WW 19 Game Thread - Mobster Mayhem - GAME OVER

[Serdoa]

Villagers, go reread Day 2 and how Selrahc was saved. I draw some conclusions by it (that partly were surely already mentioned)

- Q switched to Selrahc late, tieing the vote to Merovech 5, Selrahc 5. I had dismissed this earlier because I thought that with me on Selrahc, the switch was unimportant anyhow. Not necessarily true though, others could have switched as well, so he did get Selrahc in higher danger by that.

- Mattimeo was mentioned as a possible lynch target by zakalwe several times. He really tried his best to safe Selrahc. I don't think that would make sense if he instead would have lynched another scum-buddy.

- zakalwe also did his best not to have to vote for MJW, despite bringing him up as possible lynch-target at the start, he already in his first post mentioning him explained why despite him thinking about MJW would not vote for him

Due to the rule-clarification by BRick Azza is not a valid lynch-target for today, but has to pass me the gun tonight. Don't shoot, pass it to me. It doesn't matter if it dies with you if you are village. We will be at 3-1 after the night and if we mislynch and are at 2-1 scum can't nightkill. He either kills me (we win) or kills the other villager (we win with me being mayor). So we should be at 2-1 the next day, able to hopefully finally kill the scum. And if he does not kill you Azza, then we win definitely if I have the gun.

So with the above I see only two viable targets, uberfish and MJW. MJW has the doublevote and is therefore a possible wrench in the above outlined plans. Therefore:

MJW

And I beg all villagers to follow me here please.

[MJW (ya that one)]

Serdoa, I don't think I can change you mind. But can you promise me if you blow this game can you talk about in the lurker thread? That would be nice. If you promise me that I'll even self vote.

[uberfish]

@serdoa

The double vote doesn't really make a huge difference in endgame as far as I can tell; if it's 2-1 with a scum double voter, the worst the double vote can do is to cause a tie, which you can break as mayor.

Zak's suspect list was just "Matt is lurking, Mero is lurking, MJW is suspicious for no particular reason" and that on its own isn't enough to make a call between MJW and Matt. Mattimeo wasn't really under much pressure at the time, and he could just have swapped to MJW if he wanted. I'll say that what does make his interaction with MJW look bad here is that he puts MJW on his suspect list and then totally ignores Serdoa's attack on him.

But since you agree that Mattimeo if he's scum could be checked out of the game because he's resigned to losing, I think we should just lynch him now (unless I am wrong about the double vote.)

[Mattimeo]

I'm good to sheep Serdoa again.
MJW

But since you agree that Mattimeo if he's scum could be checked out of the game because he's resigned to losing,

...

scum

checked out

wut
Scum has a significantly higher base interest level than town does. Due to being, you know, actually fun.

Also, I wasn't looking to be lynched until after it became apparent I was lacking interest. So there wouldn't have been any 'resigned to losing' at that point either.

[Serdoa]

Now that you are here Mattimeo, please explain me why you voted waterbat. I have a theory about it, but what is your take on it?

And please explain shortly what you mean with "it became apparent I was lacking interest". To what are you referring here? Again, I have a suspicion but I'd like you to tell me.

@uberfish

There are circumstances in which a double-vote would be disastrous. They all have to do with a 1-1 endgame. Theoretically achievable depending on the wolf night-kills. Not sure it is the right choice but reading zaks Day 2 (which was played to save Selrahc it seems, as in the end he outed himself and Selrahc by his play and I sure he knew that that could happen but risked it) it really is hard to believe that Mattimeo is scum. zak asked a few hours before deadline whom to lynch and added that he would also be fine with lynching Mattimeo. What if others would have taken him up on this offer? Does it make sense to save Selrahc and instead lynch another scum? He simply couldn't know that he won't be called on it.

The same goes for Q in the end. Adding the 5th vote on a 5:4 between Merovech and Selrahc was really dangerous for Selrahc. It could easily lead to someone switching, simply because. Of course he might have come home late and didn't realize that, but as of now, I'd rather add him into village for that.

Leaves Azza, MJW and you. Azza will be lynched if he doesn't pass the gun and you can be certain that scum can't let him pass the gun, so he will be nightkilled. No reason to lynch him. Therefore I either can vote to lynch the double-voter or I can lynch you. What would you prefer uberfish?

@MJW

I don't think I will be solely responsible if village loses this game, but we certainly can speak about it in the lurker thread. In fact I would love if we actually would analyze the plays in the lurker-thread afterward regularly for these games. That would benefit village I think, because players could actually understand their mistakes. I mean, I have made several this game, not the least letting me getting talked down by scum. Maybe we could have gotten Selrahc D1 otherwise. I sure hope villagers will tell me after the game why my long post, showing the points Selrahc lied about or just exaggerated to paint Rowain in a bad light didn't suffice to sway their opinion (and more importantly their lynch-vote).

[uberfish]

Well Serdoa I agree with you on Q's likely innocence, if not Mattimeo's. I also see your point that if we're not allowing azza to use the gun, leaving us at 3:1 tomorrow, and the double voter is scum he could instantly win on a mislynch. So we should lynch the double voter if he's not in the clear. (well, this is also a reason why Matt as scum might have decided to ditch the item.)

Anyway, my elimination list is Azza-Mattimeo-MJW so if we are guaranteed three lynches I have no problem eliminating MJW.

[Mattimeo]

Now that you are here Mattimeo, please explain me why you voted waterbat.

I had very little differentiating everyone that wasn't basically confirmed town (ie. you, and Lewwyn when I wasn't being stupidly paranoid).
You put forward an argument I liked better than Lewwyn's for uber.

And please explain shortly what you mean with "it became apparent I was lacking interest". To what are you referring here? Again, I have a suspicion but I'd like you to tell me.

Mainly the waterbat vote. Which is what sparked Lewwyn's renewed interest in me, which caused me to be on the podium today, which was the only possible cause of being "resigned to losing" I could identify.
In more general terms, posting even less than I normally would, and being half-hearted about it even then.

[Qgqqqqq]

I agree with uber - I don't think zaks day 2 play clears Matt in any way shape or form.
that said, ill consider a doyblevote kill if someone will explain to me why a 1-1 endgame isn't an instant scum win.
I'm pretty sure that's what BRicks response meant.

[Mattimeo]

that said, ill consider a doyblevote kill if someone will explain to me why a 1-1 endgame isn't an instant scum win.

If there is a Mayor alive, it's 1.5-1, with mayor winning.
Similar with double vote, if that's still around.

As long as you're not doing something silly like holding a simultaneous mayor election (ie. toss a coin who wins) it works fine.

[Qgqqqqq]

I thought brick was saying that such a situation would be counted as a evil win, even though evil would lose.
BRick please clarify, do evil instantly win a 1-1 standoff, regardless of the fact that they don't control the lunch?