Are you, in fact, a pregnant lady who lives in the apartment next door to Superdeath's parents? - Commodore

Create an account  

 
WW35: Not Another TPS Report [Game Thread]

(January 29th, 2015, 09:39)Mattimeo Wrote:
(January 29th, 2015, 09:19)novice Wrote: Not answering questions on behalf of others is even more pertinent considering scum can't talk at day.
Wait, what? I can't find that anywhere in the rules.

Check rule "k".
Reply

(January 29th, 2015, 09:39)Mattimeo Wrote:
(January 29th, 2015, 09:19)novice Wrote: Not answering questions on behalf of others is even more pertinent considering scum can't talk at day.
Wait, what? I can't find that anywhere in the rules.

It is easy to miss as it is hidden in the role-pms:

Factional Communication: If there are other Mafia-aligned players, there will be a Mafia QT that can be used pre-game and during the Night.
Reply

(January 29th, 2015, 09:39)Mattimeo Wrote:
(January 29th, 2015, 09:19)novice Wrote: Not answering questions on behalf of others is even more pertinent considering scum can't talk at day.
Wait, what? I can't find that anywhere in the rules.
It's in the opening post, masons or lovers can't either
Reply

(January 29th, 2015, 09:44)AdrienIer Wrote:
(January 29th, 2015, 09:39)Mattimeo Wrote:
(January 29th, 2015, 09:19)novice Wrote: Not answering questions on behalf of others is even more pertinent considering scum can't talk at day.
Wait, what? I can't find that anywhere in the rules.
It's in the opening post, masons or lovers can't either

With the difference that Lovers can't talk at all while Masons and scum can during the night.
Reply

(January 27th, 2015, 15:19)BRickAstley Wrote: Any groups with the ability to nighttalk (Mafia, Masons), are only allowed to communicate in their private thread during the night phase.
There's the quote
Reply

And in the light of the above: Jabbz
Reply

(January 29th, 2015, 02:44)Meiz Wrote:
(January 28th, 2015, 19:23)Fenn Wrote: Thinking about it, Vanilla Cop can be very powerful in this gametype - unlike regular Cop your potential targets are narrowed down to anybody who didn't discard a vanilla role, against whom a Vanilla result is just as incriminating as Guilty would be (more so even because of possible Godfather). Possibly Mattimeo didn't consider this when he discarded it or his other option was better in his eyes. Not a scum tell but not a town tell either I don't think.
Azarius ditched the vanilla cop, not Matt. What do you think of Azarius's explanation on this?

Whoops, that's my bad. smoke Looking at Azarius's post #19 I think his reasoning makes sense, even if I don't agree with it. The idea that only a couple of the players at most would return vanilla and so it's not a good investigative role holds water. Begs the question of what role he got that was better. Vig/Doc/Cop? Still I get a town lean from it.
(January 29th, 2015, 06:05)Gazglum Wrote: Fenn, when you wake up, do you think that there is anything suspicious about any of the players apart from the discarders, Novice/Q/Lewwyn, etc?

At the moment your Novice > Lewwyn > No Vote but will probably come back to Novice or Q reads a bit like a delaying tactic while you wait to see where the bandwagon is going to set up.

Dtay's setup posting gives the appearance of providing useful information without giving any that's actually new - the possibility of at least one person getting double power roles or double scum didn't need to be shown mathematically. His other posts don't provide much of help either. Post 110 drops some half-hearted criticism of Matt/Azarius/TT for their role drops, followed by what seems to me as some obvious minor reads. His Qgqq vote hits the same points that have already been made multiple times by this point.

Ichabod's post 207 saying he doesn't want to lynch novice unless he contradicts himself ('or something') is...a little off? I do agree that lynching Novice isn't our best option yet, the way novice has hardly been posting himself makes me think Ichabod knows novice won't contradict himself. I won't say that he doesn't have a point against me, I'm not 100% happy with my earlier posts myself; my reasoning for voting those people who had discarded was to pressure them into posting instead of lurking. Turned out that Lewwyn and TT just couldn't make it, but imo it's a worthwhile strategy to pursue D1 which is why I did it. Not a fan of Ichabod's partially backing out of it though with his 'I'm grumpy' joke either.

Don't like what Meiz has done lately, his accusation against Lewwyn is weak. Him describing Ichabod calling out Q's first post as insightful (twice, even) doesn't make sense.

As for my No Vote - at the time I didn't see reason to add another vote to the novice/Q piles that early in the Day and didn't have anybody I had a great desire to pressure, especially when I was about to go to sleep and wouldn't be able to respond to the person I was putting pressure on. Perhaps not optimal town play, but there you go.

Agreed with Matt's reasoning on Bob. But I wonder if Matt is trying to go against his 'lurker scum' reputation by being very active as opposed to his play in WW34.
Reply

I think that Jabbz is overall most scummy, the timing of his jumping on Q's first post doesn't agree with a town player scumhunting. Agreed with Zakalwe in this instance.
Reply

Tally as of post 228: (Halfway through Day 1)

6 votes: Qgqqqqq (Azarius, AdrienIer, Lewwyn, Jabbz,Ichabod,dtay)
6 votes: Jabbz (Qgqqqqq, zakalwe, Molach, novice, Rowain, Fenn)
2 votes: Bobchillingworth (Mattimeo, Gazglum)
2 votes: Lewwyn (Meiz, Jowy)
1 votes: novice (Bobchillingworth)
1 votes: Jowy (Jkaen)

Voting history:
Gazglum Wrote: Ichabod
Fenn Wrote: Mattimeo
Jowy Wrote: Novice
Jkaen Wrote: Jabbz
Azarius Wrote: Qgqqqqq
zakalwe Wrote: Qgqqqqq
Meiz Wrote: Gazglum
Rowain Wrote: Mattimeo
dtay Wrote: Qqqqqqqq
Gazglum Wrote: Azarius
Fenn Wrote: Novice
Qgqqqqq Wrote: Bobchillingworth
Ichabod Wrote: Qgqq
dtay Wrote: Novice
Jabbz Wrote: Novice
Meiz Wrote: Qgqq
AdrienIer Wrote: Novice
Gazglum Wrote: Mattimeo
dtay Wrote: Lewwyn
Mattimeo Wrote: Azarius
AdrienIer Wrote: Qgqqqqq
Fenn Wrote: Twinkletoes
Jabbz Wrote: no vote
Molach Wrote: Azarius
Bobchillingworth Wrote: novice
Twinkletoes89 Wrote: Mafia Tracker
Molach Wrote: mattimeo
Fenn Wrote: Lewwyn
Qgqqqqq Wrote: Twinkletoes
Lewwyn Wrote: Qgqqqqq
Mattimeo Wrote: Mafia Goon
Mattimeo Wrote: Mafia Goon
Mattimeo Wrote: Mafia Lover
Mattimeo Wrote: Mafia Tracker
Mattimeo Wrote: Bobchillingworth
dtay Wrote: Qqqqqqqqq
Fenn Wrote: No vote
Jabbz Wrote: Qgqqqqq
Jkaen Wrote: Qgqqqqq
Qgqqqqq Wrote: Jabbz
zakalwe Wrote: Jabbz
Jowy Wrote: Qgqqqqq
Gazglum Wrote: Bobchillingworth
Jowy Wrote: Unvote
Meiz Wrote: Lewwyn
Jkaen Wrote: Jowy
Jowy Wrote: Lewwyn
Molach Wrote: jabbz
novice Wrote: Jabbz
Rowain Wrote: Jabbz
Fenn Wrote: Jabbz

Please make sure to use the correct forum name of the person you're voting for, so that the Vote Tracking tool groups the votes together correctly.
Reply

(January 29th, 2015, 04:31)Jowy Wrote: I'm wondering why the Q wagon got off the ground so fast compared to Novice wagon. Roleblocker really isn't that strong of a role, not even close to Doctor. Should it not be natural to vote for the more suspicious discard? Are townies this afraid of lynching a good player.. or did the Q wagon ramp up so fast because he's town?

The bolded part is the right question to ask, and it makes me really suspicious of the bandwagon on Qg.


But then you went and voted for Qg anyway (albeit later retracted after you got heat), and advocated revealing people's roles piecemeal on penalty of death, which is an awful, anti-village strategy. So, Jowy.


Like I noted previously, I'm fine with waiting a day on novice.


I agree with Mattimeo that, if reveals have to be done, it should be as a mass-claim. I also agree that that'll make the game less interesting; I'm ambivalent otherwise.


(January 29th, 2015, 09:11)Mattimeo Wrote: That the justification Bob is using to lynch novice is almost exactly the reasoning that was used to lynch Bob himself in the last game, with the primary difference being this game presumably isn't overwhelmingly scum-aligned, is just icing on the cake.
I'm not sure that basing your policy lynch off "scum-town thinks this is a good idea" is in any way sound.

This however is nonsense. My reasoning wasn't anything at all alike. The non-scum case for lynching me in the last game was that there was allegedly no way to confirm or disprove my claim, making it the ideal wolf safe haven. My case against novice here is that he's probabilistically more likely to be scum than village.
Reply



Forum Jump: