Hinter, on 24 January 2013 - 12:12 AM, said:
Silencer, on 23 January 2013 - 11:49 PM, said:
Tattersail, on 23 January 2013 - 11:29 PM, said:
I'm not going to be here when day times out, I've been online all day shooting the Shit, I've ran out if time. Who would you have me leave my vote on? I'm not going to be able to change it. I think you are less likely than sixty to turn out scum. HO could be scum, he came on and ran after a few posts.
This sounds like you know something we don't, especially when suggesting to Bliss that she should remove her vote.
Right, back on my PC now, so allow me to elaborate (if it came off like that, you can blame it on the fact that I don't like posting from my phone overmuch, so was being brief and therefore a bit cryptic).
OK, so, let's assume we have a WCS where we have three scum still alive - not going to make any claims about the actual game setup, just that it's potentially d-day given we have no CF and even with one a lot of people seem to be thinking there may have been a four-man scum team anyway.
With me so far?
OK, given this, if we lynch wrong today we lose. Given this, putting two votes on any one person who *isn't* scum is potentially game-ending. Therefore either Tatts or Bliss should remove vote for Sixty - now, it should really be Tatts, because his vote is going to move later, and I don't want us defaulting to Sixty when it could lose us the game, but if he wants to leave his vote somewhere it might as well be there (and if we end up lynching Sixty it will help if Sixty is scum).
BUT! Here's the fun part: if Tatts is innocent, then without him we cannot lynch scum, given d-day, correct? Therefore if we get a really good scum candidate today and try and vote them off while Tatt's vote is pinned down or not available, then that player is probably scum if there is then resistance to their lynch. In fact, it would be a no-win situation for scum - they either lynch one of their own (averting d-day) or highlight their entire team (handing us the game).
That's the risky play.
The sensible play is, given d-day, we don't lynch. (This is that one scenario I mentioned in my mafia 101 post, btw) Instead we let it go to night, scum kills one person. This 1) narrows the field of suspects. 2) Gives us another day with a reduced field before it's do-or-die.
So assuming everyone is in agreement that today *could* be d-day, we either need to go with the risky play (see if someone cannot be lynched), in which case Tatts might as well leave his vote on Sixty because we're taking a fifty-fifty gamble on anyone. Or we go the sensible play - in which case Tatts OR Lady B really need to remove their votes from Sixty because if he is not scum then if/when all three hypothetically remaining scum get on at the same time they will pile on the votes and it's game over.
Does everyone understand the basic logic? Is there anything glaringly wrong with this most basic of assumptions about the potential for today being d-day and the ensuing correct or risky choices we have facing us?
Help
