CYOC: TDT [6/22] Game Over! FREEDOM!!!

[aage]

It can be. Actually, it definitely would be good. However, if the horse thing is a player ability and the player has actively chosen to use it on day 1, that player is most likely anti town. Additional killing power on day 1 is quite useless unless some very fruitful discussion arises.

First, you say more killing power for town is good, then you qualify that statement by saying it's "useless" unless good discussion comes from it. If one of the 5 is marked for death anyway, we might as well ensure some discussion surrounding those players occurs, rather than have them flood the thread with pass the horse posts with no other substance before they expire.

You misunderstand. It is only useful after the discussion has arisen, else town knows nothing and the killer has nothing to go on. Since the game appeared at the very start of the game, the creator of the game chose five people randomly. More like an SK. While you are focussed on which of the five targets to kill, I'm doubting the creation of these five targets in the first place. As to the PCM-mastermind-theory: he may be a bastard, but not that big of a bastard.

You're using the entirely wrong reason to suggest this. Your post reeks of "hey guyz lets no lynch". FoS.

Am I? Did I ever suggest we should no lynch? No, so I can't be using the wrong reason to suggest a no lynch. Let me be very clear on this in case others arrive at the same conclusion based on my previous post. I'm not in favor of no lynch. I'm in favor of starting with the 5 before moving on to other players

I was referring to this part:
"to limit the killing/damage done to town in case we're wrong. Mechanically we'd just need to ensure whoever hammers also ensures that player is horseless."
I assumed it meant that you wanted to kill one of the five people horsing around, and preferably also kill the person who has the horse to limit the damage done to town. That's what it says. If the game had not been there, I don't know what you would've proposed, but now that it is there suddenly we have to limit the damage to town. I thought you just said that you believed there is at least one scum in the group of five. Why then give up on that second opportunity to lynch? Or am I completely misunderstanding your intentions here?

aage, why are you pleased with that?

Because apparently I'm being cut slack.

The odds are much higher that we lynch a townie than not - I don't care what you tell me, correctly lynching scum on D1 is guess work based on limited posts and mountains out of molehills at best. We'd be lucky to go 1 for 2 between the lynch and horse game today.

Alignment is random and looks like it is done after the role is created. Just sayin'

I never said that, just sayin'.

[Zivel]

Well this was before, the rule clarification from pcm but trying to control who dies is better than random isn't it?

Not when that control is able to be vetoed by one person who actually has control, what Rodion gave was a form of control. He said he would not use the control to kill himself, and he relied on 'us trusting him to share that control. Dubious shared control at best, a very nice smoke screen or even a dodgy power play at worst.

And who dies is not going to be random, it is going to be the ones who can best pass the 'lack of horse' when it comes to the hammer. As it stands, in my opinion, it seems a dodgy mechanic to have in the game, but a fun one (I am not one of the chosen horse riders).

We just have to let the horse people fight it out I think as any agreement can be vetoed at the last minute anyways.

Alignment is random and looks like it is done after the role is created. Just sayin'

How do we know that? I am assuming nothing here.

Fast posted by aage

[jonty125]

Alignment is random and looks like it is done after the role is created. Just sayin'

How do we know that? I am assuming nothing here.

The rules

We just have to let the horse people fight it out I think as any agreement can be vetoed at the last minute anyways.

But surely if somebody vetoed an agreement, we had made. They would get put to L-2 pretty quickly the next day.

[Rodion]

The only agreement that should feasibly be vetoed would be one that determined that the potato-holder died. I think Strike's latest plan of giving the potato to someone trusted in the last 24 hours solves that. Only thing that could potentially not work is we trust someone to hold the potato within the last 24 hours, he gets the potato and THEN people start suspecting him up to the point where he is the most potato-voted (a longshot, if you ask me).

[DoomYoshi]

I was going to post a long theory-based argument outlining the pros and cons of the 2 different systems (letting the horse game play itself naturally and letting it be decided by majoritarian rule). But we are almost out of time for the day anyways, and I think a natural approach is the best to go now. The main problem with that approach is if everyone in the horse game is mafia.

[DoomYoshi]

aage, why are you pleased with that?

Because apparently I'm being cut slack.

For skimmers, here's the quote I am referring to:

I'm supposed to be watching Lootifer and am happy to report that he followed my vote and was subsequently attacked for it, because it was a "crap vote" that "lacked logic". I'm pleased.

So my question to neb, edoc, jonty - what makes Lootifer's vote any worse than aage's?

[spiesr]

You're using the entirely wrong reason to suggest this. Your post reeks of "hey guyz lets no lynch". FoS.

Am I? Did I ever suggest we should no lynch? No, so I can't be using the wrong reason to suggest a no lynch. Let me be very clear on this in case others arrive at the same conclusion based on my previous post. I'm not in favor of no lynch. I'm in favor of starting with the 5 before moving on to other players

I was referring to this part:
"to limit the killing/damage done to town in case we're wrong. Mechanically we'd just need to ensure whoever hammers also ensures that player is horseless."
I assumed it meant that you wanted to kill one of the five people horsing around, and preferably also kill the person who has the horse to limit the damage done to town. That's what it says. If the game had not been there, I don't know what you would've proposed, but now that it is there suddenly we have to limit the damage to town. I thought you just said that you believed there is at least one scum in the group of five. Why then give up on that second opportunity to lynch? Or am I completely misunderstanding your intentions here?

I believe the idea here was that by lynching the horseless player the maximum number of town deaths today is reduced by 1.

[HotShot53]

Unless Anarkistsdream shows up soon, the whole discussion of voting or not on the horseless player is moot, and the "game" will just serve its purpose of eliminating the least active player.

So once that distraction is out of the way... is there any case worthy of bringing pressure on anyone? Right now because everyone is focusing on the horse game, there is no pressure on anyone, let alone a chance at a lynch. (Unfortunately no-one looks particularly scummy to me, so I'm not much help here yet... if no cases are built soon I'll go for my usual default of no scummy reads = vote for an inactive)

[TA1LGUNN3R]

Y'all keep arguing about the horse game being a town or anti-town power... But I think the "7 threes" warrants some attention. Are we assuming town/mafia setup or three factions + a single (lol TFO). If the latter, the horse game would affect across a wider spread (that is, the pool of participants aren't likely to be town, but probably among all three factions).

-Tails

[DoomYoshi]

Y'all keep arguing about the horse game being a town or anti-town power... But I think the "7 threes" warrants some attention. Are we assuming town/mafia setup or three factions + a single (lol TFO). If the latter, the horse game would affect across a wider spread (that is, the pool of participants aren't likely to be town, but probably among all three factions).

-Tails

I am assuming nothing.

[edocsil]

aage, why are you pleased with that?

Because apparently I'm being cut slack.

For skimmers, here's the quote I am referring to:

I'm supposed to be watching Lootifer and am happy to report that he followed my vote and was subsequently attacked for it, because it was a "crap vote" that "lacked logic". I'm pleased.

So my question to neb, edoc, jonty - what makes Lootifer's vote any worse than aage's?

I made a statement involving loots assumptions, not necessarily his conclusion IIRC. I will need to get my main PC running to say for certain, I just moved yesterday and today.

You can't just say regardless. You need to actually rebuff the points he made with some reasoning!

Not so jonty! Not if the logic was flawed in the first place he should not justify it!

Even when he's voting a man using his flawed logic?! He should either unvote, or back himself up not just say regardless.

FASTPOSTED by hotshot

I think the argument is that he believes his vote to be valid, despite some points being revoked, but that's pretty academic at this point. Also, one vote at this point really isn't worth worrying over. Unvoting is just a formality.

I am going to stand by an old adage for now. Third on the wagon is scum (i am counting neb and edoc in that).

I only FOS'ed.

[spiesr]

So, Anarkistsdream has been horseless for well over 24 hours now. So he will die and the end of Day 1 now? Should he return before that time will he be able to steal another player's horse, thus opening up the possibility of additional deaths?

[HotShot53]

So, Anarkistsdream has been horseless for well over 24 hours now. So he will die and the end of Day 1 now? Should he return before that time will he be able to steal another player's horse, thus opening up the possibility of additional deaths?

I wouldn't think so, I think the 4 of us with horses rode far enough away he can't catch us now lol. I sure hope so anyway... wouldn't be very fair otherwise.

[aage]

So, Anarkistsdream has been horseless for well over 24 hours now. So he will die and the end of Day 1 now? Should he return before that time will he be able to steal another player's horse, thus opening up the possibility of additional deaths?

I wouldn't think so, I think the 4 of us with horses rode far enough away he can't catch us now lol. I sure hope so anyway... wouldn't be very fair otherwise.

Well, technically killing him now is even more unfair. He hasn't posted in the threat since the rule change so he probably doesn't know. PCM will decide.

[Lootifer]

Serious time now unvote, vote Lootifer the post he made was poor.

Horse Game Activity - if pcm wanted to sure activity he would have included surely more than 5 players. Also, why not prod those who don't post, that usually works.
The Removal of the Horse Game - I can't remember the exact phrase but it goes along the lines of if town has an open setup and town don't exploit the set up then town deserve to lose. Anyway, the fact of the matter is Rodion is trying to use the horse game to his advantage. Now currently, I can't say whether he is town or mafia, merely a probability, but the point I am trying to get at is, Rodion is trying to exploit the system in a way to benefit town, which is good, not bad. Also, you said it would lower activity if the horse game were to be removed. I don't think it would, in fact I think it might increase activity, because we now have 2 lynches to talk about, the traditional and the horse. Granted, the horse is gonna be difficult to manipulate but I believe we can. We could goat people instead of voting them (i.e. goat Rodion) and he who the most goats, can end up without a horse, claim, and then be judged.
Lootifer's Response

1. If he was using to get activity, he wouldn't have only involved 5 players.
2. Rodion is making a strategic play...this should not affect anyone's activity.
3. FOS LOOTIFER for a crap vote.

Eh regardless of 1 and 2 I still believe moving the horse around to be in the best interests of town. It forces interation and information (though I concede you have a point with 1.)

You can't just say regardless. You need to actually rebuff the points he made with some reasoning!


So, that's why I'm voting you Loot, your reasoning was poor for your vote on Rodion, and I can't see why you just disregarded Neb's post. In other news in D1, DoomYoshi has posted once, his last post was May 9th, 2014, 2:37 am GMT

Ok. Interesting choice of words. "Poor" instead of "scummy" or similar. But i'll ignore that, I think it's probably just me being OMGUS'y.

Moving on you may be right in theory, but that's a pretty narrow view to side with. There are any number of scenarios where "exploiting" this situation as you have phrased it could be terrible for town. We don't know Rodions alignment, and a scum-rodion could simply be looking for an easy way to do away with another towny.

However, after musing on this for a while (provoked by someone calling my logic flawed ) I have changed my mind and believe rodions behavior to be very town - it would be very bold for scum to try and openly manipulate what is an unknown; I think the odds of him being scum are small (unless he's some kind of horse master SK and this is his own roles doing...). So unvote.

Looking back I now realize why my vote drew the attention it did. Now I would love to say "Oh yeah fully intentional, I did it to draw reactions and get reads" but really I just messed up and left half my reasoning out of the post: I thought Rodion was actively restricting information to town - the horse game is effectively giving us another independent "vote count" to work with; kind of a simplified mafia game within a mafia game (someones going to die and that death will tell us a great deal) - imagine if someone were to come in and suggest that no one is allowed to vote until 30 minutes before a lynch in a normal game. That would be viewed as scummy right? That's how I saw Rodions move. Hopefully that also puts context around why I replied to Neb in the way I did.

Now as I say secondary analysis has lead me to lean towards it being too bold a move for scum to take, but I still believe his action was not in the best interests of town

Now mistake or intentional my vote did provoke reactions, useful ones at that. To me Neb, edoc and yourself are town reads for now... unfortunately town reads aren't that useful, gonna need a whole lotta town reads for process of elimination to work

Now I have only skimmed the rest of the thread; stupid wildstar beta weekend will have a more thorough read through tomorrow.

[DoomYoshi]

However, after musing on this for a while (provoked by someone calling my logic flawed ) I have changed my mind and believe rodions behavior to be very town - it would be very bold for scum to try and openly manipulate what is an unknown; I think the odds of him being scum are small (unless he's some kind of horse master SK and this is his own roles doing...). So unvote.

One time Rodion and pmchugh spent at least a dozen multiple paragraph posts ripping into each other as they both were scum. A bold play from Rodion isn't to be unexpected.

[spiesr]

However, after musing on this for a while (provoked by someone calling my logic flawed ) I have changed my mind and believe rodions behavior to be very town - it would be very bold for scum to try and openly manipulate what is an unknown; I think the odds of him being scum are small (unless he's some kind of horse master SK and this is his own roles doing...). So unvote.

Meh, I wouldn't consider his actions with the horse thing to point towards Rodion being town in any significant way. Him doing something like that is entirely within how I would expect Rodion to play independent of alignment.

[virus90]

thx fpr not passsing the horse to me when i was away for the weekend and even posted that in last message
with the new rule it might have killed me.

With the new rule i also think we should move from the horse discussion and let it be how its gonna be. I think it now is pretty random and there are so many things that can happen / change last minute that i think we can talk about it but in the end it probably doesnt go the way that is intended anyway.
instead we should focus more on our power to lynch someone, i believe thursday is the deadline so will be 4 more days to decide. if we dont reach majority (we probably wont) the player with the most votes is lynched. i hope we can atleast get someone to 6+ because with only a few vote 3-4, the lynch would be not giving us much reads.

My first vote goes to jak, because in the other game he is gave a lot of input but here he hasnt given any. weak typical day 1 case, i admit. but its day 1, lets get some votes out and get some discussion
vote jak111

[Anarkistsdream]

Sorry everyone for not posting yet! Let me make it trough Mothers Day today and I will post something tonight...

[pancakemix]

So, Anarkistsdream has been horseless for well over 24 hours now. So he will die and the end of Day 1 now? Should he return before that time will he be able to steal another player's horse, thus opening up the possibility of additional deaths?

I wouldn't think so, I think the 4 of us with horses rode far enough away he can't catch us now lol. I sure hope so anyway... wouldn't be very fair otherwise.

Well, technically killing him now is even more unfair. He hasn't posted in the threat since the rule change so he probably doesn't know. PCM will decide.

^^This. Especially considering his previous post. I'm giving a reprieve this time.

VC later today.

[Whatsausage]

With the new rule i also think we should move from the horse discussion and let it be how its gonna be. I think it now is pretty random and there are so many things that can happen / change last minute that i think we can talk about it but in the end it probably doesnt go the way that is intended anyway.
instead we should focus more on our power to lynch someone, i believe thursday is the deadline so will be 4 more days to decide. if we dont reach majority (we probably wont) the player with the most votes is lynched. i hope we can atleast get someone to 6+ because with only a few vote 3-4, the lynch would be not giving us much reads.

My first vote goes to jak, because in the other game he is gave a lot of input but here he hasnt given any. weak typical day 1 case, i admit. but its day 1, lets get some votes out and get some discussion
vote jak111

So virus wants a wagon of at least six. Not that I am opposed to pressuring someone to get a claim, but it seems he chose nearly randomly... He admits his case is weak. Where is jak though? I agree he should be around and contributing more. (Not that there has been much contribution in this game so far from anyone, myself included. Likely from the lack of scum reads) But lynching an inactive really doesn't provide that much for reads in my experience. I understand how pressure can make them active, but a prod should be just as effective at that and you appear to be desiring more of just a lynch. I recognize you said after your vote that it is for discussion, but I still got the feeling from your post that you want this to be a lynch. Jak was much more active in that other game, but not really on the first day. I really don't like meta cases, because each game is different and we shouldn't expect the players in this game to read that one, or all of jak's for that matter to understand his meta. This is just a personal preference.

As for the horse game... the players are:
TA1LGUNN3R- been pretty active imo, and I haven't had an issue with anything he has posted
Anarkistsdream- not so active, promises a post today, clearly hadn't read yet
Rodion- was going to hold the potato, which is totally reasonable imo. Why would you want to risk randomness killing you when you could have some semblance of control over it. Not really alignment indicative
HotShot53- hasn't made much of an impression on me, some posts, nothing earth-shattering
virus90- I agree with his desire to start some pressure, but I think we can use the horse to the town's advantage. And I say we do that by using a "horse vote." It may be hard to actually get it to work perfectly, but we should be able to learn a little from how it turns out the last day. So I will horse vote virus, (brownish color because horses are brownish ) because using virus' own words, "lets get some votes out and get some discussion"

[jak111]

Could it potentially backfire? Well we could choose you as the hot potato but even then you would probably elect to pass it off at the last second though that would make you a fairly quick lynch the next day.

And he is already preparing to get around that by having basically declared that he will not accept the town trying make him hold onto the bomb as it goes off; not that I can really blame him for that.

Even if he did, Rodion is a good player. I'd rather he live and if he's on our side help us than die D1 with no chance.

I still feel like the whole thing is a scum/3rd party power of some sort... A little time spent over at EM, there was one third party roll, this creepy little girl that gives out a doll at the start of the game, the doll can be passed around, if the person with the doll dies the little girl wins and everyone else loses.

Perhaps a similar mechanic here with some sort of twist (kill so many people, kill certain people, etc).

Quote

Sorry, I forgot that's your tendency to try to stir the pot.

Well, I'm in the game, so the pot shall be stirred one way or another..

Wow, a lot of activity so far... it's looking like some people are moving past the joke vote stage slightly already, so I won't bother with a joke vote at this point.

I like the idea of having assigned people to watch activity of one other person... with this many people it would be way too easy for people to start scummarizing a lot. So are we using the original list, or the revised looped list? The looped list obviously works better with the idea of replacing the person you were watching... so based on that I'll be watching strike instead of jak. I guess jak proposed the revision just because he didn't want me watching him... lol. As strike came up with the idea I'm guessing I should have an easy job anyway

Watch me all you'd like, <.< I'm VERY active, more so than most people tend to be. I just suggested the whole thing to go in a giant line, then the system actually would never fail. A part of the train disappears but the piece behind it just goes against the piece in front of the one gone. Much more efficient too when you got a whole line of people watching the one ahead of them.

Okay, I'll tag Jak...even though Anark hasn't showed up yet.

Again, do you really need to watch me? XD I think everyone knows how often I post.

Anyway, these comments were as I read down the pages.

pcm fixed the game, though I am curious as to the participants, tomorrow I wish to look at the participants again and see if any are the same, perhaps one may be the original guy without a horse?

Another note, I've played with pretty much ALL of you (besides 1-2 maybe XD). So be forewarned, I'm mixing up my approach this game.. hopefully. I hate being the center of talk mid-game with people tunneling always because of my theories. XD Like the theory I have already made about this whole horse game.

(Note: This post was written TWO days ago, I was gonna add more to this but I just want my post out and I will catch up.

show

^ This was the final post at the creation of this one I am posting now. After posting this I need to catch back up.. been busy >.<

FP'd by like 2-3 pages worth of posts LOL

[spiesr]

I still feel like the whole thing is a scum/3rd party power of some sort... A little time spent over at EM, there was one third party roll, this creepy little girl that gives out a doll at the start of the game, the doll can be passed around, if the person with the doll dies the little girl wins and everyone else loses.

Pancakemix has, in past games, sometimes had various events that mix things up & keep it interesting. My current theory is that this is one of those. We won't really know until we see if it reoccurs in some form during later Days. I mean maybe somebody picked Jigsaw as their character or something.

[virus90]

there is the post i hoped for:)
so unvote jak111
a modprod is also a option indeed whatsausage, but i got the feeling that a vote works just as well most of the times, if it doesn't, you know its time for a modprod. i hoped for a reaction from jak and i got it, a little to soon to my liking even. that's because i also hoped for some more people jumping on, or condemning, cause that gives me some reads as well. things have to be stirred up a little in my opinion. been away for the weekend and hoped to see things heading somewhere but apart from the horse discussion -> new 24 hour rule not much has happened. and we need to start moving. thursday = lynchday.

fp'ed by spiesr.

[DoomYoshi]

I don't like it. Why did you wait 2 days to post? Afraid of something?