WW27 Game Thread: Once there were 12

[Qgqqqqq]

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 was talking about novices post possibly misunderstanding what Jkaen was saying, and his whole lynching discussion of post 17 (which does feel a bit awkward) having been misinterpreted. If novice was seeing a contradiction with an earlier/later post, then its more likely he would multiquote them in order (so post 17 is the first one which he is seeing as contradicting another) if he was posting them concurrently.
I also felt like his reaction to that discussion was odd, after all zak barely posted a theory, simply a idea for a day 1 tactic.

@classical_hero, why do you think azza is a shady character? Is that based off something he's said here, or previous impressions at CFC?

I don't think random lynches are a good thing MJW, how do you see that (rather then the normal day 1 discussion) as being helpful to the village?

[Jowy]

It was a good ice-breaker but we don't really need to continue discussing the merits of a strategy that is forbidden by the rules of this particular game.

[novice]

It was a good ice-breaker but we don't really need to continue discussing the merits of a strategy that is forbidden by the rules of this particular game.

I agree.

Since people are speculating about it, what was bad about JKaen's post was basically that he appeared to say that Zak should know better than what MJW suggested, when MJW suggested it after Zak's post. Upon rereading though it seems that JKaen elaborates what Zak should have known better in the sentences following his "Zak should know better" statement. So it's just awkwardly phrased.

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

[novice]

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.

Q asked you about the latter paragraph. To get you talking, I wouldn't mind hearing more about the first paragraph either. How are the CFC games, and how do you usually approach the game?

[zakalwe]

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.

I was sincere about wanting to suggest no lynch. That doesn't mean that I was certain it would be the optimal play, but I genuinely thought it would be worth considering. I don't get why it would self-evidently be so bad for town. Even if there are various power roles in play, expecting an average of one kill per night isn't unreasonable. And that means we could afford a no lynch. If you would be willing to do a no lynch in the endgame to set up more favorable numbers, why couldn't you do the same on day one?

You seem to imply that the first day would be a waste if we don't lynch, but at the same time you assert that a first day with a random lynch would not be wasted. I don't think there's a big difference between the two.

And no, I'm not actually that interested in discussing this any further. But that's really the only way to refute that I should know better.

[Gazglum]

Poor Zak, again facing the curses of high expectations.

It boggles my mind that half the players here are apparently finding time to play games at CFC as well.

Jowy, I see what you mean about Q responding to you, and I know it was a joke. I'm a bit wary of it though, because after what we Observed last game, I came into this game thinking that you might make a good early scapegoat for wolves wanting to use any emotions from last game to turn people onto you. And I'm interested that you seem to have already attracted a Scandinavian bandwagon.

But since Q's explained his classical_hero pressure, I'll try Mattimeo. The short meta post is in character, but that semi-rhetorical question at the end feels a bit oh so casual.

[Gazglum]

That should possibly be a Scandinavian musikalsk-vognfeste on Jowy, according to my sources.

[Azza]

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.

I was sincere about wanting to suggest no lynch. That doesn't mean that I was certain it would be the optimal play, but I genuinely thought it would be worth considering. I don't get why it would self-evidently be so bad for town. Even if there are various power roles in play, expecting an average of one kill per night isn't unreasonable. And that means we could afford a no lynch. If you would be willing to do a no lynch in the endgame to set up more favorable numbers, why couldn't you do the same on day one?

Lynching is the only reliable way to catch scum. Foregoing that for a cleaner endgame is not a good trade. Furthermore, it's the most reliable source of information on alignments.

[MJW (ya that one)]

I really feel that it is asinine that Zak that no-lynching at the start of the game could be a plan at all. There are a zillion problems. For starts it is not "an average of one" the town needs for your plan to pay out. You need exactly one night kill per night. And it also rips the town off of a lot of information. Giving up a lynch is a major concession and a reasonable chance that it will work out is no-were near good enough. I also feel that it is not reasonable but the level-of-chance feels more plausible...

I would have no problem policy lynching a lurker like Azza or Classical_Hero* but I feel that Zak is or best shot now for not living up to his expectations.

*It's his first game but I'm pretty sure he is a lurker due to not spaming the Civ3 thread up even though he posted it. And his low post count...

[Qgqqqqq]

It was a good ice-breaker but we don't really need to continue discussing the merits of a strategy that is forbidden by the rules of this particular game.

This. It is good for the discussion, but I think enoughs been said on this, and there are better topics.

I was sincere about wanting to suggest no lynch. That doesn't mean that I was certain it would be the optimal play, but I genuinely thought it would be worth considering. I don't get why it would self-evidently be so bad for town. Even if there are various power roles in play, expecting an average of one kill per night isn't unreasonable. And that means we could afford a no lynch. If you would be willing to do a no lynch in the endgame to set up more favorable numbers, why couldn't you do the same on day one?

Lynching is the only reliable way to catch scum. Foregoing that for a cleaner endgame is not a good trade. Furthermore, it's the most reliable source of information on alignments.

But under a no-lynch day 1 there is just as many lynchs (assuming no vig/sk/scum extra kill, all of which I think are unlikely given the small game) as if we lynch day 1. It's not about a cleaner endgame, its about having a larger chance of hitting scum per lynch (both under the higher information, and having targets eliminated).
I agree with zak here, though I wouldn't choose it out of hand, its not a anti-town suggestion.

I really feel that it is asinine that Zak that no-lynching at the start of the game could be a plan at all. There are a zillion problems. For starts it is not "an average of one" the town needs for your plan to pay out. You need exactly one night kill per night. And it also rips the town off of a lot of information. Giving up a lynch is a major concession and a reasonable chance that it will work out is no-were near good enough. I also feel that it is not reasonable but the level-of-chance feels more plausible...

I would have no problem policy lynching a lurker like Azza or Classical_Hero* but I feel that Zak is or best shot now for not living up to his expectations.

*It's his first game but I'm pretty sure he is a lurker due to not spaming the Civ3 thread up even though he posted it. And his low post count...

MJW
You do need an average of one - if you get 2 one night and 0 another, that is what is wanted. What information is lost in it? And if a majority passes it, then it is through (which is contrary to what I was thinking earlier, but this has been clarified), so the chance of it failing is low.
I think it is unfair to policy lynch before seeing any sign of it, so suggesting it already is stupid. Azza doesn't even have the lowest posts.

On that note, I'd be interested to hear from mattimeo