|
I really don't like Smancer's case for kirby either. After the lynch, he admits that kirby looks good (presumably he meant townie)
On April 07 2013 10:44 Smancer wrote:
Damn it.
Jkirby this makes you look really good.
He votes/unvotes Rainbows a ~36 hours later.
He builds a case against me ~ 24 hours after that.
He hasn't mentioned Kirby again until
On April 09 2013 21:56 Smancer wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2013 14:30 jrkirby wrote:
Smancer smells bad to me. I will vote for him if I think that the town is on my side.
I'll do it if everyone else is willing to. How do you know who is town? scumslip??
But he claims he was being sarcastic about the scumslip part, and just pointing out the bad logic.
He then does his crazy conspiracy theory (his words) about Raven and me.
This is where it starts getting interesting. He quotes kirby's three one-liners that imply Smancer is scum, and does a complete turnaround and goes aggressive on kirby. Then he ridicules kirby because kirby doesn't want to lynch me.
An hour later, he says he likes how I addressed his case against me, but he's still voting for kirby.
The only thing he's going on is that kirby has been "posting garbage reads" and that he doesn't seem to have a sense of urgency to find scum.
To me, it feels like Smancer is just doing voting for kirby because kirby made a weak case against him.
|
On April 10 2013 07:54 Obzy wrote:
Moloch who would you want to vote for if not kirby? nobody do you have any insights or are you still convinced?
I'm not sure right now. I'm looking closer to TRN and JJD. TRN because I trust Rainbows more than anyone else at the moment, and JJD because I have a general bad feeling about him, but him almost being lynched yesterday makes me trust him slightly more. I'm going to briefly go over kirby's posting history first, though. All I've done with kirby is find flaws in people's arguments against him, which doesn't necessarily mean that I trust him.
It kind of feels like I've wasted time wrecking other people's arguments rather than building my own.
|
On April 10 2013 08:05 jrkirby wrote:
Moloch: Why do you trust rainbows? I understand not thinking him scum, as I don't think he's scum either. But I don't think he's got good reads, and he's just tunneling TRN for not a very good reason.
That came out wrong. I meant "I trust him more than anyone else" as in, I think there's less chance he's scum than anybody else. It's not really a positive, just less negative.
|
As far as TRN goes, I really don't like the way his vote on my came around. He saw Smancer's argument about me, then TRN brings up a the ABCD theoretical person not-policy lynch question, and says that because I never had my vote on JJD, it makes me look suspicious, then he points toward my awful post last night and those are the two reasons why he's voting for me. It feels to me like he say Smancer's post and just decided that he could get some 'analysis' in quick and have a nice place to hide.
I like kirby's posts, for the most part. He's had good posts on multiple people and will probably be useful in the future.
JJD. I don't like any of his arguments against kirby, and he hasn't done much since then. He's said stuff, but nothing with any substance that I can see.
I wish I had more than half an hour to vote.
|
At this point, it doesn't matter what I vote. Half of everyone is voting for kirby.
Think about that, everyone.
50% of EVERYONE is voting for kirby. There are ten people alive. 9 people not including kirby.
When 5/9 people are voting for kirby, chances are he's town unless scum are voting for their own.
|
^Unless I miscounted votes again, could someone check that for me?
|
I'm thinking of voting Rainbows.
If he gets lynched, there is a good situation and a bad one.
Good: He's scum!
Bad: He's blue. But, this situation will also give us soooooooo much information. Much more than a kirby lynch would. I'm nearly convinced kirby is town. Like I said earlier, I don't see scum voting for their own when the race is close. So, if he is scum, the most likely candidates for scum are Fishgle and Obzy since they piled on at the end.
|
##Vote: TheRavensName
I really think there's a better chance he's scum than kirby right now.
|
Six minutes left.
My count: 2 ravens, 5 kirby, 1 jjd, 2 rainbows
|
On April 10 2013 08:59 Acrofales wrote:
Are we actually entertaining to watch? I imagine it's somewhat like watching a bunch of toddlers trying to hit each other with those floaty long skinny pool things. Swinging, missing, losing balance, and falling down.
|
What an awful way to die.
|
Can we have a final votecount, please?
|
On April 11 2013 12:46 Rainbows wrote:
Actually, it's 8 players left. 3 v 5. We can afford one more townie dying by NK. Whoever they kill, even if it's me, would give us great information. There is no reason to not go to a no-lynch.
##Vote: No-lynch
At first this sounded idiotic, but it is actually the best idea at the moment.
If we mislynch today, we've lost since tomorrow it will be 3v3. If we don't lynch until tomorrow, we have a better chance to hit scum (3/6 instead of 3/7 - not including yourself).
Either way, if we miss a single lynch, we've lost. This way we just make our chances slightly better.
##Vote: No Lynch
|
The counterargument for not lynching today would go something like this:
If we don't lynch today, and do hit scum tomorrow, the scenario goes something like this: (Morning = at the time of day post, Evening = at the time of night post)
(Tomorrow) Morning: 3v4
Evening: 2v4
Morning: 2v3
IF we miss this lynch as well, we lose, but if we hit then
Evening: 1v3
Morning: 1v2
We have to hit this lynch exactly as well.
So, the obvious downside of waiting until tomorrow is that town would have to hit every single lynch until all the scum are dead.
Possible scenario if we hit a lynch today:
(Tomorrow) Morning: 2v4
Here, we would be in the same situation we are now. We could either wait for a day to get better odds, and a mislynch would lose the game. If we wait, we're back in the 'must hit every lynch' stage, and if we don't wait (and get another lynch), we have the option of waiting (but not mislynching) the next day.
Evening A: 2v4; Evening B: 1v4; Evening C: 2v3 (loss)
Morning A: 2v3; Morning B: 1v3;
Evening A1: 1v3; Evening A2: 2v3 (Loss); Evening B1: 0v3 (Win); Evening B2: 1v2 (Loss)
Morning A1a: 1v2;
Evening: Either loss or win.
If we don't lynch today, our odds to hit scum go up to 50% hit tomorrow.
If we lynch today (and hit), tomorrow we can choose to not lynch and our chance from tomorrow we go from 2v4 to 2v3 which increases our chance to hit from 33% to 40%. If we wait two days to not lynch, our odds of hitting a scum at random go from 25% to 33%. Each day we don't use our no-lynch option (given we survive), the benefit of not lynching goes down.
The only downside to this is that we'll probably lose Rainbows tonight, and it feels like he gets the best reads on people.
|
On April 11 2013 15:46 Moloch wrote:
The only downside to this is that we'll probably lose Rainbows tonight, and it feels like he gets the best reads on people.
We'd probably lose Rainbows tonight anyway, so I guess even that isn't a downside.
|
I still think no lynch is the best way to go today. The only reasonable argument against it that I've seen is JJD's about the chance we'll hit the roleblockers.
|
On April 13 2013 06:08 TheRavensName wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2013 06:06 Moloch wrote:
I still think no lynch is the best way to go today. The only reasonable argument against it that I've seen is JJD's about the chance we'll hit the roleblockers. What about the fact that theres only one person who cast the deciding vote as opposed to two?
It doesn't matter if town wins by two votes or one vote. Having the extra person gives more chance townies will suspect each other (since there's more of them), and the vote will be split - giving scum a better opportunity to lynch a townie. Remember, if we miss this lynch, we've lost the game.
|
EBWOP
...and a better chance that the vote will be split
|
On April 13 2013 06:31 Warent wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2013 06:24 Moloch wrote:On April 13 2013 06:08 TheRavensName wrote:On April 13 2013 06:06 Moloch wrote:
I still think no lynch is the best way to go today. The only reasonable argument against it that I've seen is JJD's about the chance we'll hit the roleblockers. What about the fact that theres only one person who cast the deciding vote as opposed to two? It doesn't matter if town wins by two votes or one vote. Having the extra person gives more chance townies will suspect each other (since there's more of them), and the vote will be split - giving scum a better opportunity to lynch a townie. Remember, if we miss this lynch, we've lost the game. Just feels like 5vs3 is a bit better though. The difference between 3/8 and 3/7 is only 5.4%...
It feels like 5v3 is better, but like I said, it increases the chance of town not agreeing. If one town hates somebody (Rainbows, for example), and votes for him and is obviously not going to change his vote, scum can jump on Rainbows and have four votes. The rest of the town, which has the right idea, then cannot topple the obvious scum vote because they'd lose the tiebreaker.
Yes, it feels better when you win by more, but it increases the chance of variability within the team and unexpected things happening. And 5.4% is high enough to have my attention. Hopefully the scum hit someone that I'm iffy on and it'll increase chances even more.
|
Or, even you, Warent. Rainbows has it out for you, and votes for you twice. It's pretty obvious he doesn't really want to vote for anyone else right now, so (theoretically) if TRN, JJD, and NW were scum (and had kept their vote on you), there's absolutely nothing the rest of the town could have done.
^ I'm not saying that's an accurate representation of people's alliances, but it's just an example.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
