It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
mchack: at least 3-4 of us 14 have to be scum
avatar
HijacK: You...you do realize there are 16 payers in this game, no? Interesting. It seems you're not that aware of the players around you either. Fascinating.
I didn't refresh and missed this. In a 16 player game, 4 scum would be the number of scum assuming a basic game. The rule of thumb is that the square root of players should be on the scum team; in this case 4. Many factors can change this (such as neutral roles and handicapped town roles), which is why the figure might be lower. Three to four scum is actually a reasonable estimate for a 16 player game.

Assuming there is only one scum team, of course. That is the only point which would raise my eyebrows at all. But, it doesn't raise them that much, or for that long, because having a single scum team is the default. However, it is an interesting assumption nonetheless.
EBWOP

Oh for...

I gotta stop posting after drinking bourbon.

I see what your point is now... he said '14' instead of '16' players for the game.

...

Okay ... worth noting, but not that big a deal.

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

As for the rest of it, even if he assumed the player count to be 14 (for whatever reason), 3-4 scum is still a good estimate assuming only one scum-team. (I would assume 5 scum if there are multiple scum-teams and 16 people).
avatar
HijacK: There's a chance to be advocating for the lynch of a town player and town power role also in the case of one reading the player wrong or unfavorably. I'm not one to call for the lynch of lurkers, but I don't like how you try to paint their case, especially since you mostly just ask questions. When was the last time you shared thoughts?
Let's take a look at your stance on the matter:
So you're pretty much just advocating Lynch All Lurkers without being sure of their alignment, and on day 1 on top of that.

[...]

As for this gibberish about lurking.

[...]

Because yog, if you're going to bother to lynch the lurkers, who's to say you don't lynch crucial power roles? Because even lurkers post findings when they are town, and you never know when who checks who.
But you don't like what I said... That's some odd idea of "sharing thoughts", and goes way beyond arguing for the sake of arguing.

Not paying much attention, or worse, trying to draw/ shift attention to selected players using his usual confrontational play to disguise it?


/*dissecting* (to death) incoming in three, two, one...



avatar
Krypsyn: I didn't refresh and missed this. In a 16 player game, 4 scum would be the number of scum assuming a basic game. The rule of thumb is that the square root of players should be on the scum team; in this case 4. Many factors can change this (such as neutral roles and handicapped town roles), which is why the figure might be lower. Three to four scum is actually a reasonable estimate for a 16 player game.

Assuming there is only one scum team, of course. That is the only point which would raise my eyebrows at all. But, it doesn't raise them that much, or for that long, because having a single scum team is the default. However, it is an interesting assumption nonetheless.
Except that what HijacK finds fascinating is that mchack said 14 players instead of 16.
avatar
HypersomniacLive: Except that what HijacK finds fascinating is that mchack said 14 players instead of 16.
Yep. I did notice that... after I posted.
Lol, the confusion of busy chat threads.
avatar
HypersomniacLive: But you don't like what I said
Yep. I'm not to argue for the lynch of lurkers at any cost, but I won't just sit around when people try to paint them as any kind of lower priority to a lynch. Regarding my response to yog, the argument was constructed around the fact he wants to lynch lurkers solely on the fact that they are lurkers, without looking at contributions too or at the possibility of a power role. Of course, he will argue that lurkers don't contribute much, so the only way to show any fault in the argument is to outline the possibility of a role, but that still doesn't make them unlynchable. In the end I would have to agree with Lift that when there are no better targets, there are the lurkers, but that is debatable on what other people see as a better target.

avatar
HypersomniacLive: ... That's some odd idea of "sharing thoughts", and goes way beyond arguing for the sake of arguing.
That was not my idea of sharing thoughts, or at least as far as you are concerned. You're definitely one worth a re-read.
avatar
mchack: at least 3-4 of us 14 have to be scum
avatar
HijacK: You...you do realize there are 16 payers in this game, no? Interesting. It seems you're not that aware of the players around you either. Fascinating.
Yes I do. It was a mistake. The sentence doesn't make sense the way I wrote it, it should have said 16.
To explain why I think I made this mistake (post was written in a hurry at work): I guess it's because I've always thought about 14 players I had to choose from for my vote, since I excluded myself and yogsloth for whom I don't want to vote today. That's were the 14 come from, I guess.
Sunday night vote count:

3 HijacK (BlueMooner, Yogsloth, McHack)
3 Yogsloth (Trentonlf, Flubbucket, Lifthrasil)
2 Adaliabooks (JMich, Krypsyn)
1 No-Lynch (AgentCarr16)
1 CSPVG (Cristigale)
1 BlueMooner (HijacK)
1 AgentCarr16 (Adaliabooks)

With 16 players alive it takes 9 votes to kick someone off the island and 8 votes to "no-lynch".
HijacK and Yogsloth are closest to leaving at L-6.

Not voting: HypersomniacLive, Dedoporno, Sage103082 and CSPVG

Deadline is in 1 day on Monday night Sept 14th at Midnight EDT (UTC -4 which is Tuesday 4 am UTC)
[Extended due to Holidays, Vacations, 16 players and its the first day]

Bagatha Chrustie reporting this evening...
A fair bit of discussion tonight...
The suspense is building...
Will they kickout HijacK...or Yogsloth...or a lurker...or a grue?
Find out tomorrow for the final house vote...
You better not miss it, I know I won't!
Post edited September 14, 2015 by RWarehall
avatar
RWarehall: Sunday noon vote count:
In what friggen time zone is it Sunday noon right now?
avatar
RWarehall: Sunday noon vote count:
avatar
yogsloth: In what friggen time zone is it Sunday noon right now?
I think you are mistaken, post looks right to me! That's my story and I'm sticking to it!

Just be glad you are off the top of the list.
Thanks to Krypsyn's vote for HijacK, he temporarily had 4 votes and won top billing (just like the sign-up thread).
Even with the vote removed, no point to switch it.
Post edited September 14, 2015 by RWarehall
avatar
Lifthrasil: OK, let me rephrase that: those are the only reasonable choices. Of course it would be theoretically possible, that you were forced to claim by the mod or by someone holding a gun to your head. Or you could have been temporarily replaced by some evil clone from an alternate dimension, who was out to ruin your play and make things difficult for town. But those are too unlikely to consider.
Well, this is disappointing. notsureifserious.jpg

avatar
mchack: The easiest target might be Yogsloth, but I don't believe him being scum, so I don't want to vote for him now. (tomorrow things might be vastly different)
What, after I suddenly blurt out “SIKE IM SCUM THE HOLE TIME LOL!!!!” Somehow, I don’t think things are going to be terribly different just because another day passes.

avatar
Krypsyn: @Hijack Why do you feel that a new player, BlueMooner, asking about No Lynch is worse than a seasoned player, agentcarr16, actually voting for No Lynch?
Agent, in his 2nd game, is “seasoned”? I think I’ve moved on from giving players grief about no-lynching. It seems like a lost cause. Let it be, let it be.

avatar
Lifthrasil: OK, I went back through the thread a bit, but I don't find anyone more suspicious than Yogs grand opening. still feels off to me. [CALLS EVERY OTHER PLAYER IN THE GAME SCUMMY] But those are weak reason and I would prefer lynching Yog, since I still think that he did lie in his claim and therefore is most likely scum.
Somebody really needs to come back to this in future days. You just ripped through most of the roster with Scum tells and bad vibes, but then landed back on me because you remain convinced that the only conceivable… the only conceivable reason for me to kick discussion off the way I did was that I’m Scum. And not any of the other players you mentioned as actively seeming scummy. OK Lift, sure there, pal.

avatar
Krypsyn: On what would you wager, if you were permitted?
avatar
JMich: On whether yog is a town cop or not. But no bets allowed :(
Note that you didn’t mention which way you’d bet, though, eh? :)

avatar
HijacK: It's not the first time yogsloth has done/argued for something stupid, so no, I don't push his wagon solely for that reason. I may hammer it,
What was the other time? Still on about game #24? Is that your only example?

That’s right, ladies and gentlemen, you have to go back six games to find the last time I got something wrong. There it was. Can’t hide that one. It turns out HijacK was Town after all that game.

But thanks for slipping in there your kind offer to hammer, to ease the burden of everyone else being forced to make so momentous a decision. You’re just thinking of the children, I’m sure.

avatar
Krypsyn: Unvote: adaliabooks
Vote: HijacK
avatar
Krypsyn: Unvote: HijacK
Vote: adaliabooks
Oh look, Krypsyn’s back. I’m sure this is a savvy veteran play, right? Impeccably Townish behavior, right? Yep yep yep.

avatar
HijacK: Regarding my response to yog, the argument was constructed around the fact he wants to lynch lurkers solely on the fact that they are lurkers, without looking at contributions too
In your brain, does this sentence somehow not come out as a contradiction in terms? Did it make sense at the time?

_____

Listen folks – I don’t have a whole ton more to add. I won’t be online probably as much as I would like tomorrow as I’m preparing for a business trip (will be in Houston wed, thurs, fri), but I’ll be around as much as I can. I still simply have to believe there aren’t enough Townies out there willing to kill me out of lack of creativity to actually eat the lynch, but I know it’s going to be awful damn close.

I’m just not going to tell you in Day 1 what this was all about. I’m just not. I’m not lying, but I’m not putting all the pieces in front of you up front either. If you’re Town, you really have to ask: Does “I don’t quite get what he’s doing” exactly equate to “Scum, vote him, don’t think about it any more”?
avatar
yogsloth: Agent, in his 2nd game, is “seasoned”?
In terms of knowing how the GOG Mafia community feels about votes for No Lynch in general? Yes he is.

avatar
yogsloth: I think I’ve moved on from giving players grief about no-lynching. It seems like a lost cause. Let it be, let it be.
My question for HijacK was attempting to elicit a certain response. I didn't get it.

avatar
yogsloth: Oh look, Krypsyn’s back. I’m sure this is a savvy veteran play, right? Impeccably Townish behavior, right? Yep yep yep.
Voting for HijacK elicited the response I was after. Was it savvy? No idea. I try not too get too involved in my own life.
avatar
yogsloth: _____

Listen folks – I don’t have a whole ton more to add. I won’t be online probably as much as I would like tomorrow as I’m preparing for a business trip (will be in Houston wed, thurs, fri), but I’ll be around as much as I can. I still simply have to believe there aren’t enough Townies out there willing to kill me out of lack of creativity to actually eat the lynch, but I know it’s going to be awful damn close.

I’m just not going to tell you in Day 1 what this was all about. I’m just not. I’m not lying, but I’m not putting all the pieces in front of you up front either. If you’re Town, you really have to ask: Does “I don’t quite get what he’s doing” exactly equate to “Scum, vote him, don’t think about it any more”?
I'm not going to rehash all my issues again with you over whatever it is you're doing, I simply don't see it as a town play and it will have to be something over the top to make me believe it was a town play if you end up being town. But you are now saying "hey don't lynch me because you should have some doubt about me being scum because you don't understand what I'm doing", that's such a strong endorsement that I should unvote you now and bow down to your genius.

You keep yammering on about how everyone wants to just give someone who is lurking a walk if people don't find them to be scummy and it's bad for town, yet you are asking at the same time for people to ignore someone who is behaving in what many see as a scummy manner because not everyone quite gets what you're doing. So according to your logic don't vote for scummy actions but go ahead and vote for someone not posting enough on day 1.

Whatever it is you're doing you have intrigued enough people that I don't think you'll be lynched, and it is probably going to end the day in a no lynch. You can thank yourself for it by trying this lone wolf play. If you are town terrible play IMO, If you are scum nicely done.
avatar
BlueMooner: Is that basically true? Does knocking out one knock out the other?
avatar
JMich: Yes. If yog is not a cop and he claimed cop, that means he is lying. Town shouldn't lie. So if yog is lying, he can't be town.

On a different note, since we are speaking about reality games and mafia, do take a look at the show Siberia if you can find it. Especially the first few episodes had quite a lovely mafia game feel in them.
Thanks, short and succinct.

As to Siberia, I'll check it out, thanks. I've seen some clips of the UKs Geordie Shore and australia's Big Brother, mostly because unlike the US shows, they have nudity.

avatar
trentonlf: I lied last game about a night action and it got me lynched (as it should have) even though I was a town bodyguard trying to keep the attention away from me so I did not have to reveal my role. I should have revealed the night action without going into my role, would have been very easy to do. But because I lied it caused another townie to reveal his role because he thought I was scum. This is just one instance of what a townie lying can do to cause problems. Town should never lie, lesson learned from me.

The mantra of Lynch All Liars is there for a reason, it is a scummy play to lie and people who do need to be lynched because only scum should be lying.
Thanks for the example. Your comment and Mich's (and Lift's) have solidified my position in my next post.

avatar
HijacK: Nice dumb play, but I don't believe it. Mental suggestion can easily be done through questions. This is thought quite early in the study of psychology.
(...)
Your post was beyond terrible. "What are you hiding?" I mean, really? That was a legitimate question? Because I don't know about you all, but these type of fodder childish playground questions only distract the game.
So my post is both terrible and brilliant, as I ask stupid questions while subtly manipulating people with my subliminal thought control. Ooookay. And FYI, my "what are you hiding" was NOT a legitimate question. You seem to have misunderstood the tone and connotation completely, or are pretending you did. So, let me ask you a few out-of-game questions, which you are of course free to ignore:

1) Do you use speech-to-text software when you post?
2) Have you seen Monty Python and all of their Spanish Inquisition skits?
3) What is your approximate age? 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45+?
4) Is your cultural upbringing Romanian, or from an english-speaking country?

I ask because when I see misunderstandings and miscommunications online (or the chance that's occurring), I try to get a better handle on whom I'm speaking with, to better figure out where or what is causing confusion. I want to see if:

1) I'm misunderstanding you
2) You're misunderstanding me
3) Neither, and our exchange is solely game-related.

avatar
mchack: no-lynch is not a good option, because it might mean this horrible day 1 thingie just keeps going on...
OMFG. If someone had said this earlier on, I would have immediately seen why no-lynch is bad. I do NOT want a repeat of this day.

avatar
Krypsyn: @Sage103082 Hi.
For some reason this made me laugh. Was this a joke about Sage de-lurking?

avatar
Krypsyn: On what would you wager, if you were permitted?
avatar
JMich: On whether yog is a town cop or not. But no bets allowed :(
Why aren't bets allowed? Is this a RW thing, Mafia thing, or GOG thing? This seems like a fun thing to bet on.

*********************************

(Was going to ask K why he thinks hack's "14" wasn't an issue, but on refresh I see hack has explained. I guess that makes sense.)
avatar
BlueMooner: Was this a joke about Sage de-lurking?
It was a not-so-subtle prod for her to get a little more involved, but, yes, it was also meant to be a tad amusing.

avatar
BlueMooner: Why aren't bets allowed? Is this a RW thing, Mafia thing, or GOG thing? This seems like a fun thing to bet on.
The rule is for all Mafia games on GOG. Read this post paying particular attention to the "Game rules" section. Most forums with Mafia games has a similar rule against betting.

avatar
BlueMooner: (Was going to ask K why he thinks hack's "14" wasn't an issue, but on refresh I see hack has explained. I guess that makes sense.)
I'll answer anyway. I think a 'slip' like that, in the absence of any other data, is a silly reason to suspect someone of anything. All else equal, it is a slip that can be made just as easily by any alignment, not just scum. It should be remembered, because it might mean something later on when there is more information. However, taken alone, it means very little to me.