Mini 642: Bodyguard 7: (Game Over)

[TDC]

vote: Slaine

[TDC]

After doing a bunch of possibility trees (or whatever else you want to call them), I have concluded that if the cop and the bodyguard survive to Day 2

they should ABSOLUTELY CLAIM

[..]

Because of all this, I suggest that, unless the cop is forced to claim,

the bodyguard should not guard anyone on N1

or unless the bodyguard is extremely sure they know who the cop is.

I agree with both these statements.
I've also considered D1 Mass Claim, but that's only 55% Town Win, so doesn't seem worth it.

If the Bodyguard protects N1 he has a much higher chance to protect a townie (and possibly die in their place) than to protect the cop (and save him), hence he should only protect if he knows who the Cop is.

However, I would like to take a vote to see who wants me to reveal all my reasonings and stuff.

I think it's a waste of time to discuss our D2 strategy today, when we don't even know who we'll enter D2. I'm fine with you not further elaborating.

[TDC]

who -> how

[TDC]

I was asking TDC's opinion on how the conversation has turned, or his/her opinions on the behaviour of the people here.

I've not seen any telling reactions, to be honest. Have you?
The "dispute" between BAB and TSPN is a bit odd, though.

Slain: do you wish me to reveal the reasoning behind it?

I interpret his post as a "no".

[TDC]

The "dispute" between BAB and TSPN is a bit odd, though.

Please elaborate.

It seems like a pointless debate. Have you learned anything from it?

Do you think it makes one of us scummy? Do you think we're scum partners trying to distance?

Not specifically, which is why I called it "odd".

I interpret his post as a "no".

How? Please quote his post and explain where it is him saying "no."
I'd rather TDC answer this than Slain actually answer.

I also feel that all this duscussion may cause one of the roles to slip up and hint at who they are, providing an easy mafia target.

He's concerned about power roles outing themselves, which is obviously a bad thing. One would think he'd want to avoid that (and hence be against you elaborating).
What do you see in his post that suggests otherwise?

[TDC]

Yes. TSPN is admantly not picking a side. He's being really careful.

At the same time he is, however, clearly antagonizing you, which I can't see as "careful".

Slain, on the otherhand, hasn't posted for 3 days. There could be other lurkers but Slain was the first to pop out to me.

My last post was just before his last post. Any reason why he "popped out" first? I'm wondering, because you had answered my questions from that very post a few hours earlier.

In fact, regardless of whether I made up reasons or not, me attacking CML is an attempt to get reactions. It also unearthed a lurker, Slain.

Reactions by whom? CML or other players?
And how did attacking CML show that Slaine is lurking?

[TDC]

At the same time he is, however, clearly antagonizing you, which I can't see as "careful".

However, he avoided taking a side on the issue. He decided that he was completely indifferent and didn't choose one side or the other. I consider this as being careful. I was very puzzled why he was doing it which I was I asked numerous time why he was being so indifferent.

I think you've missed my point. Openly attacking someone has much more potential to "look scummy" than taking a side on the "should BAB reveal"-issue. Quite frankly, I can't see how picking either side could be seen as particularly scummy. Thus not taking a side on it seems to be a null tell to me.

I mean, if two people are arguing that're both not scum, chances are the other scum is waiting to see what happenss.

What do you mean, the

other

scum? Who's the first one?

[TDC]

To elaborate a bit on the first point, because I fear it's still not clear:
Being careful as scum means trying to avoid questions where your answers could be telling. The question whether you should reveal or not does not seem to be such a question, either answer is acceptable and no answer will be proven wrong during the course of the game.

[TDC]

Yeah, the missing "l" makes me read "Baboons" whenever I read his name.

[TDC]

HOWEVER; if the bodyguard is alive, they can choose to not claim. The disadvantage is it is harder to lynch correctly on Day 2

Not really, he could still claim at L-1.

[TDC]

Something useful I learned from this is that we should

not

ride a wagon until someone claims. To benefit town the most, there should probably only be one claim the first day. See above logic (quote it to see it better) to understand better.

This is true for nearly every game of mafia and not at all specific to this setup.
(And why you even considered asking a random person for a claim is well beyond me.)

I see no reason why we should not play this game as every other: Find out who's scummy and when we're reasonably certain, ask them to claim.

[TDC]

Uh.

Really feels like scum to me hiding behind a strategy that would help the town. Note: not using too townie, as things he has said make me feel this way.

Yes, you said it wasn't "too townie". What was it then though?
Or to ask more to the point: What made you feel this what not town trying to help the town, but scum trying to pretend to help the town?

[TDC]

what->was..

[TDC]

Sorry, it is not too townie if you have legit vibes. Some of what he has said just seems off.

Could you point to any specific posts/sentences?

[TDC]

Alabaska: I guess you're either ignoring me or you think you already answered my question.
I don't think CML misrepresented you:
Your case consisted of

Really feels like scum to me hiding behind a strategy that would help the town.

a) You show what made you feel that way.
or
b) It

is

too townie.

I was just bringing up the possibility that scum would want to spur conversation instead of lurk, that's all, and tried to logically conclude what would happen.

So you're saying that in this setup, discussing the setup is anti-town?
To be honest, while I see where you're getting with scum trying to find the power roles (which is something they'd want to do in every setup, not just this one..) you seem to ignore the "danger" for them to drop scum tells while doing so.

Also, please note my sig.

[TDC]

Your last sentence would've been an acceptable answer to a).

[TDC]

The fact that

you've been pretty much ignoring TDC's contribution to this debate

while going after me like a rabid dog doesn't do much to help your 'not omgus' case too. My main concern here is that you're shouting down my points without backing up your statements, and that's not how I see townies acting.

I really am curious to see the response to this.

Me too. Though he's posted in GD that he suffered a concussion, so I guess we might have to wait a while.

A. The best scum strategy (I think) would be to try to "out" the power roles, willing to take the scumtell-risk.
B. BaB seems to have been doing that the most. (And also, he knows about the numbers, and the numbers seem to tell that the best scum strategy is as above.)

I don't have anything better to go on. Do you all think A and B above are plausible?

I don't really see how discussing the setup is going to make outing power roles "easier" than any other form of discussion (or bandwagoning for that matter).

What setup discussion could do is distracting from scum hunting.


Also my vote on k7 is not random anymore. Say something.

[TDC]

I feel that alabaska, me, and bab, have all been relatively noisy, and cml, jt, slaine, and tdc have been relatively quiet.

(These estimations were made with no research whatsoever).

I would agree with most of that, but I have to wonder how Alabaska ended up in the noisy category.

We have a bunch of lurkers to fit the second profile, and I don't think me singling one lurker out is pro-town. If you insist, I will, but I don't think it's pro-town for me to say so.

Not sure what you're saying there, you

have

singled out Slaine, iirc.

[Talking about BaB]
I honestly don't think scum would put themselves knowingly at the centre of discussion so early and so strongly that early in the game.

The trick is to lurk without seeming to and that's very hard to master or to seemingly help the town but actually steer them wrong and this requires a very keen analytical mind which not everyone has.

How have you come to the conclusion that BaB does not have this "keen analytical mind"?


Still like my vote.

[TDC]

[Talking about BaB]
I honestly don't think scum would put themselves knowingly at the centre of discussion so early and so strongly that early in the game.

The trick is to lurk without seeming to and that's very hard to master or to seemingly help the town but actually steer them wrong and this requires a very keen analytical mind which not everyone has.

How have you come to the conclusion that BaB does not have this "keen analytical mind"?

I have not come to any such conclusion. BaB's logic is solid and if he is misleading us with his statistics I can't see it.

How did you conclude he's town then?
Your second quote seems to say that what he's doing could be a good scum plan (if he has a "keen analytical mind"), yet the first quote says you doubt it.

Gone for the weekend, as announced last week.

[TDC]

TDC: do you believe what CML is saying about me is scummy to do? If you don't want to answer this, don't. I think you have a reason for not saying this.

Scummy? No.

[TDC]

Why

do

you vote jonathan?

[TDC]

Interesting question. Why

don't

YOU vote jonathan?
EEBWOP: Please look at his posts in isolation first before answering my question.

You make it sound as if there was an obvious reason why he should be voted.
I don't see such a reason and am hence not voting him.

I'll explain pretty soon. Prolly sometime next page or even on this page.

I'm dying to get enlightened.

[TDC]

TDC, why do you wanna lynch K7?

I want him to contribute.
What's your plan on finding out his alignment? He's not even voting..

[TDC]

I think they are BS.. i wouldnt complain if there was a case on me that was credible but come on.. at least some one do a pbpa or case i can actauly defend.

You want a PBPA?

#1: "whats up"
#2: "im here i guess.. "
#3: says TSPN always looks scummy
#4: says he doesn't just jump on wagons (when asked about BAB) and will re-read soon and post more
#5: clarifies that TSPN looks scummy even when town
#6: wonders why he's voted
#7: asks for a case

In short, nobody has bothered to do a PBPA because

you've given us nothing to analyze

. You have not commented on

anything

that's been going on, you have not "posted more" as promised.
By the way: You

still

have Slaine's random vote going.

------------

I think he's scummy, am considering changing my vote.

Could you elaborate why?

------------

BAB: How about revealing your mystery sentence? (But feel free to wait for TSPN to answer first, if you want.)

[TDC]

However, I find TDC is starting to give me vibes. Bus perhaps? Eh, leave that for later.

Is CML giving you similar vibes?

[TDC]

No, I mean unsettling. It's pretty clearly very anti-town and while it does seem to be his playstyle from what TSPN and AJ have said, I think the fact that they're both voting him regardless of this is a little telling.

According to the above vote count TSPN isn't voting him.

[TDC]

killa seven: Can you point me to a past game where you've been lynched?
Also it is hypocritical of you to call jon out for a contradiction for wanting to lynch lurkers while lurking himself, when your own lurking is more severe.

BAB: As it is I don't find your case on jon particularly convincing, though I see where you're coming from regarding his carefulness. What's the other reason (I assume it's connected to your mystery sentence)?

[TDC]

Moar like, can killa seven point you to a past game where he

hasn't

been lynched, amirite?

No, I meant what I wrote.

I suspect that he's an alt with the specific aim of building up an I-always-lurk meta that will win him every game he enters as scum. I might be wrong though, which is why I'm asking whether he was ever lynched (and if so, I could look into why he was lynched). I've looked through a few of his past games and he was either nightkilled or survived in all of them.

However, he's just being himself, and I don't see any particular reason to lynch him.

And what if he continues to be himself all game? How will you ever be able to judge him?
That said, this is an open setup, which makes things a bit easier.

---

AJ: You've mentioned that k7 plays different in this game than in other games you've been in with him. Can you elaborate? I don't really see a difference.

[TDC]

HAPPY BIRTHDAY TDC!!!

Thanks, though you're too late, yay timezones.
Can you make me a present and answer the k7-related question?

[TDC]

In general, yes.

But it would be the hammer, so no.

[TDC]

Oh, you didn't talk about you voting k7, but about CML voting you.
In that case I think it's less valid, because it is obvious why you refrained from posting your revelation.

[TDC]

Indeed.
I guess we're all waiting for k7.

[TDC]

AJ: You've mentioned that k7 plays different in this game than in other games you've been in with him. Can you elaborate? I don't really see a difference.

I'd still like to hear an answer for this.

[TDC]

I see, though he didn't seem too involved in the games I skimmed either.

Can you elaborate why you "feel me"?

[TDC]

TSPN & AJ:

k7 is just playing like himself.

As in he usually is a lot more involved in the game. He seems so disinterested.

Who's wrong?

(Also, what's PAX?)

----

BAB: Do I understand you correctly if I say that your plan has gained you zero information on jon, because nobody understood they were supposed to add pressure votes?

[TDC]

Sorry, should have told you personally I'd be v\la.

This.

I don't feel comfortable with any person's lynch right now.

How do you feel about CML's claim request/hammer threat then?

I'd suggest jon doesn't claim until BAB has confirmed he wants him dead at this point. (k7 and TSPN seem to be "comfortable")

TSPN: I'm aware from our past game that you wouldn't lynch k7 on the basis of non-contribution.
How is jon's k7 vote less opportunistic than k7's jon vote?

[TDC]

I need to re read, not sure why tdc is voting me, i think it was before i replaced in.

I want you to contribute. I see that this isn't working all that well, though.

HOS: CML

Uh. Should the continuation of your vote be read as approval of a jon-claim?

I suppose the difference is mostly in that I find jon suspicious.

I was under the impression that your main reason for voting jon was his k7-vote. What else is there? BAB's case?

[TDC]

HOS: CML

Uh. Should the continuation of your vote be read as approval of a jon-claim?

absolutely not.

I don't get it.
jon's on L-1 and CML threatens with the hammer, this is a claim scenario if there ever was one.
If you don't agree with him having to claim (or being hammered) you should unvote.

Are you trying to get jon lynched without being held responsible for it?

[TDC]

If you don't agree with him having to claim (or being hammered) you should unvote.
Are you trying to get jon lynched without being held responsible for it?

I don't want Jon lynched right now.
I think I made it very clear I wanted

pressure

on jon to see how he reacted. I was hoping keeping him on L-1 he might do some strange stuff too look at. Anyway,

unvote

for now.

I'm aware that you claimed it was a pressure vote. Yet, when someone is at L-1 and someone else is willing to hammer, you can't claim to pressure vote anymore.
This really looks like you were trying to have it both ways - get him lynched AND have a clean sheet.

Actually, I'll

unvote, vote BAB

.
I'd like you to elaborate who your three suspects are. Like, honest suspicions.

My k7 vote failed to make him contribute, unfortunately.
I think jon still hasn't explained why he thinks TSPN is suspicious.
Also, Alabaska is lying very low, don't like that.

[TDC]

Don't you think you're being hypocritical there?

[TDC]

Quite honestly, no idea who you're talking about.

[TDC]

Well, I guess it wasn't obvious to me, because I never quoted said post. In fact it seems you were the only one to ever quote it.
Was your earlier vote for him motivated by this as well? (Where you asked what everyone thought about your CML vote?)

I'll refrain from commenting about the case until CML has done so.

Also

unvote

for now.

[TDC]

I think you're missing the point on the crumb. What you've done is putting it in a post in a way where it is blatantly obvious if anyone ever decides to quote the post, whereas a good breadcrumb would be much more subtle.

Did you ever consider that scum might quote your post?
Why would a cop not consider such a risky breadcrumb a bad idea?

[TDC]

That, quite frankly, is bullshit:
You could have achieved the same thing by

openly

claiming cop. The only thing making this through a breadcrumb achieves is risking that

only

the scum notice it. (The have four eyes after all, not just two like the bodyguard).

[TDC]

Why not? If all you wanted to achieve is a bodyguard protection, then openly claiming seems to be much safer than dropping obv-crumbs and hoping the bodyguard really picks them up.

[TDC]

Ah, so you're claiming Vanilla now.

[TDC]

I'm not voting currently.

Fixed.

[TDC]

How does BAB's urge not to be associated with the jon-lynch fit into that theory?

[TDC]

Oh, and ALabaska, thanks for making sure I'll be alive tomorrow to share my abbreviations.

Uh.. ?

[TDC]

CML: Why the hasty hammer yesterday?

[TDC]

Clearly it was the wrong choice, and I should have done what I did last time and asked jon for a claim.

Indeed. I don't really see "I thought I'd just get it over with" as good reason to hammer like that..

-----------------

Hm, I do wonder why BAB was the NK though.
I mean, he was pretty much going to be a good rival wagon for CML, wasn't he?
That is unless his last abbreviations contain a valuable insight..
Or it really is just to make me ask these kind of questions which might not lead anywhere..

IiptCallmeLiamia

tdtnk

.tiwiot,btithws.

Iphnact

.Ap.

The first underlined part seems to say "to draw the night kill".
The second is probably "I previously hadn't actually considered that", so I guess this thing mostly says that BAB thinks CML is vanilla.

THIS ONE IS REALLY IMPORTANT:
Ipocbewiatstiicbtsc,tmbstcc.
Twictttia,wwhacb.
tiaatbink

No real idea on that one. Anyone?

----------------

Anyway, with TSPN voting CML and nothing happening one of them has to be scum (or the real scum is waiting for k7 to appear).

-------------

TSPN:

I s'pose I'll wait further until CML comments, but my feeling is that this:

Maybe a way to get the heat off of his scumbuddy, jonathan?

Explains what's going on here.

Shortly thereafter:

wow. BaB and jonathan are scum together.

That's what I'm thinking. After all, who was it that pointed out that scum

absolutely

cannot afford a scumlynch today?

What changed your mind from believing BAB's case into believing he was scum with jon?
Also when and for how long did you actually believe CML could be the

real

cop? I never really thought that was likely.

-------------

Also, I think we should mass claim now. I'd say CML->TSPN->popcorn (those two first as per my "we would've lost or will lose very soon if they're both town" rationale).

[TDC]

I want to wait for something, though.

What, k7 coming in and voting CML?

Heh, perhaps I was being too clever for my own good. What I meant was that I thought BAB, by attacking CML, was trying to get heat off his scumbuddy, jonathan.

I see.

On CML, usually when I see someone breadcrumb "I am cop," it usually means they're the cop, or they're scum. If you can point me to another example of a vanilla townie crumbing like that, I'll listen, but to me, its a very strange play for a townie to make.

Yes, what I'm saying is that CML's crumb was so bad that it seemed impossible for him to really be the cop. You thought the scum team was BAB and jon, and you say you don't buy vanillas claiming cop like that so I can only conclude that you bought the cop claim.

[TDC]

Are you actually reading the thread?

[TDC]

No, Alabaska.

[TDC]

Why random? One of you two is scum.

[TDC]

I'm yours truly, the Bodyguard.

AJ.

[TDC]

Who would've thought?

[TDC]

hooray!