The Werewolves of Millers Hollow (Game Over)

[The Fonz]

Vote: Dr. Pepper for Mayor

DO NOT, I repeat NOT, elect Yos.

[The Fonz]

Because, if he's town, he doesn't need the extra vote to be influential, and you're just painting a big target on his back.

If he's scum: see 24 mafia.

[The Fonz]

No offence taken, BM. I'd be a bad choice and all.

What would be ideal would be someone who's much better as town than scum, but i can't think of anyone in this player list offhand.

[The Fonz]

I'm unlynchable.

Flavour, please.

Don't get me wrong, putting any role information in the public domain that doesn't need to be is antitown and therefore scummy. And I'd normally wagon for that.

However, I'm willing to bet that if he's telling the truth about the power, there's some kind of town killing power somewhere. Otherwise, you'd have a player that the town never has the opportunity to eliminate. Even worse if he's actually scum (which is the scenario where town would really want him dead).

In that case, what we really don't want to do is go for a kneejerk wagon, and waste the town's lynch for the day.

The only problem i see with this is if he's actually a CR. Since that's a role that commonly gets 1-shot lynch immunity.

Lynch Unvote: zwet

Vote: Xtoxm

Up to five, if I've counted right (which is by no means a sure thing.) Well within a safe distance from lynch, anyway. It was an odd post, although we don't really know what he meant by that and it could just have been joking around. Has anyone played with Xtoxm before, and would have reason to push him into a claim based on his post in conjuction with that meta? Is that kind of play something anyone's seen before in Xtoxm?

This feels odd. To vote a guy, then hedge that much in explaining it.

@Xtoxm- unlynchable period, or you survive one lynch attempt. Does "lynching" you end the day or are we just forced to choose someone else?

@BM- from what I know of you, you're a rather prolific poster and not prone to lurking as well as being a good player. These are all reasons I voted you to be mayor. I know you won't flake out and disappear (thus keeping that important double vote out of the town's hands). I also know that giving you the double vote will force you to play well as town and if you're scum, the high profile will make it harder for you to get away with anything.

unvote, Vote: ShadowKnight for Mayor

No. I mean, I want to use my vote wisely. There's a difference.[/quote]

Translation: I want to leave as little of a paper trail as possible.

Vote Xtoxm for mayor

When you fail at lynching me i'll be confirmed town, so i'm the best choice.

Fail. You also said lynching you was a bad idea.

@Xtoxm,

could you please explain what you were thinking that lead you to decide to claim under no pressure on day one?

@BM: A feeling I get from my X as SK meta.

@Shadow: I certainly hope there aren't jesters but now that you mention it I bet there is a Vampire in this game. It fits the theme perfectly. I'm not familiar with the strategy so I don't know if they'd make themselves a target for a lynch or NK so early.

No, why did you vote him for Mayor? 0.o'

An unnk SK has serious incentive to scumhunt.

@Xtomx: I think claiming 'unlynchable' makes you the perfect scum target. If you're pro-town and also the mayor, what makes you think you'll survive tonight?

Percy, please explain why that would be a bad thing.

It's unfamiliarity with a game mechanic more than anything else. You may have noticed I made a random lynch vote in this game already. With my earliest experience of playing Mafia, I didn't do any random voting until I was confident enough to do it, but that wasn't on this site and I don't believe there are transcripts of those games anywhere.

Looks like an excuse to avoid contributing to me.

Mayor Vote: Mufasa

Because Mufasa was cool

Lynch Vote: The Fonz

Because he was not

Note that I havent played mafia on this particular site in ages, so I know noone.

Question, Barry. Have you read what's already been written? If so, why did you feel it protown to random vote rather than actually contribute? If not, why not? Same question to Mufasa re the selfvote.

The Fonz - Female, 11 years old... Hmmm... Reminds me of Lilith, in Supernatural.

Please do not make any kind of speculation about what kind of character another player might be.

Any roads, I agree with Percy in the Mayor issue. Being a Mayor carries a great responsability, which I don't know if I can fulfil, hence why I don't want it. Though I'm getting better with every game I play, I still get a bit emotional with very good players that are even scum. Also, do we have to have a Mayor? Just wondering if there's a deadline for that, or if it's mandatory to have one.

Shadow Knight is also right regarding the X issue and his supposedly unlynchable ability. But, one way or another, I don't think it was wise to claim so soon, hence why I'm distrusting of him right now.

I AGLEE!

I believe Xtoxm has been lynched D1 in another game I saw as well.. for erractic posting. Can't rmb which game though.

Lynch Vote: Zwet

, for being a 1 year old kid... how can a kid be sensible in his votes?

DO NOT RANDOM VOTE AT THIS STAGE!

Also,

FoS: Percy

Seems a little too early to scum hunt issin't it? Anyway, I didn't realise the game started, I was still refering to the queue thread...

WTF? It's never to early to scumhunt.

Also, the Ztife plan sucks. Don't vote for him. I can't really be arsed to go over, point by point, why it sucks, but it does.

[The Fonz]

I don't think Ztife looks like scum, bad as that plan is. I'm reading noobtown.

Shinnen, Izzy, Mike, perhaps Barry. These are all worthwhile wagons.

[The Fonz]

Barry, as you no longer think we're in the no content stage, care to provide a vote?

@ Izzy: 'Being cautious' and 'not wanting to make a mistake' are excuses the scum hides behind to avoid contributing, frequently. But then, i'm a player who equates 'cautious' and 'scummy.' Town should be aggressive.

[The Fonz]

That's a truly horrible, and town-harming, way of playing. If you're a good scumhunter, that means you have a responsibility to contribute more, not lurk through the first few days. Nuke all lurkers.

If you've seen too many aggressive townies lynched, that means you've seen too many stupid towns who equate aggression with scum motive, when it's precisely the opposite.

[The Fonz]

Players being wrong always hurts the town whether they're active or passive, Dingo. But if an aggressive townie is leading the way, in any case it's better than the scum leading the way. And other viewpoints are only stifled if people with other views refuse to be similarly aggressive.

[The Fonz]

Does not compute, Yos.

If he's not unlynchable, there's no pressing need to lynch him now.

If he is, it's a complete waste.

[The Fonz]

So let's say we've got a couple of middling wagons, a couple of people making cases... everyone's supposed to drop their cases and just vote Xtoxm?

[The Fonz]

Does not compute, Yos.

If he's not unlynchable, there's no pressing need to lynch him now.

If he is, it's a complete waste.

If he's not unlynchable, then lynching him probably nails us a scum; like I said, his meta makes me worry that there's a chance that he's lying town, but if he's lying about his role I still think we have to assume that would make him more likely scum then town. Lynching a liar is usually a good thing.

Always a good thing. But I've no particular reason to believe he's lying; and if he isn't, it's a wasted lynch. Sure, confirming the role is useful; someone's alignment is more so. I'd rather wait and see if he is taken out at night.

[The Fonz]

But he wasn't automatically going to be run up D1, ffs.

[The Fonz]

Oh God, not jester speculation.

[The Fonz]

Guys. I want everyone to post their current opinion on the following question, be it based on gut, meta, whatever.

Do you feel that Xtoxm is lying to us?

[The Fonz]

Fonz,

What is your answer to your question?

No. I can't see an antitown role where it particularly makes sense, and I never admit the possibility of town liars.

I prefer treating Xtotm as a miller, as previously mentioned.

So... policy lynch him?

@Xtomx: I think claiming 'unlynchable' makes you the perfect scum target. If you're pro-town and also the mayor, what makes you think you'll survive tonight?

Percy, please explain why that would be a bad thing.

OK, I don't really understand your question. I was trying to say that an unlynchable pro-town mayor would be a big scum target for their NK, almost as much as an unlynchable doctor or something. I want Xtomx to explain why he thinks he won't get NKed. Does that answer your question?

Not really, as it still begs the question: if he is protown, without a night action, why would he WANT to avoid being NKed? In that scenario, you absolutely do want to be NKed.

As I already pointed out, if you had that role, the most protown thing for you to do would be to claim it early (like a miller role).

Wait...why?

If you had a miller role, it makes perfect sense to claim it day 1, because otherwise a cop investigation is horrible.

No, no, no.

My vote for myself is because I don't fear a lynch, and for now it is a place holder as I am transiting into the new game and wrapping up the old game.

That just looks like posturing to me.

@Yos: If you claim that ability while under investigation for scumminess, it is far less likely to be believed. Just like claiming miller

after

an investigation on you is less likely to be believed, even if it's actually true. Of course if you follow that logic, the best time for the scum to claim this ability is at the beginning, but that's no different from scum claiming miller.

If it's true, we need to know early. I'm not saying his early claim makes him protown, but that the best time for protown unlynchable to claim is when you're

not

under investigation.

Let me put it another way. He claimed unlynchable, and now many players want to kill him, just for that. If he was already looking scummy and

then

claimed unlynchable, he would be put down like a dog, even if he was protown.

But if he's UNLYNCHABLE....

Well, I might be out of date, but I want to say something regarding the agressiveness. I think town should be more agressive than passive, however, it should not reach an extreme of agressiveness. I've seen some games where the mafia uses the agressiveness of some pro-town players to lead the lynches as they wish. The Fonz, I believe this is what happened in War of Heaven II, isn't it? But again, a passive stance won't help either. Some agressive is needed, but all attacks should come with good bases and not just for the sake of lynching, or for pure guts.

What happened in War In Heaven is we had the unique disadvantage that roflcopter, an obvtown player, was ripping the town apart by singlehandedly killing town players right and left, and there was nothing we could do to stop him but kill him, which we didn't want to do because he was a powerful obvtown role. That's more analogous to repeated misviggings. When I acted aggressively, and tried to lead the town, I got two players lynched, one of whom was scum. In fact, my biggest error in that game was too much going with the flow later on.

claiming unlynchable is a stupid play for a jester, because it means if they arent lynched Day 1, they are likely to be NKed.

BM

This.

[The Fonz]

Oh, and Vampire speculation is equally stupid, since a Vampire has two opportunities to win, and the first lynch puts him on his 'last life.'

[The Fonz]

Also,

Claim: Jester

BM

*Facepalm*

[The Fonz]

Izzy: Are you waiting on the answer to something?

[The Fonz]

STOP WITHT THE XTOXM WIFOM CRAP! If he's scummy, we lynch him. Simple as pie.

Most people apparently think he's lying about his role. That's scummy if true.

[The Fonz]

Oh, it is. But nonetheless, even people who don't support LAL consider lying a big scumtell.

[The Fonz]

Jahudo, please rank the following possibilities:

Lynchproof scum
Non-lynchproof scum
Lynchproof town
Other town power

We know you have 'vanilla' bottom.

[The Fonz]

Thanks, Jahudo.

[The Fonz]

Thanks, Jahudo.

That's it? Did you gain something from it?

Yes.

l.

if he is protown, without a night action, why would he WANT to avoid being NKed? In that scenario, you absolutely do want to be NKed.

Are you saying that a protown unlynchable should want to be NKed? Why on earth would anyone protown

want

to be killed by any means?

Uh, ANYONE who is town and not a mason or role with a night action should want to be nightkilled. Duh.

This looks like I'm defending Xtomx, which is really not where I want to be. I just think that the claim had to come out, and I'm glad it came out now, and we should be looking at his playstyle rather than policy lynching him based on his claim.

I suggest you start contributing. You'll get my vote in 48 hours if you don't start scumhunting and analysing like a motherfucker.

I have an irresistable urge to lynch you right now.

The way you quoted my post made it sound like that comment was directed at you; it wasn't. I think that dropping a claim like that and then lurking throughout the rest of the day is scummy.

Uh, no it doesn't make it sound like that at all. It makes it sound like BM thinks your comment is scummy. And I agree.

[The Fonz]

I got the feeling that Fonz didn't want to be mayor. The Fonz, is it just you don't think you would be a good mayor, or you don't want to accept mayor?

Oh, I don't think I'd be terrible as mayor or anything. But, my objection to me as mayor is basically the same as my objection to Yos as mayor. Myself and Yos will produce enough content and be prominent enough for y'all to get a read on regardless.

I'd rather it went to someone who has good ideas, but is characteristically a bit more reticent, and unused to being in the spotlight. The advantages of this is a) a player who is pretty good, but can sometimes be ignored gets more chance to influence things and b) it's easier for the rest of us to get a read on said player. So, in my mind that's win-win whether that player is town or scum. I have no particular fear of a scum mayor (quite difficult for a scum to know how to play it) unless that player is a noted manipulator, like you-know-who.

[The Fonz]

I think the risk of a scum mayor is overrated. At least, at this early stage. Whoever is mayor will be under particular pressure to scumhunt successfully. I don't see how it's possible a scum mayor could survive to endgame without some serious bussing- and if they want to bus, that's fine by me.

[The Fonz]

Well, that's true.

Vote ShadowKnight or Dr. Pepper.

[The Fonz]

Your candidacy.

Because you seem like a rational guy, but at the same time a newer player who could do with the bully pulpit of a doublevote to encourage you to grasp the nettle.

[The Fonz]

Well, since, y'know, we have to pick a mayor before that happens...

[The Fonz]

It's hard to answer Mike's post without getting into a massive pile of WIFOM.

[The Fonz]

OK, I'm going to post my thoughts up until the end of p11, because this is turning into an unreadable WoT, and I hate those.

___________________________

Fonz answers Shinnen on the previous game all 3 of us were involved in, War in Heaven II...
He says that he was not the leading aggressive townie, and this was true.
But the aggresion used early on was too much to contain late on in the game, and as a result, town lynched town after town after town. And The Fonz was one of the main contributers of Over-Aggression in that game. Over-aggression throughout a game is not good imo. Blame WILL be afforded to an over-aggressive townie, and a mis-lynch will more than likely ensue.

Check again, FS. I hurt four players. One was mafia, one was SK, and one was a punishment for hurting without any backing. Oh, and the other we had a majority in favour of killing. In fact, I should have been more aggressive. It just so happened that the player most inclined to defying the town was also doing double damage, and the worst scumhunter.

I would like to hear peoples thoughts on this please. Possible Pros & Cons.

My thought is this. Alignment is a complete red herring. We want to elect someone, whom the extra vote will make easier to read. Whether that's a town read or a scum read is secondary.

I think we should elect a mayor based on everyone putting up 2 candidates.

Why? Don't we already have a system for electing a Mayor? What is the advantage of everyone fake voting for two people instead of people just actually voting for the person they think should be Mayor?

Use of the dual vote system forces people to show a preference for an alternative to self-voting, for a start.

Except that self-voting is extremely scummy, deprives the town of information, and no one should be doing it at all.

Uh, ANYONE who is town and not a mason or role with a night action should want to be nightkilled. Duh.

Wat.
I think what you're assuming is that his only power is unlynchable.

Well, YES, of course I'm assuming that. An unlynchable power role is over-powered. Not only that, but the last thing in the world an unlynchable power role should do is claim.

If that's the case, then I agree somewhat - him being NKed is better than a powerrole getting NKed. That said, saying that a vanilla townie should wish for death is ridiculous. A vanilla townie can be so much more beneficial to the town (in the long run) than a powerrole, given the right play and the right player. One townie can be better than another. And so on.

A vanilla townie absolutely should want to be nightkilled. The scum nightkill the player whose continued participation threatens their win condition most. Every town player should want to be the guy who is the biggest threat to scum.

I think you're trying to make some sort of general rule which doesn't exist, while confusing the hell out of me and making me look scummy.

This confuses me.

I don't like how you just dropped 'mason' in there, either.

Please explain why. Do you disagree that a mason has rational reasons for wanting to avoid the NK?

This looks like I'm defending Xtomx, which is really not where I want to be. I just think that the claim had to come out, and I'm glad it came out now, and we should be looking at his playstyle rather than policy lynching him based on his claim.

I suggest you start contributing. You'll get my vote in 48 hours if you don't start scumhunting and analysing like a motherfucker.

I have an irresistable urge to lynch you right now.

The way you quoted my post made it sound like that comment was directed at you; it wasn't. I think that dropping a claim like that and then lurking throughout the rest of the day is scummy.

Uh, no it doesn't make it sound like that at all. It makes it sound like BM thinks your comment is scummy. And I agree.

Firstly, the quoted paragraphs have stuff in between, and no indication of that was made. That's why I thought it could be mistaken to be directed at BM.

And it looked fairly obvious to me that BM wasn't mistaken. But that's really irrelevant to the matter at hand.

Secondly, my comments have been echoed by other players. Examples:

You know, I'm getting tired of WIFOMing Xtoxm's stuff back and fourth here with absolutely no input from him.

Let's let him come back and answer some of the questions about him, explain his role in a little more detail, ect. If he dosn't do so in the next few days, I'll probably vote him just for lurking at this point.

How is this 'echoing' you? It's not remotely similar. But, in any case, you appear to be labouring under the impression that what I think is scummy is the idea that Xtoxm shouldn't be lynched. It clearly isn't.

So, Fonz, do you think Yosarian is as scummy as me for making his statement? How about the others I quoted? If not, why not?

Nope. Because your post was scummy and his wasn't.

True, the doublevote could be an incentive for a newbie to participate more than they normally would. However, an experienced player like Fonz or BM is more likely to use the double vote wisely. I'd rather have a town double-voter that participates as much as they normally would than a scum double-voter that participates rather than lurks (lurking being a scumtell).

You're missing the point of why lurking is scummy. Because it makes it harder to get a read on you, and getting a read on players is how scumhunting works. If a player who would otherwise lurk does not because they are mayor, that's one more read. Remember, a lurking scum has no buddies.

Yeah; Firestarters "let's try to give a scum a double vote" plan is just a terrible idea.

Well, I don't think we should deliberately target someone scummy. But i think the risk of a scum mayor early on is overstated.

I’ve seen that some people want a mayor that is experienced, active and pro town but have also seen some say they want a newer player who is pro town, active and will step up more than they usually would if given the position. I was wondering which one you all like better and why? I am more behind the idea of an experienced player as I think they will handle the pressure better and make the right decisions, though it really depends on the player themself.

The fact that the experienced players 'will handle the pressure better' is an argument against it. You get better info on players by taking them out of their comfort zones.

If we elect a townie who's acting scummy or erratic, we'll effectively have killed two townies if the scummy mayor makes even a minor slip with regards to a lynch or another player. It's pretty much a flip of the coin.

This post seems symptomatic of a wider paranoia- 'What if we elect a town mayor and they attack townies?' which may be the least desirable consequence of WiH- the loss of faith in scumhunting as a town tell, and the opposite as a scumtell.

Look, it's the same as ever. Look for sincerity.

If this option of electing Mayor is to be used, then the incoming Mayor must agree to to Towns will, and choose the next voted player in as Mayor.
Of course, any deviation from this by the outgoing Mayor has consequences.

Explain how these consequences work. So an NKed mayor chooses a new mayor against the will of the town. How are you going to hurt him? He's already dead town. Why would you hurt the new mayor, when he's got nowt to do with the decision?

It's WIFOM, Fire. That's what bothers me. For example, many think that I have an anti-town playstyle. If by your theory, you make me mayor because of it, and I mistakenly contribute to a subsequent mislynch, I would be under more suspicion than any of the other players on the wagon.

People suspecting you because you're antitown has nothing to do with you being mayor, and a lot to do with you being antitown. Also, that's a good reason why you have little chance of being elected.

Not to mention that mayorizing the scummiest player makes them act more protown and makes it harder for us to decide whether he's scum trying to fit in with his new role or just a wishy washy confused townie. Overall, I think we should just do the normal mayor electing method of pro-towniness.

If scum act protown, then they're acting against their interests. That's fine by me.

It's why DGB-style crying bus at every opportunity is stupid. It just means scum don't bus. And that's a worse scenario for the town.

BTW, for everyone else...

Has this method been used before in a Kingmaker type set-up?
The "Vote scummy players in as King/Mayor first" method...
I'd like to see how it panned out if it was.

The problem with comparing this to KM, is... the King has 100% responsibility for a lynch. The king's reign ends at the end of every day. Here, we have a somewhat more influential than normal player, who holds the role unto death.

Then what if a town mayor accidentally chooses scum? Then the scum has a free pass for a while.

Why would it mean a free pass? We're not going to ignore the mayor. All that says is that choosing 'pro-town looking' players is fallible because the town is uninformed.

Your posts have a wring of 'we shouldn't do anything because we might be WRONG' about them.

Nope. If one of their own is elected mayor, then they can gain townie points by bussing them. The bussing would be more effective, and harder to confirm as bussing, because of the pedestal placed underneath the mayor.

BUT SCUM WOULD BE DEAD!

Your thought process seems to be this:

Well, if we elect a town mayor, and he's wrong a couple of times, he's likely to be lynched.
If we elect a scum mayor, he will use his influence to get townies lynched, and we won't lynch him because he's the mayor.
If we elect a scum mayor, he will bus, and this will be bad because he'll be basically confirmed.

Zwet, this isn't Kingmaker. Every wagon will have half the players on it, even with the double vote.

[The Fonz]

The whole thing is just a bad, bad idea. The obvious stratagy of "We give the mayorship to someone who looks really, really townie, and try to keep it out of the hands of the scum" just seems much, much better, from every point of view.

Except that 'looking townie' when no-one has been lynched yet just leads you to give it to someone fairly reasonable sounding, leading to the RTP. Let's face it, scum are going to get it at some point. Rather than agonising infinitely over whether someone's scum, let's look at how they are likely to use it, and how much them being mayor might help us read 'em.

You both do not understand where Im coming from, thats fine.
If the rest of Town see the same picture, thats also fine.

VOTE 4 LYNCH: Dingoatemybaby

Enough info for me.
Nice coat-tailing Zwet...

I understand your argument. Your argument is wrong. I expect scum to make understandable, incorrect, arguments.

And your OMGUS vote is, well, just OMGUS.

Well, you look scummy from a 'voting for game theory disagreement' perspective. But the countervote does look weak.

[The Fonz]

Yos, can I ask you this... would you LIKE to be mayor?

[The Fonz]

Hehe. I don't want you to be, because it would send my usually-high level of Yos-related paranoia and second guessing myself through the roof if you were mayor.

Anyway, can we get back to electing SK?

[The Fonz]

Well, you look scummy from a 'voting for game theory disagreement' perspective. But the countervote does look weak.

Please explain. I think it is overly simplistic to say I voted for him for "game theory disagreement". I voted for him because pushing an anti-town plan is scummy.

He obviously doesn't agree that the plan is antitown...

Yes.

Zwet is useless and antitown, so therefore naturally thinks that lynching useless and antitown players is a bad idea.

[The Fonz]

Posts which add absolutely nothing to the game ftl!

(In fairness, Zwet, you're actually contributing pretty well here. That point was somewhat tongue-in-cheek).

Btw, your claimed thought process still seems to include the notion that if the mayor is scum, we won't lynch him soon enough, whilst if he's town, we'll lynch him too soon, for basically the same behaviour.

[The Fonz]

The point of lurkerlynching is that by lurking, he is able to avoid people getting a read on him. He's outright refusing to contribute.

[The Fonz]

Only if we know he's telling the truth. Which can only be ascertained by... well, you know.

[The Fonz]

He obviously doesn't agree that the plan is antitown....

I wouldn't expect scum to admit they were being anti-town.

I also wouldn't expect scum to deliberately propose an obviously townharming plan. I don't think I've EVER seen an argument about game mechanics in which the scum deliberately proposed an antitown one; the disagreement, and hostility engendered, is usually between townies who have alternative visions, and are utterly convinced they their plan is so protown that only scum could object.

Do you really want to waste a lynch on him, though? If he's telling the truth he'll probably be nightkilled quickly.

By whom though? Fonz made a good point earlier about him probably not having nightactions if he's town and telling the truth, so the mafia probably wont want to. And whats going to make a vigilante want to take him out if they dont know if he's telling the truth or not?

Not to mention, if he's completely useless, he's no threat to scum anyway.

[The Fonz]

An unlynchable townie is a HUGE liability for the scum the later they get into the game. As of now, as no one has claimed mega-super-lighting-babe unlimited daykill vig, their best bet is to kill Xt. If he's town I don't expect him alive tomorrow.

An unlynchable USELESS townie is far less of a threat than one who's actually scumhunting.

[The Fonz]

WHAT about him, Zwet?

[The Fonz]

Why?

[The Fonz]

I don't think he's scummy. I think he disagrees with you on the best way to use the mayor role.

(The reason he's wrong is this... we already have a vote for players who are scummy. It's a lynch vote).

[The Fonz]

I don't think he's stupid. There's nothing inherently ridiculous about his plan- it's counterintuitive, but being mayor could force a scum to act more in the interests of town than they would like.

[The Fonz]

More scrutiny = having to act more town.

Where it really falls down is that if people were actually able to agree on someone 'likely to be scum,' they'd be lynched.

[The Fonz]

Where's my 'I agree with Yos2' sign?

[The Fonz]

I'm just saying that on day one, with this many players, there are better ways to make him dead than doing what he's trying to make us do. I watched a Jester destroy a game on another site, and I don't like 2nd place when we don't have to let him have 1st.

There's no such thing as second place. You either fulfil your win condition, or you don't.

Think about it logically. What reason would *you* claim unlynchable on day 1? What usually happens to people who claim unlynchable? What usually happens to people who lurk? How about when they actively lurk? How about when they actively lurk and flaunt the fact that they are not going to answer questions? Everything he's done so far has *screamed* "lynch me". Who wants to be lynched *that* badly? Jesters. His own actions have ruled out any other role. A vampire would want to wait till late game (or at least until the scum were winning). A vanilla townie wouldn't be trying this hard.

I'm not saying to keep him alive by any means though. He wants to die, lets let him, but I'm saying not to waste a lynch on him.

Why waste a vig, but not a lynch? It's a town-controlled kill either way. And yes, his play is consistent with being a Jester- so are about 1500 other examples of VI play i could note.

[The Fonz]

He could be a vamp that chooses when to resurrect. It would be awful to get to lynch or lose and then have him turn up and make us lose it, or something like that. I'm all for directing a vigilante his way tonight.

Can we put the absurd conspiracy theories aside, please? There has never been a role like that in the history of mafia, and no competent mod would ever include one. If he *is* a judas role, then his chances of winning are highest if he delays his first lynch as long as possible.

[The Fonz]

EBWODP- I'm assuming the scum would take the shot based on 1- not wanting 2nd place in the game either and 2- taking a confirmed killable over the possibly doc-protected one if they aim elsewhere. (yeah its a small chance they'll get foiled by doc protect, but why take a 93% chance over a 100%?)

THERE IS NO SUCH THINK AS SECOND PLACE FOR FUCK'S SAKE!

[The Fonz]

*thing.

[The Fonz]

The weird thing is why people get so worked up about Jesters. I mean, no-one ever thinks the town has done anything but won if they get rid of all the scum, but there's a survivor...

[The Fonz]

It's completely broken. Imagine a vampire resurrecting in lylo. I've never seen a reviver outside the Xylbot, and i've never seen one there that doesn't resurrect immediately.

[The Fonz]

@The Fonz- Whether you want to say a jester wins "first" and then town and scum fight for "second" or if you want to say he wins "also", I'd rather the town win period, and not worry about other roles. (I've also never tried to win with the "lovers" role either. When I'm scum, I want to win as scum, when I'm town, I want to win as town.) I refuse to help a neutral role who has no reason to help us beat the scum win.

Therefore, do what helps the town most. If you think keeping alive Xtoxm helps the town's win condition, by all means, do that. But that's the criterion. If he's a third-party role, then his win condition is irrelevant- it's whether him being alive is pos or neg for town. And i'm starting to lean toward neg.

[The Fonz]

unvote vote: xtomx

fix

This is your first lurk warning. If you do not start contributing more, your continued existence will become harmful to the town. Just popping up to agree with a substantial current of other player's thinking with no new analysis is scummy.

I'd like people's opinions on how to handle the Xtoxm replacement situ.

[The Fonz]

If there's not a vig, then X has to be town, or lynchable scum- because unlynchable scum is utterly broken if town doesn't have the opportunity to kill him at night, even more so than it would otherwise be.

[The Fonz]

Jesus Christ! I love replacing into games I might as well suicide myself in.

I once replaced a guy who had claimed cop, and was counterclaimed. By a guy with an innocent investigation on him.

[The Fonz]

Vote: Millar

Lynch all liars might have been negotiable, since Xtoxm was acting like a dickwad... but LASV isn't.

[The Fonz]

So, what did you want to accomplish with this, SK? And why did you vote, Fonz, after SK asked nicely to not vote for him (because he has some sort of a plan)?

Because i'm not party to the plan, i'm not going to do something on the basis that someone else might have a secret plan, and selfvoting is a lynch-on-sight offence in my book.

[The Fonz]

Someone please hammer me...or should i say X...who should have been mod-killed.

MOD: Next time do the right thing

Not a jester. A jester acting in a way likely to get him lynched is not in contravention of his WC.

Give it to the most logical, most protown player because that player will pass it to the second most logical, protown player and so on and so forth. Everyone suggesting a scum mayor is earning major scum points from me.

BEWARE rational townie syndrome.

Here are my thoughts....

Xtomx completely gave us little to no choice on who to lynch for Day 1 thats why I had little to no thought in my lynch.

2nd the mayor vote is rather interesting, I seriously would not mind Yos, Fonz on Battle Mage as Mayor, the three likelist to be town.

I'm a full time student involved in Varsity Baseball so I get on here when i can sorry for the lack of content.

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

Grrrrr. If he *is* a role that wants us to lynch him, I say we don't give him what he wants.

Why would you think that?

I once replaced a guy who had claimed cop, and was counterclaimed. By a guy with an innocent investigation on him.

I'd really like to read this game. Can you at least tell me what happened?

[/quote]

I actually mistyped. He'd claimed doc, which isn't so interesting. The innocent investigation was only announced after I'd replaced in, and spent hours making a case on the other doc claimant. The cop had waite

Yos blatantly rolefished last page, and noone noticed.

On it...

My role would be perfect for mayor.

does this make sense in the context of a Jester? Im not sure Xtoxm is that smart to think that this would get him strung up...

BM

There's a significant risk of getting vigged.

@Those who think he's a jester: When was the last time you saw a claimed jester who actually was one? Do you not countenance the possibility that implying he might be one might be an attempt to avoid lynch?

*facepalm* It's fine for a jester to win so we can cut back on the WIFOM which would otherwise plague us until the end of time.

I agree with Zwet here. I'm actually starting to develop a theory that the best course of action is almost always the one which creates least wifom down the road (yes folks, I'm starting to see lynch all claimed doctors in a new light...)

[The Fonz]

What's the mayor situation?

[The Fonz]

I didn't mean that. I was wondering if there was a votecount in the offing, hint hint.

[The Fonz]

@Fonz - You've said you don't want to be mayor. How strongly do you feel about that? Do you think, in the abstract, that this is something we should take into consideration when voting?

Not particularly. I just feel that having someone less prominent as mayor is better. I don't want BM elected, because town-but-erratic is probably the worst combo for a mayor. Tbh, I'd be pretty cool with Juls.

[The Fonz]

Battle Mage Fonzarelli. Hmmmm.

[The Fonz]

@Mufasa: Why are BM, Yos and I the most likely to be town, beyond a) us being the three best-known players here and b) everyone else saying so?

[The Fonz]

IAWY2.

[The Fonz]

Double, double, bah, and go town...

[The Fonz]

Which brings me to my second problem, women off picking flowers? Not the name but the effect. I have a problem with a game where a mechanic forces any number [1 or more] players out of the game for a couple weeks and then bring them back later with and expect them to continue like they never left. Not a criticism of the mod, just of the game itself. So I can easily support Battlemage's apathy at the end because why should he care?

I sent a message to HC with this exact complaint- you can't tell half the town they can't do anything for a few weeks, then expect them to come back and be as active as those who didn't leave.

Awful lot of Village Idiocy on the town side, plus the mother of all townie fights, cost this.

My night actions were, incidentally, to protect Yos2 night one and kill Percy n2.

[The Fonz]

Just been reading thru the early part of this game...

funniest bit was mike trying to explain to mufasa that the expression is 'bare with me...'

It isn't, it's bear...