A-Gerard wrote:
I am mostly going to respond to this out of boredom, as I don't think this conversation actually progresses the game. You will double down into oblivion and never admit you are wrong, and then even if you are lynched and innocent will just blame people for lynching you for being stupid or whatever, so it feels a bit pointless. But challenge accepted.
Im going to respond one last time and then ignore cause we’ve done this before and cluttered the entire DP and we both ended up town I’m pretty sure.
I thought of this after they had claimed. And no, it can’t only be used on people who claim Vanilla. Idrc who operates account. I see that the odds are if scum are forced this early to claim ie if Caine or Martin are scum, they’re likely to claim Vanilla.
You are only talking about this in regards to a vanilla role, meaning if someone claimed otherwise, you wouldn't have the same incentive to lynch them. From my POV I don't really see town having any other reason to claim any role besides vanilla. If I was forced to claim and I was a PR I would just claim vanilla. It doesn't make any sense to claim any thing else.
And that would be stupid because down the line when you’re about to be lynched, you’re going to say oh no no, I lied about my role. And I sure as hell will not believe that down the line. In this game, town should be honest and not force fellow townies to read into the WIFOM and force a decision.
We should treat this game as an all vanilla game unless someone has results or actions that implicate another person.
But it’s fundamentally not. There aren’t only Vanillas and goons. My strategy would not work in an all vanilla game because fundamentally everyone would be vanilla to begin with.
Which is why I haven't been going for claims very hard. I supported you in getting Caines only because I knew you wouldn't let it go like a pitbuill until otherwise and I didn't want to waste a considerable amount of the game on that shit.
That’s your perogative. Lynches via Behavioral analysis, especially during DP1 is more often than not wrong statistically. Last game was an exception, otherwise it’s usually a mislynch. Here there’s statistics to back it up + no one is saying avoid behavioral analysis. I’m promoting it. And in our quarrel here, Martin hasn’t said much.
What are you even talking about? If 3 people know they’re the targets, they have 2 options:
1) Explain why one of the other people should be lynched
2) Explain why someone outside of the two should be lynched.
It generates activity on their end, plus forces the rest of town to choose sides.
You are expecting them to be on board with logic that is already baseline unreasonable. Especially in DP1. In a LYLO situation where you are working through POE, maybe you do this, but not in DP1 lol
Expecting who? The rest of town? Or the 3 people? Regardless, it forces them to choose a side. That in itself is a gold mine. The Shining wagon last game was exonerating evidence for him.
You saying it’s “bad” doesn’t mean it’s objectively bad. It’s objectively and statistically sound. The arguments you and Deidre have made, I’ve repudiated. You have failed to explain why the probability doesn’t make sense.
This logic doesn't make sense if you are town.
The logic makes perfect sense. You just fail to see it because you’re refusing to acknowledge the probability aspect of it and are thinking I’m just saying totally ignore behavioral analysis. Even Deidre sees it now with my explanations. I’ve already told you that you can pick the third person, but you haven’t. You have a vote on me, but you haven’t said what your end goal is? Do you want a claim from me?
You are suggesting lynching someone for something completely NAI, a Vanilla claim, which we have reason to believe multiple exist based on the set up and number of roles.
A Vanilla claim this early isn’t NAI if we are considering that out of 3 people that claim Vanilla, one is likely to be scum. Why? Because scum are with 97% accuracy going to claim Vanilla this early vs a PR. That’s AI information
Scum have incentive to seek mislynches that "sound reasonable on paper" that can be justified. We lynch any of these people and they turn town, I guarantee the next day phase you just double down on your logic and say something like "Okay I was wrong, but the logic was sound so pursuing the lynch wasn't scummy".
Yes, because a 33% chance this early in the game is desirable. And you have yet to provide an alternative. Let’s say you force me to claim, and I claim Vanilla. Are you just going to get another claim from someone else, or lynch within the 3 people who have claimed lol. Cause at that point, you’re doing EXACTLY what I’ve been saying.
If we mislynch here we really accomplish nothing, except for going further down the rabbit hole and saying "Oh well, Caine was innocent, that means Martin is the next lynch, the logic still is valid" and if we mislynch again, you continuously escape blame for lynches that really have nothing to do with behavior, and were fundamentally wrong to begin with.
You have not read my previous posts. This is only for today. Tomorrow we reevaluate with the knowledge of the flip. This isn’t a Dreamer scenario where I’m just saying lynch 3 people back to back. It’s a forcible mechanism to produce reads from people both in the pool and outside.
You can always out argue your way out of mislynch responsibility, but you specifically have an uncanny ability to get away with it as scum more than others because you feel you can bully and intimidate people with a million back and forth responses that seem "logical" to the point where people just accept it out of exhaustion. Sorry buddy, I am not playing that game.
You don’t have to. If you don’t want to understand math, I can’t help you. A couple of people already outright agree with me or see where I’m coming from.
You have 2 options at this stage. Get a third claim and lynch out of the 3, with the third person most likely claiming Vanilla anyways, or get a fourth claim. Pick your poison.
Option 3: Ignore option one and two because they are fundamentally retarded and lynch people for actual behavioral related analysis.
Lol I’ve asked you this again. Why tf can we not do both? We’re not getting more than 3 claims anyways. And when that third person claims Vanilla you’re still just going to lynch them for “behavior” which is exactly what I’m saying we should do