Open 57 - Quack Mafia (Game Over) before 545

[Lulubelle]

Town in the last game we played, must be scum this time!

Vote: Oman

Scum in the last game we played, must be town this time!

Wait a second.

Unvote

[Lulubelle]

Plus, with 3 of the 4 kills being randomly assigned, we've got a 3/11+3/10+3/9 chance of hitting at least 1 mafia during night 1, which is a 90% chance of eliminating scum on the first night. That's pretty good odds.

Am I missing something here?

3xQuack Doctors - Will kill any

town aligned player

they protect each night.

[Lulubelle]

Might as well hasten things along then.

Vote: No Lynch

[Lulubelle]

Yeah, the plan stank. I might have voted for it, but I did so because I didn't believe I could prevent it from going through and just wanted to get things moving, as I think my vote indicated. Could be worse, this at least gives us something to work with, in the hopes that most people followed the instruction.

I'm just going to go ahead and post this without waiting for the last claim that matters. It was pretty easy to reassemble so I can't imagine I'm helping scum moreso than town.

Oman

shaft.ed

Mastermind of Sin

TylerJ

Disciple Slayer

Phate

vollkan

Tarhalindur

Lulubelle

fictiondepartment

LutenitPowwel

thedragonsprincess

The original player list might have been editted in the mod's first post but it was preserved in the waiting list, and I'm pretty sure after swapping Dean Harper with Tarhalindur gives us the correct list, since I remember that it was Tar I protected. Purple are the dead, red are our quack-candidates, green are our doc-candidates. Tyler is colourless for failing to put in a choice. Assuming scum nightkilled one of the players they were supposed to protect, then one of our quacks probably hit scum, so there ought to be one scum in among the reds and two scum and a quack in among the greens. If scum didn't nightkill, then all of the reds are quacks and three of the greens are scum. (Is that right?)

So what's the best course of action from here? Since it's entirely possible that we've already iced half of our docs, I certainly hope it's not another circle protection game.

[Lulubelle]

Naturally. Nobody is confirmed pro-town at this point. However, with three nightkills, quacks have to be responsible for at least two of them, so at most one of the claimed quacks can be mafia.

[Lulubelle]

I voted no lynch it was already at L-2 after a number of quite astute people had already looked at it - flaw and all - and somehow saw it as sound. I have no illusions about my ability to talk a town back from a cliff so I sped things up and tried to make the best of it. You're free to suspect me for it, but I was, after all, the first to point out that the plan was fundamentally broken.

That said, I have to agree about MoS's actions. He put forth that idea in the first place, merrily sat back as the town tripped over itself to agree with him, and then blamed everyone else when it turned out sour.

Vote: Mastermind of Sin

[Lulubelle]

And how exactly does no-kill break the already broken strategy any moreso than it already was?

[Lulubelle]

I'm not accusing you of sitting back and letting it get accepted. I'm accusing you of putting forth such an obviously broken plan from the start. Here's the Heading of our Open Game in the Queue:

bolding mine

Quack Mafia (Open 57) - 3 Mafia, 6 Doctors, 3 Quacks (

will kill non-Mafia

, but think they're Docs), DayStart (12/12) - Mod: Crub

It's pretty obvious that Quacks don't kill mafia. So I do think you could have put this forth in hopes that it would go through, and then you would be giddy to see it "quicklynched" into effect the next time you log on. However, I also see blame laying with some of the sheep that followed such a plan.

I have to say that I really, really dislike this reasoning. It was a very easy mistake to make, and one that I made myself at first while looking for breaking strategies pregame.

[Lulubelle]

So then you do think that MoS sat back and deliberately waited for people to adopt his plan. Your vote suggest you must believe that's the way it played out.

Which is the reason why I've reconsidered that since. However, there's only three people making much input right now. Scumhunting is almost impossible with such little to go on.

[Lulubelle]

It was actually pointed out by a number of people that Quacks don't kill townies.

I realize that. I just think it's

plausible

that MoS didn't see the easily-missed "will kill non-mafia" in the role description when he formulated the circle-protect strategy and that it's

plausible

that he didn't poke his head in on the thread again before it when to night. As I said before, I missed that at first myself.

And what really amazes me is how many people hopped on board even after it was pointed out. Re-reading this section it's really difficult to see who isn't looking scummy.

So then, what do you make of the fact that 4-5 of the 7 people that were on the no lynch bandwagon are confirmed townies?

[Lulubelle]

I guess the part of me that thinks scum would love to push this into action would say that it's a good thing we have so many confirmed innocents so that increases our chances of hitting scum from the voters. But the paranoid part of me says that the lynch went through in about 10 hours, the scum could have sat back and watched it go through not wanting to get their hands dirty.

I think you're jumping to conclusions here. With that many townies (smart townies, too) on the no lynch bandwagon, it should be clear that a pretty big part of the town saw the flawed circle protect strategy as a very positive move for town. I don't see how you can rule out the possibility that scum saw the strategy the same way during day one and would have tried to block it or stay away from it instead of piling on.

[Lulubelle]

Do you think that there's simply nothing to garner from the "bandwagon" then?

Personally, no. I know what role I have, so I see potentially as many as 6 of the 7 no lynch voters as pro-towns. The only one in serious question from where I stand is MoS, and I don't really see sufficent reason at this point to single him out as scum for merely being one of the no lynch voters if the rest are pro-town. But that's just me.

Unvote

[Lulubelle]

I agree that the wording was poor, but what Lulu was pointing out is that at most 1 of the 3 "Quacks" can be mafia.

Right on both counts. Oy.

No one tried to block it, or resisted piling on unless they were actively avoiding the thread.

Also seeing as how fictiondepartment disappeared over the night phase.

You just got me wondering about that. The day phase was over so quickly that it's entirely possible that scum never had a chance to react in any concerted fashion. Especially noteworthy that fictiondepartment disappeared right after a single random vote and LutenitPowwel didn't post until the hammer had dropped, both of which are within the non-killing players. I just can't help but think that almost none of the information we obtained D1 is reliable at all.

In the case of L. Powwel, this post may have escaped notice, so permit me to draw attention to it.

[Lulubelle]

Also I think it'd be best if Kuribo doesn't target anyone tonight as there's a decent chance he's a Quack and one of the other three "Quack's" is thus mafia. Since the extra NK could end the game it seems like the safe thing to do. Any thoughts on this?

I'm not entirely sure that I agree. If we have indeed only identified two quacks, then it seems to me that are ways of minimizing the risk.

I was thinking about the best course of action for night two. What I came up with was the identified quacks not targetting (obviously) and the not-quacks all targeting another not-quack that they believe probably isn't scum. It is a bit of a gamble, and I haven't had the time nor inclination to run the numbers, but there seems to me to be a pretty decent chance to block both the possible unidentified quack kill as well as the mafia night kill so long as the doc protects hit docs. If Phate, Oman, and Tarhalindur indeed are the three quacks, then we have nothing to lose.

In any case, we really have no reason to believe that kuribo or anyone else that didn't get in a night action is the third quack over those of us that did. And speaking of that:

Unvote
Vote: TylerJ

Shaft.ed is on the money. I want to hear something concrete as well.

[Lulubelle]

The problem with not protecting the Quacks LuLu is that the mafia then know who is unprotected and thus can certaintly garner a NK.

Hmm. Would the scum rather target an unprotected quack over a possibly protected doc? If we lynch town today then undoubtably so, but if we hit scum everything would change.

I suppose thinking too much more about this is pointless because an "ideal" protection scheme would at this point be both complex and random, and we didn't even quite pull off night one's "protect the person above you" scheme, no offense intended to anyone. Back to scumhunting then.

[Lulubelle]

Wow, Tar lots of problems with your last post.

Sheesh, no kidding. I could have seen Tar's original vote for Phate as simply a snappy response to an ugly idea from Phate, but I can't say I feel good about all the after-the-fact twisting Tal is putting into it. Not to mention that that's an incredibly weaksauce justification to suggest who should be lynched today.

Unvote
Vote: Talhalindur

[Lulubelle]

Is it true that one of the quacks have to be scum? Or is it only that no more than one of the quacks are scum?

The latter. It is entirely possible that all three quacks are quacks. However, no more than one quack can be scum.

MoS is getting away with his last plan.

Would you mind elaborating? My vote on Tal right now is a pressure vote, not a lynch vote.

[Lulubelle]

post 31 post 56 - read both and yes it did seem you were just going through, but that just sounds like a blow off. Almost like saying hey I didn't agree with it, but went with the flow. Post 60 seeming to agree because it is easier then trying to stop a dumb idea? Blaming the person who came up with said idea.

I'm not going to defend it. It was a mistake and I admit it. I failed to consider what consequences my vote would have after night one, and I certainly never could have predicted that I would be one of the only lynchable people on the wagon that would make it through the night.

Fought the idea that scum would be to smart to vote no lynch with shaft.ed theory.

I think you're incorrect here. I never said that scum wouldn't be smart to have pushed the plan. I said that scum might have seen the plan as a dangerous pro-town move the same way the townies on the no lynch bandwagon seem to have seen it and that we shouldn't just assume from our position of hindsight that they would have tried to push it through.

Follows Shaft.ed idea a little too much.

Honestly, I'm not entirely sure what to make of him. I have no problem agreeing with someone that I believe is correct, though. I came to reconsider my original vote on MoS on my own, and Tal's claim that his vote for Phate was an elaborate trap just doesn't fly with me.

[Lulubelle]

Wait are you saying that you suspect one if the "Quacks" is scum and thus you

may

be a Quack, or that you didn't get a night action in and just now decided to tell us about it?

Actually, he told us about that a while ago.

[Lulubelle]

With the deadline a week or so away I remain uncomfortable about the idea of a Tal lynch - while he's done some things that I certainly don't altogether like I think we can do better.

Unvote

More once I finish getting caught up on my reading assignments.