Posted: Tue May 28, 2019 10:28 am
Challenge: design a scumteam combination of {Chemist, Creature, Nance, RC, Skygazer}
I'd never agree to a blind coalition before. Now the alternative is you do the smarter play improv, well...In post 5714, RadiantCowbells wrote:If a majority of players in the game agree to follow my coalition before I give it I'll post my coalition and we'll do it
Otherwise I'm fine with confirming the 1/2 or 2/1 even though that information is essentially common knowledge
Not taking you up on that oneIn post 5725, Creature wrote:Challenge: design a scumteam combination of {Chemist, Creature, Nance, RC, Skygazer}
Why not ask if he thinks you're scum? This is awkward wording.In post 5728, Chemist1422 wrote:Not taking you up on that oneIn post 5725, Creature wrote:Challenge: design a scumteam combination of {Chemist, Creature, Nance, RC, Skygazer}
Creature, I've got a quick question for you. Do you think we're TvS?
shh I'm trying to bait himIn post 5729, Titus wrote:Why not ask if he thinks you're scum? This is awkward wording.In post 5728, Chemist1422 wrote:Not taking you up on that oneIn post 5725, Creature wrote:Challenge: design a scumteam combination of {Chemist, Creature, Nance, RC, Skygazer}
Creature, I've got a quick question for you. Do you think we're TvS?
Yeah. Day 6 starts immediately and I'll ssit on my hands and vote anything not 1 of 4 after confirming the pools.In post 5731, MariaR wrote:I think we're all just waiting for something at this point. But just vote the coal so it can fail
I'm not sure. If you're not scum then we've got to find who from Nance, RC, Skygazer is scum.In post 5728, Chemist1422 wrote:Not taking you up on that oneIn post 5725, Creature wrote:Challenge: design a scumteam combination of {Chemist, Creature, Nance, RC, Skygazer}
Creature, I've got a quick question for you. Do you think we're TvS?
Why not multiples? I'm starting to believe there may not be scum outside the coalition. Of course, that could be stubbornness but I am shocked at the resistance. If there was scum outside the coalition, you'd think they'd heavy push my plan.In post 5733, Creature wrote:I'm not sure. If you're not scum then we've got to find who from Nance, RC, Skygazer is scum.In post 5728, Chemist1422 wrote:Not taking you up on that oneIn post 5725, Creature wrote:Challenge: design a scumteam combination of {Chemist, Creature, Nance, RC, Skygazer}
Creature, I've got a quick question for you. Do you think we're TvS?
Cool.In post 5734, Titus wrote:Why not multiples? I'm starting to believe there may not be scum outside the coalition. Of course, that could be stubbornness but I am shocked at the resistance. If there was scum outside the coalition, you'd think they'd heavy push my plan.In post 5733, Creature wrote:I'm not sure. If you're not scum then we've got to find who from Nance, RC, Skygazer is scum.In post 5728, Chemist1422 wrote:Not taking you up on that oneIn post 5725, Creature wrote:Challenge: design a scumteam combination of {Chemist, Creature, Nance, RC, Skygazer}
Creature, I've got a quick question for you. Do you think we're TvS?
Possible but I would expect scum to support my plan although my plan is logically optimal, it provides no short term informationIn post 5736, Creature wrote:Could be the resistance comes from town?
Dunno. Shit is weird though.In post 5735, Creature wrote:Cool.In post 5734, Titus wrote:Why not multiples? I'm starting to believe there may not be scum outside the coalition. Of course, that could be stubbornness but I am shocked at the resistance. If there was scum outside the coalition, you'd think they'd heavy push my plan.In post 5733, Creature wrote:I'm not sure. If you're not scum then we've got to find who from Nance, RC, Skygazer is scum.In post 5728, Chemist1422 wrote:Not taking you up on that oneIn post 5725, Creature wrote:Challenge: design a scumteam combination of {Chemist, Creature, Nance, RC, Skygazer}
Creature, I've got a quick question for you. Do you think we're TvS?
Who are the scumteam from Chem, Nance, RC, Sky and me?
but what ifIn post 5737, Titus wrote:Possible but I would expect scum to support my plan although my plan is logically optimal, it provides no short term informationIn post 5736, Creature wrote:Could be the resistance comes from town?
Why can’t you tell us what it is first? But it’s got to be better than Titus’, which is guaranteed to fail. At this point, I just want anything to go through. I pretty much stopped caring about this game after we vetoed PB.In post 5714, RadiantCowbells wrote:If a majority of players in the game agree to follow my coalition before I give it I'll post my coalition and we'll do it
Otherwise I'm fine with confirming the 1/2 or 2/1 even though that information is essentially common knowledge
They pretty much aren't. The closest thing to a supporter is Moongrass. That dude's been crickets.In post 5739, NanceFloor wrote:but what ifIn post 5737, Titus wrote:Possible but I would expect scum to support my plan although my plan is logically optimal, it provides no short term informationIn post 5736, Creature wrote:Could be the resistance comes from town?
scum is supporting your plan ¿
- dann
+1In post 5721, Succinct wrote:Can I say the idea of confirming it wasn't 3-0's absurd and seems like a total waste?
I don't exactly trust you, but if your plan isn't simply "let's do Titus's plan", I immediately trust it more than I do Titus's.In post 5714, RadiantCowbells wrote:If a majority of players in the game agree to follow my coalition before I give it I'll post my coalition and we'll do it
Otherwise I'm fine with confirming the 1/2 or 2/1 even though that information is essentially common knowledge
Veto was always going to kill one town. The better play was 4 and then doing the coalition to create two irrevocable boxes that trap scum or autowin.In post 5743, NanceFloor wrote:+1In post 5721, Succinct wrote:Can I say the idea of confirming it wasn't 3-0's absurd and seems like a total waste?
I don't exactly trust you, but if your plan isn't simply "let's do Titus's plan", I immediately trust it more than I do Titus's.In post 5714, RadiantCowbells wrote:If a majority of players in the game agree to follow my coalition before I give it I'll post my coalition and we'll do it
Otherwise I'm fine with confirming the 1/2 or 2/1 even though that information is essentially common knowledge
You should have been here when we did veto, maybe you could have gotten people to listen to my 3 in coalition veto plan and we’d still have PB in the game.
Of the available options, I think any coalition that doesn’t have either Chemist/Creature and TD/Moon, has a very good chance of passing. With PB, probably a lock but meh.
I seriously doubt that’s possible. I just can’t see a world where either RC or Sky are scum here, since I can’t seeIn post 5742, Titus wrote:They pretty much aren't. The closest thing to a supporter is Moongrass. That dude's been crickets.In post 5739, NanceFloor wrote:but what ifIn post 5737, Titus wrote:Possible but I would expect scum to support my plan although my plan is logically optimal, it provides no short term informationIn post 5736, Creature wrote:Could be the resistance comes from town?
scum is supporting your plan ¿
- dann
Second, my coalition is not guaranteed to fail. If we suppose you town for sake of argument, only 3 others in the original coalition would need to be scum. It's theoretically possible my coalition wins the game.
It's also an argument I want to close off from scum.
[/quote]Veto was always going to kill one town. The better play was 4 and then doing the coalition to create two irrevocable boxes that trap scum or autowin.
We also should not who died with PB. Clemency. That's someone no one was TRing. That gives greater credence that at least one of Chemist and Creature is scum. ~ Titus
What's to stop your proposed scumteam from killing me and then arguing that I'm correct though? By doing my coalition plan, you protect your townread from that argument and show that the thought is paranoia.In post 5745, NanceFloor wrote:I seriously doubt that’s possible. I just can’t see a world where either RC or Sky are scum here, since I can’t seeIn post 5742, Titus wrote:They pretty much aren't. The closest thing to a supporter is Moongrass. That dude's been crickets.In post 5739, NanceFloor wrote:but what ifIn post 5737, Titus wrote:Possible but I would expect scum to support my plan although my plan is logically optimal, it provides no short term informationIn post 5736, Creature wrote:Could be the resistance comes from town?
scum is supporting your plan ¿
- dann
Second, my coalition is not guaranteed to fail. If we suppose you town for sake of argument, only 3 others in the original coalition would need to be scum. It's theoretically possible my coalition wins the game.
It's also an argument I want to close off from scum.bothChemist/Creature being scum because of the dance pairings. I think one of Chemist/Creature + TD/Moon is my best current guess for the scumteam.
I would shoot TD or Moon as I hard TR both slots based on behavior and dance strategy.In post 5746, NanceFloor wrote:That’s my point, had we substituted either TD or Moon for PB, we’d now know which one, because no way either TD/Moon were dying in that scenario, so one of Creature/Chemist would be dead along with Clemency and the survivor likely confiscum.