Guns & Roses IV [Game Over]

[chkflip]

Yes.

[Paragon]

you seem to be more concerned about the wagon on me than i am... why? its jokes, bruh. what exactly is pinging you about me?

I agree with you on votato, chkflip. Recommending his township be seen as NAI, but it "could be an intentional township" is shady as votato. Also, I didn't like how he tried to brush off his wagon as a joke with no real reasons above.

[lilith2013]

I’m on board with a chkflip wagon. farside is right, I’m tunneling and that’s my b. I’ll revisit SS later.

VOTE: chkflip

Lilith, why did Faraide convince you that you were tunneling rather than correct about an early gut scumread?

I actually already dropped my SS push in 116 on the basis that all I had at that time was a read I couldn't explain to anyone, which evidently is not a very convincing case for building a wagon. 163 is the next time I'm in the thread and I explicitly moved on to interacting with a different wagon there. I'm not saying my scumread is wrong because I still have that read, but with farside calling me out I realized that pushing my read without evidence was not going to be productive so I decided to move somewhere else and revisit my SS read later.

[Paragon]

Okay, that makes sense!

[votato]

Because if my vote is going to be by itself (the two highest wagons that aren't me don't really appeal to me rn, i.e. I don't see the case), it's not going to hang out on a new player you lot are giving a free pass to after they just openly admitted to purposefully trying to townslip. It's not a hill I feel like dying on, sorry.

The initial gut ping from ABR hasn't been swayed by their recent posting. I understand where you're coming from re: my bus theory only being plausible if vot is scum and, therefore, that's where my vote should be; however, to reiterate, if I'm going to solo vote I'm not solo voting there.

i didnt say it was an intentional townslip. i just said maybe. as in scum!votato did it as a townslip. I do have a reason for saying it beyond curiosity. No, I'm not scum claiming.

@paragon my wagon came purely in RVS. they werent serious votes. there was no case, hence nothing to say about it. i dont see brushing off an RVS wagon as AI. if someone has a serious case against me Im happy to address it.

[chkflip]

I shan't revoke his township, I don't have the power to.

Maybe ask faraide... fuckin work abroad sounding ass.

[chkflip]

Ahhh yes the "If I was scum" argument. Classic.

Definitely not complete WIFOM bullshit.

[lilith2013]

whoa, it's not Faraide's fault he got dragged into this!

[chkflip]

Not to assume Faraide's gender, but I

believe

they do not identify as a "he." I could be wrong.

[Paragon]

Albert and chkflip's votes on you were both serious, vottato. Go ISO Albert and tell me what you think of his push on you.

Sigh, these typos aren't gonna stop anytime soon lol

[lilith2013]

oh. Sorry Faraide

[lilith2013]

Albert and chkflip's votes on you were both serious, vottato. Go ISO Albert and tell me what you think of his push on you.

Yeah I was gonna say this

[eyestott]

I AM SO CONFUSED RIGHT NOW

[Knightmare491]

So the plan is simple, we know we have 8 townies with roses, that means there's three with guns.
So one by one we just claim whether we have a gun or not. No need to claim what night it will be used on. That way we basically get 3 ICs and reduce the lynchpool by 3.

I see a flaw in your plan! What stops 1 of the scum from claiming gun? Do you still lynch in the guns aiming to hit them?

If you were joking, I apologise and give you permission to berate me.

Scum either choose to give us 3 ICs or put themselves in the lynchpool. If all 3 scum choose to claim having a gun then we can make the 3 shoot the other 3.

Why are you assuming scum ever put more than 1 of them as gun claims? One of them will fakeclaim gun, and so lynching in the gun pool is going for 1/4 chance of scum if we do this. Lynching in this game regularly is going for 3/13 chance of lynching scum, which is actually only marginally lower odds than your strategy which requires a mass claim and giving scum all the cards.

It's 14 not 13. Like I said it gives the vig a pool to shoot in. If only 1 of them claims to have a gun, we lynch 1/4, 25% chance to hit scum, vig kill reduces the pool even further. We lynch scum day 2 or 3 max. Guaranteed. What cards are we giving the scum please tell me? How does it hurt town.

[chkflip]

Engage with me eyestort I will stort this out for you.

[eyestott]

So the plan is simple, we know we have 8 townies with roses, that means there's three with guns.
So one by one we just claim whether we have a gun or not. No need to claim what night it will be used on. That way we basically get 3 ICs and reduce the lynchpool by 3.

I see a flaw in your plan! What stops 1 of the scum from claiming gun? Do you still lynch in the guns aiming to hit them?

If you were joking, I apologise and give you permission to berate me.

Scum either choose to give us 3 ICs or put themselves in the lynchpool. If all 3 scum choose to claim having a gun then we can make the 3 shoot the other 3.

Why are you assuming scum ever put more than 1 of them as gun claims? One of them will fakeclaim gun, and so lynching in the gun pool is going for 1/4 chance of scum if we do this. Lynching in this game regularly is going for 3/13 chance of lynching scum, which is actually only marginally lower odds than your strategy which requires a mass claim and giving scum all the cards.

It's 14 not 13. Like I said it gives the vig a pool to shoot in. If only 1 of them claims to have a gun, we lynch 1/4, 25% chance to hit scum, vig kill reduces the pool even further. We lynch scum day 2 or 3 max. Guaranteed. What cards are we giving the scum please tell me? How does it hurt town.

The fact that you don't see how this negatively impacts town is worth -2 townreadpoints.

[Paragon]

It's 14 not 13. Like I said it gives the vig a pool to shoot in. If only 1 of them claims to have a gun, we lynch 1/4, 25% chance to hit scum, vig kill reduces the pool even further. We lynch scum day 2 or 3 max. Guaranteed. What cards are we giving the scum please tell me? How does it hurt town.

If your aim is to kill scum guaranteed by day 3, I suppose you're right.

In that case, what stops scum from claiming no guns? Do we really want scum to know who the guns are? They can just shoot inside of them and get guaranteed killshots off rather than having to risk shooting Roses. The payoff is we get 3 ICs for the first couple of days, but they'll drop like flies from scum's guns. The whole point of the roses is that they have potential to block kills from scum, so it feels counterproductive to remove that possibility.

[eyestott]

Engage with me eyestort I will stort this out for you.

I haven't played in a large game in a large amount of time, and there's too large an amount of people for me to have developed

qualia

for many people yet

Chkflip, compare Knightmare's way of explaining his plan with my own. Do they ping differently to you?

[Something_Smart]

Is this aimed at me? I don't understand what you're saying.

I am saying that there's a discrepancy between this post:

S_S just reads off. Like he's trying to defuse pressure but not too obviously.

Where you said that I'm being subtle about trying to prevent people from voting me, and this one:

What part of 77 or 100 isn't obvious in its intent to defuse pressure?

It's like kinda AtE, kinda "haha wagon on me"
No outright "why am I being wagoned?"

Where you suggested that to be more blunt I could have asked why people were voting me-- but asking WHY they were voting me isn't the same as asking them to STOP voting me. My posts were very clear in their intent to get people to STOP voting me, which is what you originally claimed I was not being obvious about.

[Knightmare491]

If your aim is to kill scum guaranteed by day 3, I suppose you're right.

In that case, what stops scum from claiming no guns? Do we really want scum to know who the guns are? They can just shoot inside of them and get guaranteed killshots off rather than having to risk shooting Roses. The payoff is we get 3 ICs for the first couple of days, but they'll drop like flies from scum's guns. The whole point of the roses is that they have potential to block kills from scum, so it feels counterproductive to remove that possibility.

I think having 3 ICs to reduce the lynchpool to 11 early on is a better bet than scum failing to get NKs.

[chkflip]

eyestort, they are both similar but also vastly different. Both net a modicum of information that is arguably useful but also not very useful; however, both are bad because mass claiming is bad and you should feel bad for letting it snowball to this. I hope this helps.

[Knightmare491]

eyestort, they are both similar but also vastly different. Both net a modicum of information that is arguably useful but also not very useful; however, both are bad because mass claiming is bad and you should feel bad for letting it snowball to this. I hope this helps.

okay boomer

[eyestott]

eyestort, they are both similar but also vastly different. Both net a modicum of information that is arguably useful but also not very useful; however, both are bad because mass claiming is bad and you should feel bad for letting it snowball to this. I hope this helps.

I'm crying now
does that make you feel good?

[chkflip]

Absolutely.

[eyestott]

+1 townreadpoint