WW27 Game Thread: Once there were 12

[zakalwe]

Maybe the whole lynching discussion was misinterpreted. Possibly with a earlier and/or later post? Evidence points to later if he was posting them concurrently.

You lost me. Something evidently happened earlier and/or later and/or concurrently?

I don't know that Jkaen has contradicted himself, but his post certainly had a clumsy composition. It looked like he was saying that I was to blame for something that MJW suggested. Though, even if that isn't what he meant to say his post is perhaps a little bit scummy. It does feel like he's singling me out for hypocritical reasons. He's being very forgiving of MJW and very emphatic towards me.

I also thought Gazglum's "reminding us of grievances against Jowy" was a bit of a stretch. Like everything else at this point, obviously.

[Jkaen]

I will admit I am treating you and MJW differently, but that is because from prior experience it would be suspicious if MJW didnt post some bizarre theory I disagreed with, where as even if I disagree with what you say, I typically expect a logical path to your theories.

End of the day I have learnt (as you pointed out earlier infact) that acting 'anti-town' is not in itself a scum tell, it is acting differently than normal that is suspicious.

MJW posting that theory is normal, you posting yours felt slightly off

[classical_hero]

Lets see how different these games are compared to CFC. BTW I hate the way the PM messages are done here since they are not obvious enough so you can know if you have one.

It looks like that the votes have to be in red. Azza is quite a shady character.

[Jowy]

Why so keen on poking the new guy, while reminding us of grievances against Jowy at the same time, Qgqqqq?

It was me who brought it up. Qg made a joke in reference to my post just before his. It's clear that he didn't intend it as anything more than a joke. Gazglum

End of the day I have learnt (as you pointed out earlier infact) that acting 'anti-town' is not in itself a scum tell, it is acting differently than normal that is suspicious.

I agree in part, but it's not as black and white in my opinion. Only if abnormality leads to play that does not catch wolves, only then it is a scum tell, though it is suspicious and good to take note of regardless. Someone playing a different game could also be a villager trying to be more effective and beneficial to the village, at least I would hope that players learn from their mistakes and try to play better every game. And I realize you did say that acting differently is suspicious as opposed to a scum tell, but from the context I figured you were using those words interchangeably (which I am not in this post :P)

[Azarius]

I agree in part, but it's not as black and white in my opinion. Only if abnormality leads to play that does not catch wolves, only then it is a scum tell, though it is suspicious and good to take note of regardless. Someone playing a different game could also be a villager trying to be more effective and beneficial to the village, at least I would hope that players learn from their mistakes and try to play better every game. And I realize you did say that acting differently is suspicious as opposed to a scum tell, but from the context I figured you were using those words interchangeably (which I am not in this post :P)

Jowy, how do you get this from what Jkaen said? I read what he wrote as saying that acting anti-town isn't necessarily[/spoiler] a scum tell, but he believes acting differently is suspicious and therefore a scum tell. Correct me if I misunderstand please Jkaen.

[Jowy]

I agree in part, but it's not as black and white in my opinion. Only if abnormality leads to play that does not catch wolves, only then it is a scum tell, though it is suspicious and good to take note of regardless. Someone playing a different game could also be a villager trying to be more effective and beneficial to the village, at least I would hope that players learn from their mistakes and try to play better every game. And I realize you did say that acting differently is suspicious as opposed to a scum tell, but from the context I figured you were using those words interchangeably (which I am not in this post :P)

Jowy, how do you get this from what Jkaen said? I read what he wrote as saying that acting anti-town isn't necessarily[/spoiler] a scum tell, but he believes acting differently is suspicious and therefore a scum tell. Correct me if I misunderstand please Jkaen.

Yeah that's how I understood him too. I shared my own opinion on the latter part of his statement.

[MJW (ya that one)]

Well MJW is still acting like himself - suggesting really odd and poorly thought out theories.

If the town only lynched every other day, then what we are doing essentially is making the wolves have twice as many kills for no benefit, how on earth does that possibly help the town?

Somebody who I would hope would know better is zak. ASSUMING 3 wolves, having no lynch right now may well make no difference (not done the maths), but what if we get a roleblock in one night? surely that would change the figures.

I think any chance we have of hitting scum should be taken unless we have a very good reason not to

Under my plan the village would lynch the first day randomly. (caused by breakaing a 17-way tie for zero). The first day There would be a lot of talk going to so the day would not be a waste. Lynching randomly is good for town because the first day is ofter a mislynch.

If your interpretation of Zak's plan is correct that means that zak said for the town to no-lynch on the first day for no reason. That is so bad for town that I feel Zak could not have made those statements sincerely. So he is insincere and a wolf.

Zak

[MJW (ya that one)]

Concerning LyLo, the main scenario I was looking to avoid was that we'd be at LyLo after a straight run of mislynches on the first three days, which seems to be a common way to lose. If we no-lynch on day 1, we would be guaranteed three more lynches *after* that before we're at LyLo.

I guess I'm off by one here, the point was that we could lose the game straight up after three mislynches, but doing a no lynch on the first day gives us more time without costing us a mislynch. Mattimeo's rule of thumb is really what I'm getting at - odd numbers favor town, even numbers favor scum.

Now let's talk about something else.

This logic is flawed. Unless this game was a powerole-free game there is a good chance of an extra night kill happening or the village stopping the night kill. And it would be very strange to assume that this is a power-role free game.

[MJW (ya that one)]

You'd need good herding to get everyone on board with that, because just one vote would be enough to lynch someone. So anybody could potentially get a lone kill and if they had a hunch on a suspect it might be hard to resist taking the chance.

I think Zak meant "VOTE no lynch". However, that is illegal as zak's post implied.

[Jkaen]

I think we are talking semantics here, suspicious and scum tell are generally the same thing in my mind, that is if you acknowledge, or believe that a villager may have one or two scum tells which have to balance against their town tells.