Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
George Kansas
Sep 1, 2008

preface all my posts with this


EccoRaven posted:

Someone please poke holes in the logic because it seems pretty sound to me. Alternatively if you have compelling reasons why PMush as scum would unnecessarily claim a role that would invariably be counterclaimed I'd like to hear it. ("because PMush is bad at mafia" is an answer but a rude one.)

Pmush is not a jailor. I'm sure that, post-game, her reason for claiming will either be completely unexpected or will make me real mad. Either way, lunching the doc in this game will be made even worse by the fact that you will get no info from it.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

George Kansas
Sep 1, 2008

preface all my posts with this


Can you do the same analysis for me, ecco? Why would I claim doc as scum?

EccoRaven
Aug 15, 2004

there is only one hell:
the one we live in now


peramene posted:

You're the obvious choice for first call.

how am I the obvious first call. there is a logical impossibility before you and you still want to vote for me?

I'm going to help you help get me voted out - what is the case against me? Why am I so obviously scum? It wasn't clear from your posts up to now, your "quote every post in the thread" posts had the tone of "I know ecco is scum and now I see it from these posts!" rather than the other way around.

Why am I scum? And why is it so much more compelling than BK, whom you also think is scum?

EccoRaven
Aug 15, 2004

there is only one hell:
the one we live in now


BottleKnight posted:

Can you do the same analysis for me, ecco? Why would I claim doc as scum?

it doesn't make sense in and of itself, especially since a number of us were leaning on voting for pera, and it's unlikely pera is scum with you.

but it makes more sense than anything else so far.

It's not because of your play, which has, all of today, been pretty much gearing up to this counterclaim. It's just logical deductions - the least stupid possibility.

EccoRaven
Aug 15, 2004

there is only one hell:
the one we live in now


if PMush is scum fakeclaiming jailor, then that means either pera is her scumbuddy or pera is telling the truth and somehow her result was erroneous.

could it be pmush and pera? I feel like I dismissed that as a possibility earlier for some reason. I'm still tired and still have a headache unfortunately.

sephiRoth IRA
Jun 13, 2007

"Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality."

-Carl Sagan


EccoRaven posted:

pera is telling the truth and somehow her result was erroneous.

Occam's Razor. I think this option is unlikely. It all comes down to whether you think there's one or two scum left. If there's two it's​ pera and mush. If it's one it's bk.

sephiRoth IRA
Jun 13, 2007

"Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality."

-Carl Sagan


peramene posted:

Why are you so sure Ecco is town?

Because of the opposing claims. There's no way in my brain that you, bk, and mush are all town and claiming truthfully.

EccoRaven
Aug 15, 2004

there is only one hell:
the one we live in now


I think we're 30 minutes to deadline.

honestly part of me thinks it'd save us a lot of headaches just to let the day end without an execution. the scum can't nightkill PMush and pera and BK all at once, killing any one of them would clear up the logic problem a bit/lot. Killing me would suck but it'd mean the power roles would have gotten more information to break down day 3. killing someone not me and not BK/pera/mush would suck less for me and also give us that Valuable Info.

EccoRaven
Aug 15, 2004

there is only one hell:
the one we live in now


yeah actually, if we no-hang there is no way for us to lose the game. if we vote for someone and we're wrong about them (AND about quidnose) then we might lose the game (depending on night action shenanigans).

I think that's the best option ahead of us right now.

George Kansas
Sep 1, 2008

preface all my posts with this


We are 3 hours to deadline, according to OP.

EccoRaven
Aug 15, 2004

there is only one hell:
the one we live in now


BottleKnight posted:

We are 3 hours to deadline, according to OP.

oh it's 10 not 7:30. ok. I dunno why I thought it was at 7:30.

still I think no-hanging makes the most sense.

George Kansas
Sep 1, 2008

preface all my posts with this


If Pmush isn't going to happen, no-lynching is the only viable alternative to me.

sephiRoth IRA
Jun 13, 2007

"Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality."

-Carl Sagan


To elaborate, based on eccos push on quid, they are not scum buddies.

Therefore if ecco is scum, quid is town. If quid is town, then there are two scum left. If there are two left, based on claims, the teams are you and mush or bk and ecco.

I find the idea of a bk/Ecco scum team unlikely based on their play.

So thus my personal theory that it comes down to whether quid was scum or not.

George Kansas
Sep 1, 2008

preface all my posts with this


If anything, it's nice that me, the doc won't die because I am now almost certainly someone the scum want to get lunched.

EccoRaven
Aug 15, 2004

there is only one hell:
the one we live in now


BottleKnight posted:

If anything, it's nice that me, the doc won't die because I am now almost certainly someone the scum want to get lunched.

unfortunately both PMush and pera can very credibly think the same thing about themselves.

areyoucontagious posted:

To elaborate, based on eccos push on quid, they are not scum buddies.

Therefore if ecco is scum, quid is town. If quid is town, then there are two scum left. If there are two left, based on claims, the teams are you and mush or bk and ecco.

this makes sense, but why would it have to be me/BK as a possibility? Why not something like, BK and AA?

Anomalous Amalgam
Feb 13, 2015

by Nyc_Tattoo


Doctor Rope

Coulds be bk ecco

Anomalous Amalgam
Feb 13, 2015

by Nyc_Tattoo


Doctor Rope

Yeah

EccoRaven
Aug 15, 2004

there is only one hell:
the one we live in now


Anomalous Amalgam posted:

Coulds be bk ecco

point against it: why would BK, who made a long case yesterday about how pera was scum, fakeclaim doctor to get PMush executed (especially after PMush said she can't self-jail or jail the same target twice in a row)? Why not just go with his scumbuddy's plan and get pera executed?

why would I defend PMush all morning knowing BK wants to make a case against her?

by play it just doesn't make sense.

sephiRoth IRA
Jun 13, 2007

"Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality."

-Carl Sagan


EccoRaven posted:

unfortunately both PMush and pera can very credibly think the same thing about themselves.


this makes sense, but why would it have to be me/BK as a possibility? Why not something like, BK and AA?

To me based on how you both voted down quid. If quid was town. Nothing AA has done in the last chunk of the game pings as scum.

sephiRoth IRA
Jun 13, 2007

"Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality."

-Carl Sagan


EccoRaven posted:

point against it: why would BK, who made a long case yesterday about how pera was scum, fakeclaim doctor to get PMush executed (especially after PMush said she can't self-jail or jail the same target twice in a row)? Why not just go with his scumbuddy's plan and get pera executed?

why would I defend PMush all morning knowing BK wants to make a case against her?

by play it just doesn't make sense.

This is why I think it's down to bk acting singly or pera/mush

EccoRaven
Aug 15, 2004

there is only one hell:
the one we live in now


I'm leaning on it being BK too, but there's evidence for and against each of them. Barring something stupid (like a busdriver or a town fakeclaiming for funsies) someone has to be lying scum in that triangle.

I want to punt it off to tomorrow. Anyone the scum kill would give us information to solve the logic puzzle, and if the scum withhold the kill for some reason it'd be even better.

sephiRoth IRA
Jun 13, 2007

"Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality."

-Carl Sagan


EccoRaven posted:

I'm leaning on it being BK too, but there's evidence for and against each of them. Barring something stupid (like a busdriver or a town fakeclaiming for funsies) someone has to be lying scum in that triangle.

I want to punt it off to tomorrow. Anyone the scum kill would give us information to solve the logic puzzle, and if the scum withhold the kill for some reason it'd be even better.

I'm fine with a no kill unless someone has something else particularly illuminating to say

Anomalous Amalgam
Feb 13, 2015

by Nyc_Tattoo


Doctor Rope

EccoRaven posted:

point against it: why would BK, who made a long case yesterday about how pera was scum, fakeclaim doctor to get PMush executed (especially after PMush said she can't self-jail or jail the same target twice in a row)? Why not just go with his scumbuddy's plan and get pera executed?

why would I defend PMush all morning knowing BK wants to make a case against her?

by play it just doesn't make sense.

To secure a lunch where there was early game suspicion and reason to still doubt the claim. A coercion.

P Mush claims first, and that's unlikely to be fake unless scum withheld and she is scum. Will elaborate further soon.

EccoRaven
Aug 15, 2004

there is only one hell:
the one we live in now


Anomalous Amalgam posted:

To secure a lunch where there was early game suspicion and reason to still doubt the claim. A coercion.

but it'd be unnecessary. if BK and I are scum, BK could just hold it in, vote for pera using his day 1 case and my day 2 case, wait for you or AYC to vote for pera (both of you were thinking she was the most likely to be scum going into today iirc), and then I'd perform the nightkill on PMush with impunity and the scum would win the game.

why complicate things this way unnecessarily? it doesn't make sense.

EccoRaven
Aug 15, 2004

there is only one hell:
the one we live in now


if you read BK's play today it does read a lot like "I know PMush is lying"; it's not clear that he pulled this doctor claim out of his butt just when he claimed, it was building at least since the start of the game day, well before pera claimed.

indeed other than BK not really making a strong case for PMush, his play today is textbook "I know someone is lying but I don't want to claim" play.

peramene
Oct 13, 2015

Just peramene.


areyoucontagious posted:

Occam's Razor. I think this option is unlikely. It all comes down to whether you think there's one or two scum left. If there's two it's​ pera and mush. If it's one it's bk.

I had a big post but deleted it the second I saw this. Maybe I'm just not seeing the "logical impossibility."

EccoRaven posted:

how am I the obvious first call. there is a logical impossibility before you and you still want to vote for me?

I'm going to help you help get me voted out - what is the case against me? Why am I so obviously scum? It wasn't clear from your posts up to now, your "quote every post in the thread" posts had the tone of "I know ecco is scum and now I see it from these posts!" rather than the other way around.

Why am I scum? And why is it so much more compelling than BK, whom you also think is scum?

I quoted relevant posts worth rereading because people who have promised cases haven't produced them. I did the best I could and feel I made pretty clearly that it's you and BK.

But now that he's counterclaimed - which is ballsy af if he's scum - you have to bus him.

You have been trying to undermine and discredit me this entire game, you have benefited from my desire to get you to see the whole of the experiment. I feel like I know you're scum, and then at 4/1 we can talk about whether pmush or bk is lying.

areyoucontagious posted:

Because of the opposing claims. There's no way in my brain that you, bk, and mush are all town and claiming truthfully.

I absolutely agree with the second premise but I fear you may be affirming the consequent, at direct risk to town.

A no-lynch either keeps us at 5/1 or 4/2, or 4/1, 3/2, right? Not knowing sucks. Scum knows. Alright. It didn't occur to me until just now but officially supporting a no lynch is the only 'vote' a townie can do today that doesn't result in helping the two scum take out another townie.


Regarding tonight, let's just get this out in the open:
A guilty result from me on Ecco is meaningless. Of course scum!pera would say that.
I'll get the same result on PMush.
AA and AYC are town, I say with almost full confidence. I could try one of them as a sanity test?? Does anyone think this is a good idea?
All investigating BK will earn us is also worthless except in the unbelievable case that it's pmush and bk AND pmush is the godfather... but even then, what does a guilty from me mean at this point?

I need inno results that make sense.

BK, if you're really the doc, letting them nk me confirms my claim. Don't waste it on me. (The ultimate WIFOM, take that, hypothetical mafia-roleblocker)

EccoRaven
Aug 15, 2004

there is only one hell:
the one we live in now


apropos of nothing but this is a good example of where breadcrumbs would have been helpful. Someone writing "DOC" with the first letters of each sentence in their first post would have been wonderful.

people should breadcrumb all the time forever and ever amen. Please everyone involved in this cluster try to breadcrumb in the future :eng101:

EccoRaven
Aug 15, 2004

there is only one hell:
the one we live in now


peramene posted:

I had a big post but deleted it the second I saw this. Maybe I'm just not seeing the "logical impossibility."
BK says he protected me last night.
PMush says she jailed me last night.

It is impossible (barring outside interference, like through a scum busdriver) for me to have been both jailed AND doctored last night. A jailor makes their target untargetable to other actions; it's not just a doctor+roleblocker hybrid, it makes actions that target the jailor's target fail.

As such it must necessarily be the case (again barring something stupid) that BK and PMush are of opposite alignments.

EccoRaven
Aug 15, 2004

there is only one hell:
the one we live in now


peramene posted:

I quoted relevant posts worth rereading because people who have promised cases haven't produced them. I did the best I could and feel I made pretty clearly that it's you and BK.
you didn't. please try again, in one or two paragraphs. bulletpoints would work as well.

people had a hard time understanding exactly what you were saying with those reams of posts, I'm not trying to bullshit you or tug your chain, it simply wasn't a clear and focused "case" as much as it was "here's every post ecco made and me saying 'ha! you WOULD think that, SCUM' to them."

peramene posted:

Regarding tonight, let's just get this out in the open:
ideally you wouldn't tell the scum whom you're investigating since that gives them the opportunity to use their resources more effectively. knowing whom everyone is going to investigate and protect can help them figure out who to roleblock/jail and nightkill in a way that's most optimal for them.

peramene
Oct 13, 2015

Just peramene.


EccoRaven posted:

I'm leaning on it being BK too, but there's evidence for and against each of them. Barring something stupid (like a busdriver or a town fakeclaiming for funsies) someone has to be lying scum in that triangle.

I want to punt it off to tomorrow. Anyone the scum kill would give us information to solve the logic puzzle, and if the scum withhold the kill for some reason it'd be even better.

But realizing it was your idea freaks me out.

Two scum avoid the chance of a noose and potentially get to nk?

EccoRaven posted:

apropos of nothing but this is a good example of where breadcrumbs would have been helpful. Someone writing "DOC" with the first letters of each sentence in their first post would have been wonderful.

people should breadcrumb all the time forever and ever amen. Please everyone involved in this cluster try to breadcrumb in the future :eng101:

I certainly hope it was.

EccoRaven posted:

BK says he protected me last night.
PMush says she jailed me last night.

It is impossible (barring outside interference, like through a scum busdriver) for me to have been both jailed AND doctored last night. A jailor makes their target untargetable to other actions; it's not just a doctor+roleblocker hybrid, it makes actions that target the jailor's target fail.

As such it must necessarily be the case (again barring something stupid) that BK and PMush are of opposite alignments.

Correct. And? That has nothing to do with you. I'm flipping a coin when I'm absolutely convinced I have a sure thing demanding I not vote her and instead flip a coin.

EccoRaven
Aug 15, 2004

there is only one hell:
the one we live in now


peramene posted:

Correct. And? That has nothing to do with you.
it has to do with you.

From your perspective, barring something stupid (like PMush being a godfather in a 7 player game, or you being an insane cop in a flipless game), PMush must be town. And since PMush must be town, since BK and PMush cannot both be town, that would necessarily make BK scum.

So why are you so convinced I'm scum? Why are you voting for me instead of BK, a player you should essentially know is scum?

peramene
Oct 13, 2015

Just peramene.


EccoRaven posted:

you didn't. please try again, in one or two paragraphs. bulletpoints would work as well.

I will if somebody else asks.

EccoRaven posted:

people had a hard time understanding exactly what you were saying with those reams of posts, I'm not trying to bullshit you or tug your chain, it simply wasn't a clear and focused "case" as much as it was "here's every post ecco made and me saying 'ha! you WOULD think that, SCUM' to them."


Reams. Is this on purpose to demonstrate consistency, or because you know it bothers me as much as it bothers you. I'll take a second's voice on this one too.

EccoRaven posted:

ideally you wouldn't tell the scum whom you're investigating since that gives them the opportunity to use their resources more effectively. knowing whom everyone is going to investigate and protect can help them figure out who to roleblock/jail and nightkill in a way that's most optimal for them.

You know full well what I'm doing, this obfuscation is not going to convince anyone of anything. I say I'm investigating you. I've stated several times that I'll lie as town. Guess what? Either they lolblock me, or it's a coin flip for both of us - except I have the advantage. But thanks for this.

Anomalous Amalgam
Feb 13, 2015

by Nyc_Tattoo


Doctor Rope

I find it far more likely that BK is lying.

I don't believe scum considered Pera a sure lunch even with mounting suspicion.

While I found her posts fluff filled their is still genuine content there.

I found your haste to reinforce the idea of them as such somewhat off putting at the time, but was busy.

This seems like a clumsily coordinated scum move, on BKs part regardless of your alignment.

I suppose it could be Mush, but interpreting which of the two is scum first is order #1, I am much more wary of you though.

Not at a pc yet. Need quotes.

EccoRaven
Aug 15, 2004

there is only one hell:
the one we live in now


Anomalous Amalgam posted:

I don't believe scum considered Pera a sure lunch even with mounting suspicion.
had pera not claimed, and if BK and me are both scum, pera would be the execution today. there's a good case there, especially coming off Quidnose self-hammering; AYC and you both have listed pera as your top picks when prompted, and if one of you balked all it'd take is someone leaning on PMush to get the execution ready.

it doesn't make sense for me to push pera so strongly and defending PMush as well if my scumbuddy BK was about to (and had planned on, all day) spoiling it with a fake doctor claim.

peramene
Oct 13, 2015

Just peramene.


EccoRaven posted:

it has to do with you.

From your perspective, barring something stupid (like PMush being a godfather in a 7 player game, or you being an insane cop in a flipless game), PMush must be town. And since PMush must be town, since BK and PMush cannot both be town, that would necessarily make BK scum.

So why are you so convinced I'm scum? Why are you voting for me instead of BK, a player you should essentially know is scum?

Because you keep insisting it's the right course of action so heavily, just like you did with Quid. It has to do with Quid. I am not at all beyond considering "barring something stupid," but if it isn't going to be you, I'd lynch BK if the votes built up for it. PMush voted BK. But PMush is innocent. It makes my head spin.

I'm really kind of looking to my confirmed-as-far-as-I'm-concerned townies to speak up and make their voices heard, and it sounds like AYC at least is willing to consider a no-lynch. We'll have a nk and potentially a roleblock, but at least a townie won't die. That's been my principal concern today. But it means even a single townie vote could mean the end of the game. It makes me nervous. But it's better than potentially ending the game now.

peramene
Oct 13, 2015

Just peramene.


EccoRaven posted:

had pera not claimed, and if BK and me are both scum, pera would be the execution today.

You're just so goddamn sure of yourself.

EccoRaven
Aug 15, 2004

there is only one hell:
the one we live in now


peramene posted:

Because you keep insisting it's the right course of action so heavily, just like you did with Quid. It has to do with Quid. I am not at all beyond considering "barring something stupid," but if it isn't going to be you, I'd lynch BK if the votes built up for it. PMush voted BK. But PMush is innocent. It makes my head spin.
this isn't a reasonable position to hold, pera. Sorry. If the only reason you're voting me instead of BK right now is because I'm telling you the logic from your perspective (which makes it all part of some DASTARDLY ECCO PLOT :tinfoil:) then that's irrational. ESPECIALLY since you're seemingly convinced Quidnose had to be town solely because me and BK are scum together.

there's no rational reason to keep your vote on me and not BK.

peramene posted:

But it means even a single townie vote could mean the end of the game. It makes me nervous. But it's better than potentially ending the game now.
it doesn't. in a 6 player game we need 4 votes. if there's 2 scum, one town vote on another town can't end the game.

EccoRaven
Aug 15, 2004

there is only one hell:
the one we live in now


peramene posted:

You're just so goddamn sure of yourself.

because I'm really good at this game.

peramene
Oct 13, 2015

Just peramene.


EccoRaven posted:

had pera not claimed, and if BK and me are both scum, pera would be the execution today. there's a good case there, especially coming off Quidnose self-hammering; AYC and you both have listed pera as your top picks when prompted, and if one of you balked all it'd take is someone leaning on PMush to get the execution ready.

it doesn't make sense for me to push pera so strongly and defending PMush as well if my scumbuddy BK was about to (and had planned on, all day) spoiling it with a fake doctor claim.

And... whose cases convinced them to suspect me so heavily? Have they made their own? I'm understanding that I'm hard to read, but Ecco, you won't loving claim.

I feel like unless you claim VT - in which case, why pretend you're an unspecified power role if you're town?

Oh, hang on, I can do a thing.

EccoRaven posted:

this isn't a reasonable position to hold, pera. Sorry. If the only reason you're voting me instead of BK right now is because I'm telling you the logic from your perspective (which makes it all part of some DASTARDLY ECCO PLOT :tinfoil:) then that's irrational. ESPECIALLY since you're seemingly convinced Quidnose had to be town solely because me and BK are scum together.

there's no rational reason to keep your vote on me and not BK.

it doesn't. in a 6 player game we need 4 votes. if there's 2 scum, one town vote on another town can't end the game.

5 player game. 3 votes. Tomorrow.

Incidentally, I'm still not voting you. I'm saying I'd like to, but I'm standing firm that I don't want to vote without a consensus. If one of the others wants to join you and mush in a BK lynch, I'll back that up, because your plausible logical is absolutely correct, and BK counterclaimed mush in as lukewarm a fashion as I've ever seen. If the consensus is no lynch, that seems phenomenally pro-town...

Unless there are two scum. Because 5 survivors means 3 votes to lynch. One townie mistake, scumrush, game. Which you loving KNOW, Ecco!!

EccoRaven posted:

because I'm really good at this game.

Yeah, you are. This is the most fun I've ever had as town and in my most hated role in a largely useless fashion.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

EccoRaven
Aug 15, 2004

there is only one hell:
the one we live in now


peramene posted:

Incidentally, I'm still not voting you.
I thought you did. whoops.

  • Locked thread