It's simple. Don't worry about self-preservation. Think of ways to find out who is scum (if not you) and act on your plans.
Sorry, answers. default hasn't done enough to make me lean any which way other than misunderstand the game. He has done a lot of fearing and speculating, not a lot of investigating. I think he is inexperienced, not intentionally misleading. I did contradict him on his bad posts. @default: I'd like to hear some kind of response on those fronts. Krowley is playing a hard anti-town game, inviting his own death to avoid suspicion and doing no work for town. A decent lynch target. One problem: He did that in reaction, not out of the blue, and in reaction to me. We'll know more by his voting record. I say policy lynch him if he refuses to take part. I'm trying to find much content between What? and The Fuk but it looks like What? asked him a question, he dodged, and that was it. Not seeing a case from either of them. Trigger has been erratic but that's not a sin in itself. Gut reads town, behavior reads nervous, possibly scum.
I know that Beau has the most hard evidence against him and currently the most votes. Other than that, no. I do know that each person with your own ideas isn't going to lead to a majority lynch. Too many suspects: Me, Beau, default, Trigger, What?, Krowley. Not enough people to vote for all of those. We have to thin it down and work as a team. If we wait until the end, it will be a lot more work for you to move votes from Beau to anyone else; I strongly believe he'll win out if you wait.
Not exactly. We need to find a way to put the mafia on the spot. Voicing singular opinions doesn't force their hand. Here's an example: Find two possible lynches for the day; the two most suspicious people. Discuss them at length and then force a vote for consolidation at the end. You will gain info on both the targets and the voters no matter what.
It's a personal quirk; I switch depending on context without thinking, for everyone. Nothing personal.
Try to say more with fewer words. I'll cut to the thick: 1. If a lot of people vote for Beau mid phase, Beau is probably not mafia (due to mafia not wanting to lynch their own). If a lot of people actively do not want to lynch Beau mid phase, it could mean that the lynch is on the right track since mafia would not want to lynch them. This all depends on the context of the votes, but statistics usually don't lie; mafia make up a notable number of votes. Sorry about my wording. 2. I'm playing with people who want to sit around and have to ask me why I think we should be doing things this early. I can't gather info by my lonesome. I've tried the 'Do you-know-what, *wink wink*' routine. It's not working on this crowd. 3. By explaining/eliminating a lot of mafia's actions, I'm making it harder for them to maneuver freely. They can't outright do anything I've said. You can now work with something: What would mafia do if they couldn't do the things I've said? 4. I've asked multiple times for people to press other cases. No one wants to take risks. At this rate you will all sheep me at the end of phase and lynch Beau without learning anything or pressing any pressure points. That's not a win in my book, but at least lynching them will give some info. Anything is better than nothing.
Mainly because I don't consider it an actual wagon until at least 5 people are on it in quick succession with similar reasons. Think about it statistically: 3-4/20 people are mafia. 2/20 people vote to lynch me, another 2/20 vote to lynch to Beau. What are the chances that all four of them are mafia? What about that one of them is mafia? Pretty low. Assuming the ratio of scum to town is 1:4, when 5 people vote on a wagon, it's a decent bet that one of the five is mafia. It's not sure fire, but it's a decent bet. Worth considering at least. At 4 votes, the mafia have little reason to shy away from the vote because they are following the lead of other people whom they know are town. The number of scum involved in the vote should grow with the number of total votes. We haven't had a real wagon yet. Highest we have is three. We have enough people to form five 3-person wagons and not involve a single scum. Hardly worth worrying about.
Hypothetically, statistically, et cetera. Mafia have incentive to join wagons on suspicious town. When a wagon forms, chances are that some of the people who are on the wagon are mafia. The bigger the wagon, the bigger the mafia involvement. If we have trouble getting the necessary votes for a lynch on the hand, it's possible that this is because the mafia are actively staying away from it or arguing against it -- and they wouldn't do that unless the lynch was on the right track. But... If we all hold back, don't speak our minds, and play it safe until the very last minute, we don't get to use those kinds of speculations. Mafia can fire off their votes at the end of the day without contributing much in the middle at little cost to themselves. It takes ten votes to hammer the lynch in before deadline. We can afford at least five votes on a particular person without risking a mafia takeover. We can switch the bandwagon later if we want. Meanwhile, we would get all kinds of interesting info. Waiting around just doesn't offer much in the way of help.
Information. If a lot of people are okay with killing Beau, it probably means they are not mafia (since some of the people who hurried to the wagon are mafia). If we wait until the end of day, we can't capitalise on the info until after the lynch happens. On that note, I think having only one major target a day is an issue. If you outright disagree with voting Beau, you need a good reason. If you agree with voting Beau, speak up. We aren't going to learn anything if people keep their thoughts to themselves until it's too late to control the flow of votes. Make up your mind now, not at the end of phase. Maybe I'm just impatient. I don't see the point in sitting around unless people think new information is going to come to light.
What is the point of holding off until the end of the day? What will we gain by waiting? Not rhetorical.
Based on the evidence, he's anti-town. Could be either one. I'm just pointing out the flaw in Cat's gut dismissal of the facts.[DOUBLEPOST=1408477711][/DOUBLEPOST]Basing your decisions on who you think the host will choose to be a role isn't playing the game in my opinion. It avoids the part where you actually read into peoples' behavior.
I've been pretty careful about specifying that I think he is anti-town. There is a third party role that also explains all of his behavior.
I probably wasn't clear enough. Self-preservation is not pro-town. My real reason for thinking he is anti-town is that slip up. I'm not going with my gut on anything if I don't have to. It's very possible his actions are just newbie mistakes, but that possibility doesn't mean I can overlook hard tells like that. At the end of the day, I have more hard evidence on him than anyone else. Doesn't seem to be changing any time soon.
It's hard to take you seriously when your only mention of a feeling comes when under pressure, towards the people putting you under pressure. Review of your behavior: Has no suspicions when asked. Alienates self from town. Asks to be lynched in my place. Suddenly accuses people, but only when a wagon of three forms on him. Doesn't vote for the people he accuses. Openly admits their accusation is purely to influence other players' votes. The accusation is towards the people voting for him. What part of this is good?
Your work isn't stopping you from voting. If your gut says I am mafia, you should vote. But you haven't. Playing it safe is not pro-town.
Slip up in which you alienate yourself from town. Wagon not forming on slip up. Painting the people who voted you in a negative light and disappearing. I'm feeling better about this the more you post.
... Everything about this post. Trigger is still my second highest scum read. Did you forget I voted him before you?
Why not this? We have a real, tangible reason to think you are anti-town. A much better basis than any other people to be sure.
Exactly. How is that a plus? That just makes winning even easier for mafia since they can focus on killing people who might actually spend time hunting them.
The bit about them not being a target for mafia is nonsense, though. By the same logic that lynching them is better than lynching someone valuable, mafia killing them is better than mafia killing someone valuable.
