Mocsta got voted.
While I was wrong, and glad I was was, as Mocsta making power plays end-game with no fear of being inspected could pretty much instawin scum the game, my reasoning is the same as pretty much every other day one/two lynch I've ever done. I don't get my first choice of lynch because I don't wield that much influence, so I need to settle for going for the next best thing: protecting the people I consider more catchable/valuable end-game.
Acid is absolutely correct to expect me to step up and start taking names, the time has truly passed for LAL. I will note that I have a commitment to my Mother to go down to my hometown and supervise some Youth reachout gig at 5pm tomorrow for an unspecified amount of time. I don't have a license and the public transport is terrifyingly bad, often taking a lot longer than it should. This will hinder my contribution somewhat, but should not be too big of a deal. I will reallocate my time spent on rousing lurkers to making cases.
I'm going to go and gorge on lasagna and cider to celebrate, this is a big win peops! I believe it was Zarepath who complained that I hadn't justified my actions (It might have been Acid). This was wrong. My justification is strong, and I believe that if I had acted any other way I would have been acting to the detriment of Town (with the information available). I have done similar moves in previous games, and given the same scenario I would do the same again. Someone stated they didn't like me saying I didn't care who died between Zebezt and Trotske. At the time I had equal reads on both, and they are still on my 'dar with the addition of JSL. I really didn't care which one was lynched, I think narrowing my scope down to two people is sufficient. I never have the confidence in my scum reads others seem to have (yes I'm talking about previous games), I am known for my cautious scum reads, and voting for reasons other than tunneling the one person. I believe Shz or Zarepath can give you the meta-read. The interplay between myself and Mocsta was more cautious than normal. We just threw away XXXIV with in-fighting between Mocsta and myself, his jabs throughout the entirety of that game being damnright nasty. That he approached me with what I interpreted as some composed humour this time around was a relief. I wanted Mocsta around day Three, as I didn't think there was any chance of him slipping past us if he were scum come day three. I mean, could you honestly see him surviving given that last big case? At the time I voted, I had skimmed over it the night before, given some denunciation to make sure that it didn't gain traction in the eyes of some of the newer players, and went to sleep. When I voted in the morning, I voted without rereading the case (it was even worse than what I thought), switched my vote to improve the chances of me getting my way, and went straight back to sleep. I don't know if I would have switched my vote to Mocsta if I had reread the case, but I'm pretty sure I wouldn't. --- Two out of my three biggest town-reads died in the night: Sn0 and Omni. This leaves only Shz as confirmed town in my eyes. There is no way that he would make the hammer vote on Mocsta if he were scum, the bus was too unnecessary. The only way Shz is scum is if Trotske is also scum. That way, Shz was choosing which of his buddies to lynch, not whether to lynch one of his buddies. If Trotske flips town, Shz is confirmed town 100% no question. Of who I think is scum, I think at least one is hiding among Trotske, Zebezt, and JSL. I'm leaning towards Trotske in this position based off Mocsta's erratic behaviour. Town was in a bad position prior to Mocsta's lynch, three deaths in one cycle is bad. Why would Mocsta act so erratic if there wasn't another scum on the chopping block? If there was only town up for killing, all he had to do was play consistently and we would dig ourselves an even deeper hole. Instead he stepped up and made a bizarre case against a strongly confirmed town. Scum are more than capable of bussing their buddies, but why would Mocsta take such massive risks to protect someone that was town? It looks to me as if he was making a distraction to try and destabilize the vote on a buddy. Voting Troske now also has the benefit of establishing Shz as 100% town if he does flip green, and gives us a strong lead on a third scum if he flips red. ##Vote: TrotskeI will be open to discussion when I get back, but I need to start packing and make my way to the bus-stop. And yet you offer no specifics in this whole post. Make excuses for your bad play, and you still have not given town any information in this whole thread YOU SCREAM SCUM you have no case and are trying to waste a lynch on a fact finding trip. My FoS of Spaghetticus of which no points have been changed or addressed. + Show Spoiler +FoS on Spaghetticus I would like some other opinions on him,
I feel that most of his posts so far have been only restating that he doesn't
like lurkers Literally half of his posts have had some comment about lurkers.
His posts seem to me to be saying nothing while looking very large at the same time.
##VOTE Spaghetticus
Agree. He talks a lot but there's not substance behind it, and of course the biggest scumtell is wanting to waste a lynch when a mislynch puts us in LyLo the next day with two scum remaining.
Zarepath + Show Spoiler +Does this feel like a bus to anyone else? It seems like we are pretty set up on killing spag today so why not jump on the bus and try for the late game. On January 19 2013 01:42 zarepath wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2013 01:20 shz wrote:On January 18 2013 22:58 zarepath wrote:
This post (mine, here) does not even attempt to go into Spag's endorsement of Mocsta's case on me, or his voting behavior, or lack of cases on who the other 2 scum are. (Really, if he were actually going after scum, he would ASSUME I were scum, because if he supposedly knows he's not scum, then he has to assume that I was backing Mocsta up by voting for Trotske. Where is Spag's case on me? Shouldn't I be the most obvious scum to him if he's NOT scum? NO, instead he has a convoluted case which main goal is to confirm someone town.) I post this now because I think people are overlooking the importance of analyzing his interactions with the one person we KNOW to have been scum. Should we then just lynch you both and one scum will come out of it? The point is that if I were Spag and I knew I weren't scum, I would be looking very closely at Zarepath because he is the only person who voted with Mocsta that I wouldn't have confirmed as town. I can understand why people are suspicious of me, because I voted with Mocsta. That on its own isn't enough reason for me to be scum, but I can totally understand why it would be worthy of looking through my filter and coming up with a case. I can ESPECIALLY understand why it would be worthy of doing if Spag were town -- he would think it very likely for me to be scum. However, he did NOT do that -- that draws attention to the idea that another scum must have voted with Mocsta, and he apparently isn't very confident that I am scum. Because I am town, I am highly suspicious of the other person to have voted with Mocsta, so I looked through his filter and his interactions with Mocsta, and it all builds together (along with his votes and his cases) to a strong case of Spag being scum. The point isn't that we're both scum -- it's that we're both very much worth looking into if you're LOOKING for scum. I submit that Spag is not looking for scum, and that, having now looked, I very much think him to be scum. Also He voted with mocsta last lynch with no explanation saying he would post it during the night this is that post. On January 17 2013 11:15 zarepath wrote:My Vote, Explainedby ZarepathTrotske's Day 1 involved few contributions. Most notably, he "pressured" bringaniga, agreed with Mocsta's case on Mandalor while still defending him while still saying he'd vote for him if he acted more scummy (bandwagon ready), and then he also made a case on sno_man and wouldn't let up on trying to get everyone to talk about it: Show nested quote +On January 14 2013 05:24 Trotske wrote:
How do you feel about sn0_man and my case for him. Show nested quote +On January 14 2013 06:16 Trotske wrote:
for some reason I Thought there were more votes on laguerta
bringaniga lets assume you are not going to get modkilled please tell me why you like laguerta more than sn0_man. Show nested quote +On January 14 2013 08:55 Trotske wrote:
@Acid How is Zebezt a better lynch than sn0_man.
Not necessarily scum-aligned, of course. But also smacks of trying to start a bandwagon. When looking at how Day 1 mislynch went, Trotske went out of his way to call Laguerta a bandwagon and voted for Mandalor because he was the one who started the vote for Laguerta... it seemed a little bit like trying to take credit in advance for the town's mislynch (or non-credit, as it were). As my time was limited today, I decided that the players I'd limit my analysis to were my previous scummy reads and those with lower post counts (Shz, trotske, Acid, zebezt). Trotske stood out to me as I read Acid's case on him, as his defense wasn't exactly stellar, and his other contributions weren't that amazing, either. His vote for Mocsta seemed to be mroe of a deflection than a read. So, prior to Mocsta flip, those were my thoughts on Trotske and my reasons for voting for him. NOw, however, we have a LOT more data with which to look at things, so I am pretty much looking at Trotske completely fresh (and almost confirmed townie, basically, considering his interactions with Mocsta, although that can't be completely assumed.) no hard reasons but the case from Acid. Makes his vote seems a little scummy, something to consider.
Yeah, zarepath's play is frustrating to analyze and bears a lot of similarities with Mocsta. Also, scum bussing their buddy today? I buy it. I'm convinced they didn't do it day 1 or 2 but if there ever was a time to bus, this is it.
zebezt + Show Spoiler +I really like how he made a case on mocsta pretty early, My only problem is he makes a case on jacob based on a case against lagurata who was practically trolling instead of voting for mocsta. I would really like some more input on him so I can see other points of views on him.
The only thing Zebezt has going for him is that he made a case against Mocsta, similar to mine, a few minutes before I posted mine. So, essentially, we both had the same idea at the same time. While this is indicative of town alignment to me, the rest of his play has been abysmal, especially tunneling a lurker when we've had much better lynch targets.
These are my current reads, I WOULD LOVE SOME INPUT ON THESE, IT IS DEAD IN HERE. I think spag is still the best lynch candidate.
I think you could make stronger, more detailed cases but you've got the general idea. I agree with Spag being the best lynch candidate.
My gut feeling is that the scum team intended to lynch you yesterday by bandwagoning Sn0_Man's vote and my case, so that they could point the finger at us when you flipped town. As such, I believe the remaining two scum to be Spaghetticus and zarepath. Simple, yes, but not simplistic and definitely in the realm of possibility.
Therefore, since it's unlikely any pressure will come on Zebezt today:
##Unvote: Zebezt
##Vote: Spaghetticus
|
Spaghetticus
1. Roleclaim.
2. More scumhunting, less defensiveness
As of right now, you are the best candidate for a lynch whether you are scum or not, simply because none of what you are doing is actually helping us find scum.
|
On January 19 2013 23:31 Spaghetticus wrote:
(3) - My reasons for suspecting/voting Trotske are not only that he confirms you as 100% town, though I am someone who factors in such things into his initial estimate of a person. I believe JSL stated it should only be a tie-breaker, this is very conservative and IMHO dead wrong. Trotske has very little contribution, and what he does say is generally fairly weak. He is one of my two biggest reads (the other being JSL, though I'm starting to suspect Zare), and while my post did not explain everything, it was a summary post, not a case. I feel that a lot of the misinterpretations of my content are happening because a failure of people to look at the context (as well as delve into my possible intentions).
Trotske's posting can be explained by him being a newbie town player. There are a couple of things that don't match up with him being scum:
- Why would Mocsta bus him day 2? After the case I made against Trotske, would the scum team have given up on life so easily and not tried to attack me? There were also other targets that they could have switched us to. Zebezt and Laguerta/JSL were under scrutiny. Mocsta would also not have gained any town cred for lynching Trotske IF Trotske flipped scum, because Sn0_Man originally called for the lynch and I made the case.
- And now we can ask the exact same question in reverse. Why would Trotske bus Mocsta? My case against Mocsta had no traction and there were juicier town targets.
Even WIFOM doesn't make sense here, because while it could be, in some situations, a good strategy to double-bus, it's stupid in the situation we were in yesterday. They could have easily led town into a mislynch (and I do declare that's exactly what they almost did), in which case we would have entered day 3 at 4-3. Yeah. We didn't know the situation, but there was a chance OE was getting modkilled with no replacement and scum team KNEW that OE was town.
I don't think I need to explain how a 4-3 ratio is stupidly more advantageous to scum than *maybe* getting a bit of town cred.
|
On January 20 2013 00:36 Spaghetticus wrote:
- Mocsta would bus anyone day two. He was WIFOMing like a mad-man. He did it too much and you guys caught him because of it. His actions were calculated to cause confusion, why would he act in such a way that allows us to confirm town? He was and is a bold player, and there is not a croutons chance in hell that he didn't name/mention/act against one of his scum-buddies to create further intrigue.
- Trotske probably did not believe the lynch on Mocsta would happen (I certainly didn't). By the time it became a real possibility it was too late for him to back out without being called scummy, and he may as well rack up town cred for the lynch.
- it's not as if these were hard buses. A scum's role is not to act predictably, but to win the game. If they thought that neither target would go down (I know Mocsta left enough options open), then why shouldn't they remove themselves from the lynch is it was a reversible maneuver?
Honestly my head is getting fuzzy, and your argument is not making as much sense to me as it should. What is your fourth paragraph about? I don't see the double bus play at all, and I'm not even sure of the mislynch you refer to.
OK, here's the simple version:
Mocsta can't take credit for the lynch if Trotske is lynched and flips scum. Sn0_Man made the first case against him, and initiated the vote. I made the supporting case later on. Mocsta can't take any credit for the lynch, he made no case and just used mine as reference when he parked his vote.
What is there to gain from such a bus?
None of the bandwagon voters are realistically going to get any town cred for it. Also, at the time the votes were made, none of the bandwagon voters were under any real suspicion. So, yeah, maybe scum aren't supposed to play predictably, but there's unpredictable play and then there's just bad play. And killing one of your own, when you don't need to, and in doing so losing the opportunity to create a LyLo situation for town on day 3, that's just bad.
Now look at this play: if Trotske is town instead, what happens when we lynch him and he flips town?
1. Honest mistake guys, really. After all, the case was really convincing and Trotske had made some dubious plays, it's his own fault he got lynched, really...
2. I look bad. Mocsta wouldn't have failed to point out that I made a case and didn't back it up with a vote and then I spend all day 3 explaining why I acted this way and maybe, just maybe I get lynched and then it's GG.
At this point, it's not even that one situation is more likely than the other. But one explanation IS simpler than the other, and it also happens to contain a great endgame plan, whereas your explanation... I don't see the strategic value. I don't see the endgame. Judging by Mocsta's play there is 0 doubt in my mind that scum are being coached so I'm taking a little risk and assuming he's not coaching them into doing stupid shit that doesn't advance their gameplan, just to be unpredictable.
I buy Shz being scum more than Trotske, because I can see the sequence of plays leading to a scum win in that scenario. Yes, it's ballsy as fuck but it would qualify as good, unpredictable play.
For Trotske being scum, I don't see the sequence. Well, actually I see a possible sequence but it would require you to be scum as well.
|
On January 20 2013 01:53 shz wrote:
Spaghetti, you are pulling a serious Mocsta here. But leaving your will is actually a good thing to do. No matter what you flip.
Despite playing the angry victim pretty hard, I don't like this lynch.
Why don't you like it? If it's because it seems too "easy", remember that now is the perfect situation for scum to bus.
My favorite to lynch today is zarepath. He did nothing all day except from tunneling Spaghetti. He is also AWOL the last 24hs and why shouldn't he be? Spag is going down and he doesn't need anymore attention on him.
If nothing happens for the rest of the day, my vote will stay with him.
##Vote: zarepath
Zarepath has actually been pretty active this game day. If tunneling Spag is scummy, why am I not suspicious as well? Why does Spag's will read to you as genuine? Why is Spag's will valuable to us if he is scum?
|
On January 20 2013 09:12 zarepath wrote:I am SO glad I did not mistakenly tunnel Spag two games in a row. 
So you don't feel the least bit remorseful about throwing your buddy under the bus?
|
On January 20 2013 10:07 zarepath wrote:
That's a pretty leading question . . .
I can understand why I'm under scrutiny; I am the only surviving person who voted with Mocsta, and my arguments D3 could be seen as a bus. But consider my perspective as a townie who voted with Mocsta on D2... of course I focused Spag, because I have valuable information that nobody else in the game has (unless I've been DTd) -- I know that I am Town, which makes Spag the obvious focus for my attention.
To me, the most obvious next people to look at are Zebezt and Jacob, as they're the only people left (other than myself) who didn't vote with Mocsta. If you're going to argue that I bused Spag, I ask that you also analyze those two as well.
Sorry for the loaded question, but it was too tempting :p
More seriously: your play this last day makes sense whether you are town or scum. Spag flipping scum means that you are not 100% scum at least.
And yes, I'm not letting Zebezt or JSL off the hook that easily. We will have a very interesting day 4 indeed.
|
Alright, here is the course of action I suggest:
1. Tomorrow we lynch zarepath because he is still the most obvious scum.
2. If zarepath flips town, next day we lynch JSL because he's the next best candidate by elimination.
You already know my reasoning for Trotske and Shz being town, Zebezt I could see you being iffy about but the fact that he made a case on Mocsta similar to mine at the same time (slightly before, even) shouldn't be ignored. No offense to Zebezt, but I don't think you're *that* good of a scum player :p
That leaves zarepath and JSL as the only two possible scum.
Sidenotes for the night:
A. If we have a roleblocker, RB zarepath
B. If we have a JK, Jailkeep Shz or me
|
|
|
On January 24 2013 03:56 shz wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2013 03:53 JacobStrangelove wrote:
Oh and for the record spag told me lynch time was 12 so I was legitimately confused coming into the thread. Why didn't you roleblock all game though?
I think it's because they used him to carry out the kills since he was flying under the radar and he can't kill and RB at the same time?
|
Sorry if this seems really noobish but... What do you mean by breadcrumb?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
