A Storm of Swords - Lay your swords down!

[zoraster]

Seriously, the fact that someone of you (and I'm looking at you, Twilight Sparkle) are considering that governor is a detriment to the town on D1 is ludicrous.

Is it REALLY ludicrous? Think about it. In a regular game, the governor role is given to a townie, so the town benefits from that role. But we have no way to be sure we're giving it to a townie, we can just hope.

And what does the governor power do? All it serves to do is limit the town's options to lynch. It essentially provides an unproven player with veto power. The town's power is that it has a majority of players. Giving the governor power to someone to use lets a minority decide a lynch.

My understanding is that the governor can't even stop a scum driven quick lynch. In other words, he has to nominate a person BEFORE the hammer drops.

So no. It's not ludicrous. It's smart playing.

[Magua]

Seriously, the fact that someone of you (and I'm looking at you, Twilight Sparkle) are considering that governor is a detriment to the town on D1 is ludicrous.

Is it REALLY ludicrous? Think about it. In a regular game, the governor role is given to a townie, so the town benefits from that role. But we have no way to be sure we're giving it to a townie, we can just hope.

And what does the governor power do? All it serves to do is limit the town's options to lynch. It essentially provides an unproven player with veto power. The town's power is that it has a majority of players. Giving the governor power to someone to use lets a minority decide a lynch.

My understanding is that the governor can't even stop a scum driven quick lynch. In other words, he has to nominate a person BEFORE the hammer drops.

So no. It's not ludicrous. It's smart playing.

Please. Tell me the worst case scenario you envision with the governor. Is it scum governing scum on lylo? Well, now you have someone who has to explain why they governed the person everyone else wanted to lynch. How, exactly, is that bad?

[zoraster]

Worst case? 2v3 lylo, deadline in an hour. Votes stand at:
Scum A: Town A (has been spotty in activity), Town B
Town A: Scum B, Scum A
Not Voting: Town C (waffling)

Scum B has the governor power. Uses it at this point to protect Scum A, claiming that he OBVIOUSLY knows Town A is scum.
Result: time is running low, Town A hasn't been seen in 30 hours, no sure thing he'll be back in time for the lynch. Town B and C have to, in less than an hour, make a read on whether Scum A is earnest (very possible since he's voting Town A in the first place and, if he were town, would do the very same thing) and vote Town A OR try and vote Scum B and hope that Town A gets online in time, but if he doesn't, there's no lynch and they lose anyway.

Compare that to the situation if there's no gov: Town C makes the coinflip choice between Town A and Scum A. Much likelier win.

Of course that's worst case scenario, so it's not necessarily all that likely, but it is illustrative. More likely the governor power will just serve to frustrate town.

What's the best case scenario you envision?

[Locke Lamora]

I'm tired of people talking about the governor ability. Let's lynch Mikujin. I get the feeling her DGB votes are more based on the idea that DGB is being stupid than DGB is being scummy. There doesn't seem to be a whole lot of conviction that DGB is actually scum.

[Eddard Stark]

Vote count 1.13

Mikujin (2) Locke Lamora, Danakillsu
xvart (2) Thor665, chesskid3
LynchMePls (1) DrippingGoofball
GreyICE (1) Shadow1psc
THor665 (2) Raivann, Twilight Sparkle

diddin (4) Magua, MagnaofIllusion, xvart, Zdenek

danakillsu (1) Benmage
Magua (1) diddin
Kast (1) Zoraster
Hasdgfas (1) Bunnylover
Xtoxm (1) Hasdgfas
Zoraster (1) GreyICE
Drippinggoofball (1) Mikujin, Nexus
Raivann (1) LynchMePls

Not voting (4) Percy, Xtoxm, Feysal, Kast

With 25 alive it takes 13 to lynch.

Raise Count 1.13

Locke Lamora (1) Locke Lamora
Hasdgfas (1) Feysal

Twilight Sparkle (5) Bunnylover, xvart, LynchMePls, Zdenek, GreyICE

DrippingGoofball (1) Danakillsu
Danakillsu (1) chesskid3
Benmage (5) Benmage, Song of Ice and Fire, MagnaofIllusion, diddin, Mikujin
Magua (1) Hasdgfas
Percy (1) Magua
Shadow1psc (1) Raivann
Not raising (8)Nexus, Percy, Xtoxm, Zoraster, Twilight Sparkle, DrippingGoofball, Kast, Shadow1psc

With 25 alive it takes 13 to raise someone

*Any mistakes in the votecount please point them out.
* No one needs a prod.
* Percy is sick (V/la).
* Deadline countdown is here

[Shadow1psc]

Can someone explain to me the case on Diddin? I don't quite get it.

[Magua]

Worst case? 2v3 lylo, deadline in an hour. Votes stand at:
Scum A: Town A (has been spotty in activity), Town B
Town A: Scum B, Scum A
Not Voting: Town C (waffling)

Scum B has the governor power. Uses it at this point to protect Scum A, claiming that he OBVIOUSLY knows Town A is scum.
Result: time is running low, Town A hasn't been seen in 30 hours, no sure thing he'll be back in time for the lynch. Town B and C have to, in less than an hour, make a read on whether Scum A is earnest (very possible since he's voting Town A in the first place and, if he were town, would do the very same thing) and vote Town A OR try and vote Scum B and hope that Town A gets online in time, but if he doesn't, there's no lynch and they lose anyway.

Compare that to the situation if there's no gov: Town C makes the coinflip choice between Town A and Scum A. Much likelier win.

Of course that's worst case scenario, so it's not necessarily all that likely, but it is illustrative. More likely the governor power will just serve to frustrate town.

What's the best case scenario you envision?

Your worst case scenario, I call good (with one wrinkle, noted below). How so?

In order to be *at all* believable, Scum B is forced to have been showing townreads on Scum A. Locking scum into behaviors is beneficial for the town. This also means that Scum B is forced to have scumreads on Town B.

Secondly, Scum B has to have been explaining why they haven't been nightkilled since D1.

Thirdly, if town correctly lynches Scum B in this case, the next day town autowins. (Town C must be clear. Town A knows Town B is clear. Town A's only possible scumpartners are Town B or Scum A, given the initial setup and the lack of hammer -- it is impossible for Town A to be partners with Scum B. Since Scum B turns out to be scum, Town A is clear.)

So scum may have reduced the chance for town to lynch correctly slightly (though Town B should be incredibly suspicious of Scum B for the governing), but they increased the town chance of winning overall.

The one wrinkle is the "1 hour until deadline". That's just silly. If town gets to the point where it's 1 hour before deadline on 5-way lylo, then they've lost already, governor or no governor. You've got two weeks, use them. If the scenario you outlined occurred, I would expect a town loss not because of the governor, but because town has just played poorly.

Best case scenario is that the governor is has to make reads and act upon them. If the governor is town, this is just good play. If the governor is scum, then it forces them into locking down their options far earlier than they might otherwise. If a governor doesn't do this, then they should get lynched.

@Shadow:

This is D1. Why don't you read diddin and come to your own conclusion?

[Shadow1psc]

@Magua: I see your point, but not the 3 other people voting him. He's definitely not worth voting over some of the other people here =\

[zoraster]

First, you take my worst case scenario, then address a different one. Then at the end you acknowledge you've done it. And as I described, town hasn't lost in that situation if there's no gov. You asked me for a worst case scenario, I gave you one. There are plenty of other less bad scenarios.

Second, you call the situation "good" but that's clearly just because you want to "win" this argument. It's not good, even if you can find a silver lining (in, as I mentioned, a situation different than the one I described).

Third, I think you're severely overestimating the value in getting a governor to "lock down" their reads. A governor, whether town or scum won't use their 1 shot power unless it's close to a lynch. If it is, what value is added by him avoiding it? He just says he thinks it's a bad lynch (which we could have guessed by the fact he's not on the lynch), and where are we?

Anyway, don't want to go round and round on this. Going to take a closer look at Mij.

[LimMePls]

If he "just said its a bad lynch" with no previous statements that validate this viewpoint, then he's just claimed scum. Thus he would need to be posting a favorable/town-like read of the player he governors prior to the actual usage of the governor power. Thus he's been locked into a play he may not have wanted to make. That's Magua's point, and he is right.

Unraise
Raise: Magua

I like Magua-Hand.

[Kast]

@Mikujin-
I'm sure you think there's a reasonable case on DGB (or at least a defensible case); she's not exactly known for her rock-solid logic and she often comes across as scummy to others. But the timing on your vote in context of you being called out for not voting, rejecting that call-out, then getting some pressure; combined with the attack on DGB coming essentially out of nowhere without DGB really adding anything new, seems more like it's a response to the pressure than a strong conviction that DGB is extremely likely to be scum.

I find her push to get has to break his PR to be scummy for reasons others have stated.

Her push to have cow break his post restriction is pointless for reasons others have stated. Explain how pointless = scummy.

I've seen scum push wagons on DGB plenty of times & her playstyle often encourages it (not a VI, but also not a highly analytical/rational player). I don't think DGB has posted enough (or covered a wide enough range of topics) to generate a good read on her yet.

@Zdenek-
No, it doesn't answer my first question at all. The first question is an expansion/clarification of your answer. You think I did something scummy and label it as "mudslinging". Since it's obviously not mudslinging, but instead a behavior you misapply that term to, you need to clarify why you think that behavior is scummy. Both options I listed are potential explanations implied by your previous statement; but it's ambiguous whether you believe either of them are actually the case.

A simple check of your iso shows that you agreed with nearly all of my assessments of GreyIce's posts as overreactions (you used different words but the same message). Since you claim neither of the two potential scum-motiviations you previously implied were intended, then I have to ask why exactly were you objecting to perceived "mudslinging"?

At this point it looks like you're just throwing out an ambiguous keyword to cast suspicion on me but haven't actually thought it through.

but passing judgments like that can often be useful. For instance, as an explanation why they aren't voting someone.

My posts pointing out that GreyIce's overreactions were overreactions do exactly this. How is your distinction relevant?

@Zoraster-
It's hard to believe that you missed the repeated speculation of cow as Ilyn Payne (it's been present since at least page 6 and referenced on almost every page since).
But it's even less plausible that you "misunderstood" the fishing accusations as referencing your post about cow's name.

@LL-
It's been a while since I played with you, but from that game and skimming others at that time, I had a strong impression that you as town enjoyed finding info about players before jumping on a solid wagon (sort of the playstyle Mikujin espoused then abandoned here). In short, I recall you as a cautious analytical player, but now you're semi-lurky pushing an impulsive throwaway case. It feels like hiding under the radar.

VOTE: LL

Also, Zoraster's scum-read on LL is probably distancing.

[zoraster]

If he "just said its a bad lynch" with no previous statements that validate this viewpoint, then he's just claimed scum. Thus he would need to be posting a favorable/town-like read of the player he governors prior to the actual usage of the governor power. Thus he's been locked into a play he may not have wanted to make. That's Magua's point, and he is right.

Unraise
Raise: Magua

I like Magua-Hand.

Oh? He's already not on the lynch, presumably, so he's made a previous stand on the player (unless he's claimed he's waiting to vote for some reason) even if it's passive. It's one that will support his use of the governor power later. But whatever. I think you're wrong, but It's not worth arguing over unless some other people see the wisdom of not having a governor running around.

For the rest of you guys, the question is essentially this: In your ideal game as town would you rather have an unconfirmed governor running around or not?

@Zoraster-
It's hard to believe that you missed the repeated speculation of cow as Ilyn Payne (it's been present since at least page 6 and referenced on almost every page since).
But it's even less plausible that you "misunderstood" the fishing accusations as referencing your post about cow's name.

Maybe it's hard to believe, yet it's true. Keep in mind that cow's response was fairly enigmatic to a quick read (I was catching up on roughly 12 pages when I read through so a couple of faces to a quote didn't necessarily register). I'm not sure what you mean about the second part though.

After the Arsenal/Barcelona game, I'll post again trying to take a look at some other players I didn't notice as much in my last read as well as return to LL and Kast to see if they're worth pursuing.

[Magua]

@Magua: I see your point, but not the 3 other people voting him. He's definitely not worth voting over some of the other people here =\

I don't think GreyICE (whom you are voting for) is scum. Who else do you find worth voting for over diddin?

First, you take my worst case scenario, then address a different one. Then at the end you acknowledge you've done it. And as I described, town hasn't lost in that situation if there's no gov. You asked me for a worst case scenario, I gave you one. There are plenty of other less bad scenarios.

In your worst case scenario, town loses even outside of the governor, because town has played badly and gotten themselves into a completely avoidable situation.

For Scum B to be governor in that situation, entirely preceding the actual scenario described, he must have:
1) Posted townreads on Scum A
2) Posted scumreads on Town A and Town B
3) Approved of every lynch that has occurred, since he governed none of them (and at 5-way lylo in this game, that's going to include a fair number of mislynches)
4) Explained why he hasn't been nightkilled

These are all positives for the town. You prevent Scum B from bussing Scum A. You prevent Scum B from buddying Town A or Town B. As the number of mislynches accrue, you put more pressure on Scum B as to either why he's so bad with his scumreads, or why he hasn't governed one of the mislynches.

Even in the final scenario, scum governing scum is good for the town, with the noted exception of your one-hour-deadline. Then it's bad. Yes. Agreed. Don't let scum govern scum with one hour left until deadline. But that is *easily* avoidable by town, simply by not being idiots and wasting the other 2 weeks of the day.

So, tl, dr: Having a governor, even a scum governor, is good for the town.

[zoraster]

1) Posted townreads on Scum A
2) Posted scumreads on Town A and Town B
3) Approved of every lynch that has occurred, since he governed none of them (and at 5-way lylo in this game, that's going to include a fair number of mislynches)
4) Explained why he hasn't been nightkilled

1. Sure
2. Why are both necessary? Only needs to do Town A.
3. He just approved of it enough not to govern it. He only has a one shot power, after all, and he wants to use it where it does the most good, he thinks.
4. WIFOM. And if town is actually suspicious of this, why isn't he the one who's got the wagon on him?

Town hasn't lost in that situation. They're at a disadvantage, sure, but they haven't lost.

[Magua]

Town hasn't lost in that situation. They're at a disadvantage, sure, but they haven't lost.

Which situation? It's unclear from your post which you mean.

If it's one-hour-to-deadline-scum-governs, town loses because they've played poorly, wasted their time, and the ability for all three town to get on and vote is low, even if Town B and C vote correctly.

If it's not one-hour-to-deadline, town is in a better situation if Scum B governs Scum A than if there was no governor.

Either way, town is in a better situation over no governor for the entire period leading up to the lylo lynch, by limiting Scum B's actions and making him accountable.

[zoraster]

Town hasn't lost in that situation. They're at a disadvantage, sure, but they haven't lost.

Which situation? It's unclear from your post which you mean.

If it's one-hour-to-deadline-scum-governs, town loses because they've played poorly, wasted their time, and the ability for all three town to get on and vote is low, even if Town B and C vote correctly.

If it's not one-hour-to-deadline, town is in a better situation if Scum B governs Scum A than if there was no governor.

Either way, town is in a better situation over no governor for the entire period leading up to the lylo lynch, by limiting Scum B's actions and making him accountable.

No... All that has to happen in the non-gov situation in the one-hour-left is for Town C to get on and hammer.

[Twilight Sparkle]

DR....I'm willing to vote DGB.

Although pending a further look. I'm pretty confident Sparkle is scum... Why haven't they requested the governor? They gonna throw it away? Sotty and hito are bad players ?!?!?!??!?! Baloney.... I'd want to give it to them, because it should be a doom sentence.

I don't get what you are driving at here. We haven't out right requested governor because we think it isn't that great of a power. It's one shot that won't make it to lylo and fretting over it like that is pretty crazy to me. I'm finding it a distraction.

= = = = =

Unraise: Twilight Sparkle

Raise: Percy

Based on what? Your only Raise before this was your first post, and if Percy had done anything to warrant a Raise you would have changed it prior to him needing to be prodded and his announcement or being sick so limited content.

I think it is clear what Magua is doing. The fact you missed this despite it being only just discussed doesn't sit well with me. Reads fake.

It is unclear to me and I don't see Percy being raised as a discussion point anywhere.

I'm not talking about raising Percy in partiuclar, I'm talking about Magua and who is choosing to raise and why. He is doing it in an attempt to read people as far as I can gather as reinforced in post 349. Your question reads like busy work.

= = = = = =

Ben keeps trying to get us to raise him. I'm not a fan of this. Insisting you're town and the best case for raising isn't convincing. Scumhunt and prove you're a useful asset instead.

What did you think of ICE trying to get the hand at the start of the game?

= = = = = =

Please point to the exact quote where you think I was swiping at Benmage as a VI. I’d really like to know where you saw that because that’s about as far removed from what I’ve said about Ben as you can get.

The snipe I am talking about is what I originally quoted here. It read like a dig at him because it was a response you gave to ben that wasn't actually needed. Ben was just talking about bringing his A game and you brought up some fail on his part as if he needed a reminder. I don't understand why you would do that unless it was you trying to discredit him. But I have noticed that your playstyle has changed from when we first played in that you like to throw out a lot of these quips at people that makes you sound very judgmental. I'm guessing it is a null tell now, but I don't like it much.

Combine all that with the fact I remembered you were raising benmage despite him not playing up to your standards recently and I saw a contradiction.

Actually as I type this out, I am getting more and more confused as to why you would raise Ben. He doesn't seem like your kind of player. His style is either hit or miss from my experience and as already demonstrated, you look down on players who “miss”. I'm gonna check out these links you have provided, but out of everyone in the game... I'm having a hard time swallowing you raising Benmage. Gut says you did it to either get him on your good side or to go with the flow. Neither is a good thing.

Oh and yeah, Hito is prodded. He's busy atm but will answer you as soon as he can.

= = = = = =

Seriously, the fact that someone of you (and I'm looking at you, Twilight Sparkle) are considering that governor is a

detriment

to the town on D1 is ludicrous.

I don't think it is a detriment. I just think it isn't as powerful as some people are acting.

Argh I see a lot of direct governer talk that is making my eyes glaze over. I'll read it properly later on and see if it changes my mind.

~Sotty

[Magua]

Last time, then I'm not responding on this line anymore:

1) Scum governing scum increases town EV, assuming that that town can lynch before deadline.
2) Scum governor is under more scrutiny, must take positions earlier, and cannot change positions as easily because of the scrutiny -- this all applies from D1 up until lylo.
3) Town that waste two weeks and allow it to get an hour to deadline in 5-way lylo is just playing badly to begin with.

I would rather give the governor to someone I thought was scum than to give it to someone who would waste it D1 to "get it out of the way".

I don't think [

governor

] is a detriment. I just think it isn't as powerful as some people are acting.

Sotty, I'd like for you to talk to your other heads about this. I direct you at Mina's post #87:

Right now, I think the role would mainly have a scum benefit, and even then, only when played at the right time. I'm asking because we're discussing the best use of the role in the Hydra QT. We'll explain more, later.

And hito's post #376:

As for the growing Raise wagon on us. As hinted at before, I'm of the personal opinion (hito-personal, not pony-personal) that the Governor role is best suited by immediately throwing it in the trash.

What I'd like from you all, collectively, is a) is governor useful to the town, and b) if Twilight Sparkle was raised, would you immediately govern to use the power up?

[Nexus]

DGB: You telling me you're a townie doesn't convince me that you're a townie. Sorry, but no. GreyICE was focussing on you also, yes. I called him out on it as well.

A lynch on hascow wouldn't be more efficient. He won't break his post restriction. We'll just waste time lynching him when we could lynch someone else instead, and see if it resolves itself.

zoraster: In no way did you mention given names. You mentioned the role of vigilante. That's a role. Fishing. Rolefishing. Try again later.

Magua: Thanks, I missed that.

Opinion on diddin: I agreed with his point on GreyICE in his first post. Not with his townread on DGB though. Disagree with his opinion on Benmage. Vote on Magua is a bit weak, really. Generally, Diddin hasn't really been posting much outside of talking about the VI/vigging debate, and answering some questions. I'm not convinced he should be the first lynch, anyhow.

Twilight: Hey, I answered that in like my first post. I thought that ICE was scummy for pushing far too hard on the raise issue. He was being borderline desperate, and it wasn't really town behaviour in my opinion. Basically, I refuse to raise anyone who has stated a desire to want the power and to "use it for the greater good." I think that's scummy and unconvincing. So no.

[chesskid3]

give me governor then
i'm always on lol
don't know what that has to do with anything
BUT I GET AWESOME SUPAPOWERS IF I GET HAND
.......or do i? wink wink wink

[zoraster]

zoraster: In no way did you mention given names. You mentioned the role of vigilante. That's a role. Fishing. Rolefishing. Try again later.

Oh dear lord. Mentioning a role isn't the same as role fishing. Here, I'll mention a few more: If there's a doctor, don't protect Nexus. Cop, investigate me. Tracker, follow chesskid3. I'm smart enough to realize that mere mention of a role is not going to make a vigilante suddenly claim. Saying that if we knew something, we could do X was to illustrate my point, which was just that we'd be well served to off the hand right away in that situation (having not thought about how we could lynch him instead which is way better). So I don't know where you're going with this. Last, quit with the smarmy attitude. You're neither town enough nor smart enough to pull it off convincingly.

Now for some reads:

Mikujin

As per LL's request, I took a look again at Mikujin. While I find his play a little frustrating, I don't see it as very scummy. I'd like him to cut the "I don't want to be hasty" crap, but I see it as probably genuine. The focus on DGB is sad because I think DGB's goofiness makes the game a lot more fun and she still makes her point, but again... it's understandable in its way. I read him as slight town.

diddin

Slightly scummy, I'll agree to that, but not a whole lot more. As an aside, it does annoy me that his posts are like 3/4ths quote. It's possible he views this as a way to seem like he's a heavy contributor without actually doing it. Lazy scum is possible.

Raivann

Raivann, upon second inspection is scummy. I feel like he's going for a sort of "hit and run" post style that keeps him under the radar yet active. Without reviewing anything, can you remember anything Raivann has said or what his positions are? No? Me neither, and I just reread his iso. Pretty reluctant to vote

Some return characters:

Locke Lamora

Scum. scum. scum. Who can read him and not come away with the impression SOMETHING is seriously off about LL? The focus on Mij is underwhelming and all too convenient for Locke. Barely has to expend any effort or attract any attention on actual reads.

Kast

Coming across as less scummy than before. I like his attention to Zdenek. Still by no means town, but there are bigger fish to fry.

VOTE: Locke Lamora

[GreyICE]

Here's mentioning a vigilante:
"While this cop guilty means we have to Lynch MoI today, DGB's early defense makes her pretty much vigbait.""

Here's rolefishing:
"Just a thought. If we KNEW we had a vigilante, this would be clearer: give it to vig bait and let him get shot."

[zoraster]

Here's mentioning a vigilante:
"While this cop guilty means we have to Lynch MoI today, DGB's early defense makes her pretty much vigbait.""

Here's rolefishing:
"Just a thought. If we KNEW we had a vigilante, this would be clearer: give it to vig bait and let him get shot."

what? why is the second rolefishing? there should be no expectation that a vig is suddenly going to claim. In fact, the vig would have to be pretty dumb to claim on the basis of that alone. Quit trying to pretend like potential power roles are morons. And stop assuming I'm one for thinking that something that lame would work in outing a power role.

[LimMePls]

Raivann

Raivann, upon second inspection is scummy. I feel like he's going for a sort of "hit and run" post style that keeps him under the radar yet active. Without reviewing anything, can you remember anything Raivann has said or what his positions are? No? Me neither, and I just reread his iso. Pretty reluctant to vote

@Zoraster: Upon second inspection? What do you mean by this? Also, did you notice his "we should raise a VT, specifically chess and shadow" or his responses to my questions about it? What do you make of that? Why do you think Raivann thinks those two players are VTs? Even if he thinks they are, how would he "know" they are? How would we collectively give the hand to a VT under his proposed solution? For that matter, why is making sure it goes to a VT even a good idea?

I find Zoraster's "Raivann is scum, but LOOK OVER HERE AT THIS GUY WHO HAS BEEN GETTING MORE SCUM ATTENTION, HE'S GETTING MY VOTE" really scummy. Of course I need to stay away from relational cases D1, we saw how that turned out for me in ACoK.

[zoraster]

Well. I read things once when I caught up on Monday or as they happened after that (once) and then I read selected portions again (twice).

If there was a good case against Raivann, I don't recall seeing it. I isoed you to come across your vote on Raivann, but it's not like that was gold scum hunting. You are the only person to have voted him all game, so I don't really get where you're coming from.