WW33 - Walking Dead [GAME THREAD]

[Hashoosh]

I`m now 100% certain either you or Matt (or both!) are lying about being vanilla village, so yeah, I see you as a good candidate for scum.

I think it`s either Catwalk or Mattimeo, and I`m leaning towards Mattimeo and this time.

[Catwalk]

Still at work, I acknowledge that my second case is also misguided (a multi-vig doesn't necessitate a 1-shot vig). I'm keeping my vote on zakalwe for now for tie break reasons, but I'm still investigating and hoping for better evidence to show up. I may not have much time tonight, but I'll try to do a little bit of digging. I suggest that we stick with setup analysis for a bit longer

[zakalwe]

I'm not sure how to interpret the rule, but it sounds like I'm already doomed to lose any 3-3 tiebreaks today, since I was the first player to reach 3 votes. Jowy?

[Catwalk]

Okay, going to take one last stab at the setup.

Scenario 1: I, Jabbz and Qg are all being truthful.
This is possible. 2 out of 3 claimed vanillas are lying.

2x C => 1 cop
2x D => 2 doctors
3x V => 2 vigilantes
2T setup: 5 power roles + 3 bandits + 5 vanilla.

Scenario 2: Qg is lying, me and Jabbz are truthful
This is NOT possible as max number of kills per night is 2.

2x C = 1 cop
2x D = 2 doctors
1x V = 1 vigilante
2T setup: 4 power + 3 bandits + 6 vanilla.

Scenario 3: Jabbz is lying, me and Qg are truthful
This is possible. 2 out of 3 claimed vanillas are lying.

2x C = 1 cop
2x D = 2 doctors
2x V = 1 vigilante
1T setup: 4 power roles + 3 bandits + 1 serial killer + 5 vanilla.

Scenario 4: Qg and Jabbz are truthful, I'm lying
This is possible (in theory). 1 out of 3 claimed vanillas are lying.

2x D => 2 doctors
3x V => 2 vigilantes
2T setup: 4 power roles + 3 bandits + 6 vanilla.

Scenario 5: More than one of me, Qg and Jabbz are lying
Not possible, due to resulting in either a TTT or TTTT setup without a godfather.

Conclusion:
- 2 out of 3 vanillas are indeed lying. None of you can be sure about that except me, as I'm the only one who knows I'm a cop.
- Qg is a townie, which means that we will have a shot to use at night and we can plan around this. Note that you all have certainty of this regardless of my alignment.

[Catwalk]

Serial killer analysis, the following assumes there is a SK.
Conclusion: We will need to be lucky to win, and we need to hang a bandit today.

If we hang him tonight, we will be left with 3 townies and 2 bandits, one of whom is a roleblocker. He will block Qg and the other will kill, leading to bandits winning. So if we needed anymore confirmation, we now know that we need to not hang the serial killer today.

In the event that we hang a townie, it gets dicey. We're left with 2/2/1 and Qg will be blocked at night. We'd require insane luck to pull that off.

If we hang a bandit we're left with 3/1/1 and 3 kills the following night. We might luck into the SK and the bandit hitting the same target, in which case town wins. If they both hit a townie, whichever faction Qg doesn't kill will win. Lots of double bluffing fun and negotiation will likely take place all night.

No SK analysis.
Conclusion: Hang a bandit and we're golden.

If we hang a townie we're dead, as Qg will be blocked at night. If we hang a bandit we win easily, as Qg will have an extra shot to use and I can scan a player.

The SK scenarios are too messy to deal with, so I'm going to assume that we don't have a SK. That means it's back to the vanilla claims.

[Catwalk]

Hashoosh: First to claim vanilla, even in the face of being threatened with lynching due to a misconstrued case. I think that gives him a lot of town cred. I also think his interaction with me on D2 seems more town than scum.

zakalwe: I think he was instrumental in keeping the Rowain/Azarius spat going. I will try to dig for quotes on this tomorrow, out of time tonight.

Mattimeo: I'm a little unnerved by his knowledge about exactly how the setup works. I think it goes without saying that the bandits have been discussing the setup at great length, and I suspect that he failed to conceal this in-depth knowledge in his eagerness to seem town. It's certainly possible he's just smarter than me, though I had a town lean on him earlier, and it counts in his favour that he helped push Goreripper. However, we were still two votes short of hanging Goreripper due to tie breaker mechanics.

[Jabbz]

So, Qg is claiming to be the multi-shot Vig. I suppose that's a reasonably safe claim, as we know there was at least a 1sV. The odds are much more in favor of a 1sV + SK however. It is possible that he is being honest, we didn't see a second (third) kill on night two, so it could be that the 1sV couldn't repeat.

Despite that however, I find his arguments about who he shot and why to be rather suspect. They sound a lot more like the types of shots a SK would take, especially the night 1 shot. As I said in the post above regarding Zak (I think it was Zak) there wasn't enough information to make a real claim on Day1, which is WHY we ended up sacrificing the guy who didn't respond. Your night two shot makes a lot more sense, but is also EXACTLY what a Sk would do in that situation.

Since you know it is almost 100% unlikely that there is a MsV AND a SK, you can feel free to make that claim, as no one will likely claim it instead. We may not have nailed down a scum, but I think we found our SK. Unfortunately, as others have pointed out, killing the SK is bad for us, so we have to know you are evil, block you perhaps if what Cat says is true (he is I believe claiming to be a MsRB, which means we also have a 1sRB) then we should block him and hope for the best? Or should we trust his judgment, knowing that it is in his best interests to kill a mafia, or he loses anyway? I'm not sure on that point. Either way, We know who you are now Qg, and your time is limited.

You can see here I am arguing this as if I know for a fact there is a 1sv, which, oh yeah, I do know, because I am a 1sV.

Since everyone else is owning up, I am a 1-shot vig.

Protip: Claiming to have an unimportant role is frowned upon as it makes it easier for scum to figure out who has the important roles.

And that after you hinted to be survivor yourself

Do as I say, don't do as I do.

Here is where I started getting suspicious. It was like he was trying to leverage my newness into getting me to admit to a more serious role, trying to get information that I shouldn't be giving at that point.

Azarius: Rowain attacks Jabbz...

Well no innocent child
Lets start with jabbz - everyone knows strangers are up to no good.

...and you revenge vote for him. Except you're not voting due to the Jabbz vote but due to the novice-zak theory. Which is sort of analogous.

This started faster than I expected. Rowain, care to elaborate on that theory?

So Rowain's pair comment makes sense, I'd say, at least as an observation about the interconnectedness of existence.

Then I saw him defending a guy that, at the very least, I had my suspicions about.

I didn't really have anything overly concrete on him, other than a very bad feel. I didn't put a vote on him, because I was afraid doing so would get me targeted, and with as many votes as there were on Ryan, I couldn't see it going any other way, even if I tried to get him. It turned out to be an obviously bad choice. TBH embarrassment as much as anything else has kept me from copping to it, as people didn't seem to be very ok with the idea of a 1sV taking the shot first night :/

So you can use as reference for the following text:

Hashoosh, what devil was Brick speaking of? Richard Nixon?

Me, of course.

Hasoosh, do you have any reactions to the thread so far?

Too many Euro/Asia/Aus time zones, lots of thread spam.

As for writing style, that first in the thread last night was not the poster child of posting-sobriety, and I'll leave it at that.

I'm changing my vote from Brick (what's the vote change protocol for days?) to Ryan, who hasn`t been posting much.

Here is Hashoosh' sole contribution on day 1. The thread has too much spam to comment on anything, but Ryan isn't posting so he needs to hang. At this point in time, Goreripper had 3 votes, and Hashoosh pushed Ryan up to 3 votes. No comment on Goreripper, though.

Also, Catwalk is looking better after rereading day 1. He pushed Commodore a lot on both days, with genuine arguments.

Mattimeo made a case against Goreripper, but it was then shot down by Brick. So if Mattimeo is a bandit, maybe that explains why the bandits would kill Brick. It still looks a bit dubious, though. And I am no closer to believing Jabbz' vig claim after reading day 1. According to him, the only reason he was even voting on day 1 was that otherwise he might be mod-killed. That doesn't exactly match up with killing Novice on night 1. There is not a single trace of his alleged suspicions against Novice in the thread, either.

Hashoosh, do you still think I'm scum with Catwalk? Or what, exactly?

Yes, if you read day 1 you can see I don't have any claims to make. If you read the post where I came out as 1sV, you can see WHY that was the case. I knew for a fact I was innocent, and knowing Az better than any of you, though maybe not in the context of this game, I was pretty confident he wasn't being deceptive. That made Rowain look guilty, and when Novice defended him, look guilty as well. I figured a case was already started against Novice, so he was good for a second day push. Therefore I took a shot on Novice. I didn't call out my suspicions, because I was worried I was an easy first night kill if I was the only one vocalizing arguments against those two, as the other arguments were elsewhere.

Yeah, I made a mistake, I said that in my previous post as well. I was embarrassed by said mistake. I'm used to playing live play Mafia, where this much information delving and analysis isn't really possible. Further, I haven't played in a good while, so I'm rusty. I'm fairly certain, reading back through 19 pages of text, that I'm not the only one who made faulty assumptions (Azarius and Rowain arguments ring a bell). Making mistakes doesn't make me scummy.

[Jabbz]

Also, the writeup on mat is coming, I'm just busy as sin today. Round doesn't end till tomorrow so no huge hurry right?

[zakalwe]

You said "we know there was at least a one shot vig" which is the same thing everybody had been saying. There is no unique knowledge in that statement.

And in that post you are quoting, you say that Q was scummy for shooting Sunrise. That's pretty rich, coming from someone who allegedly shot Novice because he defended Rowain (alignment unknown at the time) who had made some accusations against Azarius (alignment unknown at the time). You barely even dared to vote on day 1, and yet you took your only vig shot on night 1, on that basis? That's not a credible story.

22 1/2 hours to go.

[zakalwe]

zakalwe: I think he was instrumental in keeping the Rowain/Azarius spat going. I will try to dig for quotes on this tomorrow, out of time tonight.

Good luck with that. Instead, why don't you consider why Jabbz kept his vote on Rowain on day 2, if he really wanted to save Azarius. That's a question he has dodged at least twice now.