You see, gogtrial34987, it's things like this that make me think and say things like what I said in my post #516. And by revealing it all when you as soon as you show up, you disarm any arguments that could potentially be made.

*waits for the scum-points shower*


Looking through the C9++ setup determination, going from one letter to two, each role (except for the Cop and Mason roles) becomes a regular one + a 1-shot one. The Cop and Mason roles are even on the limited power side if only one letter of them is rolled, which I think is for balancing purposes.

Are you saying that the town's overpowered against a Godfather + Investigation Immune OR 1-Shot Bulletproof SK, or Godfather + RB, so that adding a pair of Lovers balances things out? Does it look the same way if we're in the 1T setup, where, compared to the 2T scenario we're against Godfather + RB + Investigation Immune OR 1-Shot Bulletproof SK, when that one T less more likely means an additional 1-shot role? How do you explain it if yes, and if no?


Not sure I follow why you're limiting this to the 0T scenario.

I also don't quite see what the "reduced additional power" is in having a Lovers pair. The strength of a Masons pair is the same as that of a Lovers pair so long its existence in the setup is hidden. And once it's out, aren't both pairs equally a liability to town? One Mason gets policy-lynched, the other gets NK-ed, both Lovers are off the table for lynch, but both die with a single NK. So both pairs are typically removed during a single Day-Night cycle. As for the Day-Chat, that's just marginally better than the Night-Chat, so I'm not sure it balances out things enough. Sure, Day-Chat allows for coordination during the Day phase and Lynch, but since the pair's hidden, there's only that much it can do to influence the Lynch in a certain direction without exposing themselves. And that's assuming that between the two of them they make better judgements than the rest of us.


Heh. Do I get scum-points only when I say you're speaking and acting smart?


Well, which of the following has better chances?

1. Let your remaining buddy die, and ride it alone, as a first time scum, with a single vote in the game, and hope that the townies won't figure it out, and thus not turn against you?
2. False-claim Lovers which not only immediately takes you both off the table, but also gives you a position of power and influence over the lynches, and ride it together with two votes in the game?


[emphasis added]

*ISO's gogtrial34987, finds post*

Heh.


I didn't miss it, but with one more letter unknown, it isn't all that clear cut that blocking mchack results in a 100% chance of killing you both... is it? Oh wait, you accounted for that just a little bit further down...

On another note, the wording of that last bit I quoted suggests quite some confidence/certainty in another PR being in play. That's after you've already mentioned the 0T scenario. Any particular reason you seem to think this is our setup?


As soon as I started playing forum mafia, I went and made my bus-driver's license, then bought me a shiny new bus; this way I don't have to depend on regular bus routes like Vitek.

I know that trentonlf has said the same thing in at least one past game, but I'm pretty sure I've never seen it in action myself.

Does everyone answering for themselves help you, and in what way?


Heh. Any ideas on why you'd be still alive Tomorrow?


Yeah, I'm still not sold on the Lovers claim. Because their EoD3 bothers me. The claim itself and its timing was damn convenient (said so Yesterday already), and at this point in the game (with almost every PR revealed), not all that risky. especially with all the alternative ways of fitting in he setup they pre-emptively mentioned.
What bothers me is that while they seemed pretty concerned about getting lynched, they didn’t seem to be concerned about being the N3 NK. JoeSapphire voted mchack, with what felt like subtle fearmongering (deadline is looming, mchack’s now at L-1 (a subtle push to finish him off?)), and left. gogtrial34987 switched to Ixamyakxim but was ready to go back onto mchack at around the 15 minutes mark to deadline, which also felt like subtle fearmongering (15 minutes to deadline, it’s either mchack or No-Lynch, make your choices). Neither seemed to care that mchack may well have been their only chance to be protected, which the latter pointed out in his post #768. So effectively, while all others present were concerned with losing 1+2 townies in a single Day-Night cycle, they weren’t. And here they are Today, both being “sucks he was telling the truth, but I didn’t believe him, oh well”.

Additionally, gogtrial34987 made a case to get back on the mchack wagon in post #723, and when I asked him to elaborate on why mchack’s votes look opportunistic, his reply was [emphasis added]:
That was around the 2hrs mark, enough time to go back and check, especially if he’s keeping notes like he’s said somewhere, so why just "maybe later"? That came across as dodging/unwillingness to support his case with the requested details when he had just pulled up a bunch of mchack quotes in his post #723, if not some eagerness/impatience to get their claim out so they're in the clear, and frankly, it still does.

That’s on top of town-reading JoeSapphire for saying “let the day play out”, and not participating in cutting the Day short (post #745). When at the same time, Bookwyrm627 who did exactly that, but it didn’t affect the strong town-read he still had on the latter one iota, as his experience could be used to lynch mchack for allegedly false-claiming.

I don’t know, perhaps I'm getting paranoid, but something just doesn’t seem to add up in a way for it to feel right.


I'm finishing up another post, so could use a bump just in case.