Um, no, that's not at all true. There was a mafia discussion thread about the subject a month or so ago, and that's not at all what I said. Let me see if I can find it...armlx wrote:Unvote, Vote Yos2
I thought OMGUS was one of the scum tells you believed was overly relied on and not actually a scum tell.
By the way, before someone tries to nitpick me, when I mentioned "it's not OMGUS to vote someone on day 1 before you have anything to go on", I was speaking of stuff where someone random votes you on page one and you OMGUS vote them right back instead of a random vote yourself. This is different; a case was presented, it's clearly a non-random, serious vote, and he responded with a weak counter-attack and a OMGUS vote. That's scummy.Yosarian2 wrote:I tend to think it's usually a weak scumtell, so I voted yes.
It's not a scumtell to OMGUS vote someone day 1 when you've got nothing else to go on.
It's clearly not a scumtell to vote for someone with good reasons, no matter if they're voting you or not.
It's not even a scumtell to suspect someone slightly more because they're attacking someone you know to be pro-town (you, in this case), although considering how many votes people make over the course of a game this probably shouldn't be that significant most of the time.
However, most real OMGUS voting is voting in order to punish someone for voting you or deter them from voting for you, and/or to try and lynch off someone in order to prevent them lynching you off first, and/or an attack designed simply to discredit someone who's attacking you, and that's all solid scum-tell material. It's a scumtell because town are mostly concerned with using their votes first and formost to find and kill scum, and secondarally sometimes using their votes to deter anti-town activity. Town should not use their votes to defend themselves in this manner. However, scum care mostly about staying alive and destroying the town, in that order, and they tend to view their votes as another tool in their arsenal to do both of those things; so if someone is voting OMGUSly, or if someone is attacking for OMGUS reason, then it is a scum tell.
The complicating factor is that for pretty clear psyscological reasons, everyone tends to be more suspicious of people who are suspicious of them; the game leads to a very natural paranoia, and that can lead to votes that look OMGUSy. So, you've got to use a lot judgement here, and that's why I say it's a "weak" scum tell.
Still, scum will tactically OMGUS vote and tactically launch OMGUS attacks, both in order to defend themselves and weaken the position of their attacker, and good guys shouldn't (at least, not outside of some lynch or lose situations), so yeah, OMGUS voting is generally a scum tell (scum tell meaning "something scum do more then town").
Explain it. If you mean my strategy post is scummy, or when I said the chances of we lynching the recruiter after making someone claim is scummy, though I dont agree, I respect that.armlx wrote: However, while TSS's case is baseless, Runner has acted fairly scummy since the case was presented.
Thinking time.
In fact, as I said, this is my second game. All the experience I have is from it. But Ill tell you what happened day 1.armlx wrote: This is the quote that worries me the most, as Blazes subsequent posts, especially the one regarding TSS's allegations, seem much more informed about basic mafia strategy.
I didnt OMGUS. I really think when TSS said "conviction that Blazerunner is someone who needs to die. " it is weird. And I would have voted him for that if you exchanged "Blazerunner" for "armlx", "The Silent Speaker", "Osama Bin Laden" oh whatever.Yosarian2 wrote:vote:Blazerunner. OMGUSing is bad.
First off, what does EBWODP mean?Yosarian2 wrote:Actually, I'd go with your initial statement. Even with just one cult recruiter, lynching a recruit puts the town one step closer to losing. (Cult loses one member at day; that night, cult gains one member and town loses one member due to recruitement; net result, town falls farther behind.) Vigging cult recruits isn't bad, but lynching a cult recruit is not a good thing until after any and all recruiters are dead.armlx wrote:EBWODP: A bit is probably exaggerated. Lynching a recruit is good, but lynching recruits for days on end is not going to win the game.
And lynching someone just because they're "likely to be recruited" is even worse, since then the cult would just recruit someone else instead. In fact,fos:Blazerunnerfor that logic.
Claims are to be avoided whenever possible, but if you do have a town power role, it is a little better to claim then to be lynched, because then at least we have a chance to lynch the cult recruiter that day instead.
Cult games are always hard to balance, and while we don't know much about the setup yet, I tend to think the odds are against us here. If we mislynch today, and if we are dealing with 2 recruiters and a SK, we might theoretically be in a situation where the town is no longer in the majority on day 2. It seems like we've got basically no margin of error this game.
Oh, hopefully you're right about unrecruitable townies, but on the other hand, the setup also strongly implies the existance of more then one cult recruiter. If the cults average one recruitment a night between then, then lynching cult recruits is still pretty bad. Besides which, even if everyone who's recruitable is dead or recruited, if the cult leader is still alive then the cult is still a mafia-like group that can kill; without him, they're much less dangerous. So cult recruits are still pretty much cannon fodder, and lynching them still wouldn't be a good thing.vikingfan wrote: Second, lynching (or in the case of a nightkill) a recruit is not necessarily bad. Your case would only be true if everyone could be recruited. But given the fact that Norinel is an experienced mod leads me to believe that not as many town players will be recruitable as expected (otherwise the town would be essentially dead with a mislynch or two). Theoretically, your case is true, but in reality, I don't think our situation is QUITE as dire as you're portraying.
Who said Lynching possible recruits is GOOD???? It is one of the possibly worst things we could be doing! Not only we are intentionally killing a member of the town, but we allow the Cults to pick up another member!!! are you guys thinking straight? We should be looking for the SK and the recruiters.armlx wrote:Vikingfan: Edit By Way of Double Post.
BTW, we aren't saying lynching recruits is bad, its just that lynching recruit after recruit gets you nowhere fast.
Yos:
Unvote
Sorry, actually mixed up the overreacting thread with the OMGUS thread.
Blaze:
You pick up on things like TSS saying you need to die, yet suggest bad lynch plans. Thats the contradiction that gets me the most.
I think you've misunderstood the nature of the cult here. The cult group can only kill if the cult leader is dead- without him, they can kill. All I'm trying to say is that killing a recruit is still better than killing a member of the town. Cult recruits have their power in numbers, after all, so cutting that down is always a good thing. Is it as good as killing the cult leader? of course not. but still a good thing.Yosarian2 wrote:Oh, hopefully you're right about unrecruitable townies, but on the other hand, the setup also strongly implies the existance of more then one cult recruiter. If the cults average one recruitment a night between then, then lynching cult recruits is still pretty bad. Besides which, even if everyone who's recruitable is dead or recruited, if the cult leader is still alive then the cult is still a mafia-like group that can kill; without him, they're much less dangerous. So cult recruits are still pretty much cannon fodder, and lynching them still wouldn't be a good thing.vikingfan wrote: Second, lynching (or in the case of a nightkill) a recruit is not necessarily bad. Your case would only be true if everyone could be recruited. But given the fact that Norinel is an experienced mod leads me to believe that not as many town players will be recruitable as expected (otherwise the town would be essentially dead with a mislynch or two). Theoretically, your case is true, but in reality, I don't think our situation is QUITE as dire as you're portraying.
One thing is not really related to another.armlx wrote:Blaze:
You pick up on things like TSS saying you need to die, yet suggest bad lynch plans. Thats the contradiction that gets me the most.
mnowax wrote: You know the funniest thing? If you are a Vanilla townie, Lurking is the best in this game. either you win with the town, or one of the cult will recruit you and you could win with the cult. I think only the SK would really try to kill a townie power role.
We don't actually know that; the mod specifically said that the following roles might or might not exist. There might be a vig, there might be a SK, there might be both, there might be neither. There might even be multiple vigs or SK's.First, there was only one body tonight, and we have the SK and the vigilante. There are 3 and only 3 things that may have happened:
Norinel wrote: This is a semi-open game; what follow are all the possible role PMs, but I won't tell you which ones are actually in the game, or how many.
I know "claimed townie should die" is bad. I already agreed. What I have to say in my defense, I already said. I thought it might have been good. This might make me a noob, but not a recruiter. I dont want to enter WIFOM, but I wouldnt suggest this as a recruiter.armlx wrote:Blaze:
"Claimed townie should die" is bad as you are lynching A) a townie or B) a recruit. Both are not good ways to win.
The point about TSS saying you need to die is valid.
About my statement: The two things I pointed out show contradictory levels of pro-town thought. Catching the "must die" is good town play, the bad lynch plans are bad. This suggests you know what you are doing and are purposefully trying to lead us into bad plans.
Edit mid-train of thought: I'm an idiot.
Unvote, Vote Blazerunner.
I agree with you- however, we may have the alarmist around to protect against recruits. So the cults will have to decide whether or not to go after the claimed person. Also, if they both go after the claimed person, the person will die and they lose a night of killing/recruiting.Yosarian2 wrote:First of all, no one should claim vanillia townie, at all, under ANY circumstances. If you're vanillia townie, then no matter what, DO NOT CLAIM ANYTHING. We were talking abotu what to do if power roles claim, which is a very different thing.
One last thing (I hope) before I leave the forum for now:armlx wrote:About my statement: The two things I pointed out show contradictory levels of pro-town thought. Catching the "must die" is good town play, the bad lynch plans are bad. This suggests you know what you are doing and are purposefully trying to lead us into bad plans.
This is your conclusion, and this I had already understood. What Im curious is about the thinking that got you to that conclusion and not that I didnt know what I was doing when I suggested that.armlx wrote:My point is you are trying to deliberately add faulty strategies into our discussion in the hope we use them, giving you as scum more a chance of winning.