Hi Az, I'm somebody whose default mode of thought about how to play mafia comes across as scummy, but I'm really bad at playing scum and can be very transparently town when I have something to dig into.
Voxx/Vaimes both think I should have been doing my normal town thing tonight, but I didn't really have much time so I decided to go fishing instead.
You should know that the only time I've rolled scum in a game with both of them, Voxx caught me for making an awkward sounding RVS vote. I decided to emulate that this game to see what would happen.
I'm sleeping now, and will post something real in the morning.
As soon as the game really started, it didn't look like we'd be able to beat any of the three of you in Final 3, and needed to chain lynch Killjoy, Rhand, Ghosting. Which, uh, I made kind of difficult.
Sorry everybody for dropping off the face of the planet here and significantly hurting game health. In the end, signing up for this one was a mistake and my schedule punished me for it.
DoTA and NAG didn't deserve the fate I saddled them with.
That said, this setup felt very town favored as long as town was willing to lynch twice on Day1 and lynch through the rest on Day2. Getting 3 mislychnes in such a small game is pretty OP. I probably wouldn't play this setup again as is.
I wouldn't sort them into two groups, I'd just analyze their behaviours and motivations, try to read the posts from a town mindset, from a scum mindset, etc. But if I had to answer your question, I'd probably group it based on how people want the days to go forth. I feel like rushing for a massclaim is inherently scummy, and that wanting multiple town day one also is scummy (also, importantly, we're more likely to lose our PRs before they can do anything if we do mislynch a lot at first).
Ok, here's where my head was at on that. I'd split either based on how many lynches people want Day1
0: Killjoy, Rhand
1: mal, Ghosting, DoTA
2: Nacho, grimclaw, Iso
-OR- based on how many days people want the game to be:
2: Nacho, grimclaw, mal
3: Killjoy, Rhand, Ghosting, DoTA, Iso
I sincerely doubt that both scum would decide to push No-lynch here.
I also think that the other two people pushing for only 2 day phases are both town, especially because the arguments against it have amounted to "But but but the PRs, guys?" I really don't see how scum deal with town controlling 5 kills in an 8 person game. Easier to stall and try to keep it from actually happening than give in.
2. I don't find "alive too long" to be a reliable tell in any form of the word, and don't find the loss of that tell to be particularly significant. Iso is the player with the biggest rep in the game, but if he didn't die N1, I wouldn't be suspicious: hell, I wouldn't even be surprised. I'm pushing all of my cards on the table because it's a high priority to get everyone on the same page with the optimal strategy for this game. I don't have time to mess around and obfuscate things in order to trap scum because I don't know if pushing bad strategies is a scumtell for anyone here or not.
3. And I'm not advocating for claims, period. If you are the doctor and about to get lynched, your claim shouldn't save you, meaning that there is absolutely no point to claiming at all. The only only only claims that should possibly pop are are Ascetic or Bodyguard roles; both can confirm themselves by dying, and while it's not likely that scum will shoot a scummy player for the free kill, it's a possibility that could be worth exploring.
4. I understand your concerns with not being able to get lynches done in time, but I don't think that it's productive to give up on 2 lynches for Day 1 just because you think we can't hit the activity requirements. I don't care so much if counterwagons exist or not; I only care that the two lynches that are being pushed are on people who make sense and is for a good reason. I don't see the point in not considering multiple suspects at once.
I think the extra flip of information is very important because of how that extra flip affects our chances of hitting scum before night. I think your concern about diminishing returns is a valid one, but also a concern that it makes more sense to monitor while the game is in progress; if we can't do two lynches, we can't do two lynches and will adjust if we must, but there's no reason not to push for two lynches while hope is in the air. My opinion on night actions are not necessarily that they are irrelevant; I just feel that they are being severely overvalued this game and am probably overselling their uselessness based on that concern.
2. Sure
3. If this was a noflip setup, I'd 100% agree. But scum will know who we kill even if they don't claim. And even if scum have doc/watcher/bodyguard, they still have to pretend to shoot around protection if we don't lynch them. Which is /good/ because maybe they'll remove a mislynch from our pool. Which, in a game this small with so many mislynches, could checkmate them.
4. Sure
Ok, here's the argument I was missing before for only lynching one player toDay:
If we're lynching two people today, its because we're trying to maximize our chance of hitting scum. So right after our first lynch, our second lynch is not "The person most likely to be scum if our first lynch hit scum" it should be "the person most likely to be scum if our first lynch hit town". So, lynching 2 people Day1 is not a plan that will ever hit 2 scum in the first two lynches. Which is fine, that's being kind of greedy and unreasonable anyways. But that does a couple things.
1. If we're correct on our first guess, lynching somebody based on that person being town gives us less lynches to aim at possible buddies.
2. If we want to hit scum in our first two guesses, it would be useful if we had an anti-aligned pair where we're pretty certain one is scum. Massclaim could auto give us this, Rhand/Killjoy need to interact with each other more before I'd give them that rating.
So basically, 2 lynches on Day1 gives us a higher chance of hitting scum Day1, but lower reward for doing so. I also think that it decreases our chances of hitting scum in our first 3 lynches, because I think the additional information before lynch 2 is more important than the additional information before lynch 3.
And that's in addition to people agreeing to shruglynch one person toDay if they believe that it will also let them get enough support for the lynch they really want. Don't think that's a healthy dynamic for wagons.
I haven't read much yet so will come back to soon to add more detailed comments, but I think we should aim to lynch just one person today. There's a lot of information to gain from lynching two people day one, but I think the risk of lynching two town would be too great to chance. It'd be different if we mass claimed, but there's no reason to do that just yet. I do somewhat support a mass claim D2, maybe D3.
What's the difference in risk between lynching two town on Day1, and lynching 1 town on Day1 and 1 town as our first lynch on Day2.
Do you think the game should even go to Day3?
What kind of order should the massclaim you support go in?
If you had to sort the players in the game into two groups based on the most important thing that's happened so far, what defining characteristic would you use to sort them? Give the groupings. How many scum are in each group? Is that because of independent reads, or because of the nature of each group?
@mallorean: What information were you hoping to attain by slowrolling which option you thought was best?
Literally anything? Not triple posting in the first 5 post of the thread? Not starting the conversation I'm having with Nacho right now until everybody had showed up and posted at least once (oops, that one didn't happen)?
If we are lynching two people today, how should we budget our time? Should we set a soft deadline for ourselves to lynch one player by next monday, and then spend the second week on our second lynch? Or should we spend the full two weeks discussing before lynching both targets back to back before deadline? Something in between?
1. It's a nice option to have, sure, but I don't think it's an option that offers us significant advantage. Mafia can only fake a guilty if they have either the Watcher or the Tracker roles and they don't get lynched D1, and typically, claim situations like this end up in obvious alignments based on offense or lack of defense.
2. Regardless of scumteam distribution, scum having as many nights as possible is only to their advantage; if I rolled scum in this game, I would likely push a multi-night plan because it would increase the chances of me being able to take out people who are threats in day play. If scum only get one night to shoot and they have multiple guards against shooting people, then they won't be able to shoot who they want without getting ****ed over.
3. Don't care about roles; town can have them, mafia can have them. Claims won't be able to save people today, scummy people get lynched regardless of their role claim.
4. I disagree completely with this point; why do you think that it's in the case? I plan on playing hard and fast, and I plan and having influence while I do so. If Iso is scum, I have a little bit of vengeance that I've been seeking, and if I'm town, I'm sure he will play as hard as fast as I will. We are not in a large enough game where there's an excuse for apathy or laziness in these first couple of lynches, and leading by example is typically a pretty effective strategy and I promise I'll be a good role model for all the lurking girls and boys.
Witchhunt is a much, much different world than this game is. In Witch Hunt, you have a Priest who has hard information and an Acolyte who has hard information and oracles and etc etc that compensate for the lack of flips; in this game type, we have a watcher and a tracker for our investigative roles that could end up accomplishing absolutely nothing. Working with no flips in this game means working with no hard information and believe me when I say that is not something that we want at all.
Your concern on the 4 lynch day phase is noted, but again, I don't forsee it becoming a problem. If the town is active and engaged, we will win this game. If it isn't (which is the only reason we wouldn't be able to swing the 4 lynch day phase), then we're probably losing and a more conservative lynch plan won't be able to compensate for it.
1. Sure
2. Mixed. Even with the available protection, there's definitely a player type that the heuristic "If the mafia haven't shot you by DayX, you're mafia" applies to. AND you've already said that you'd consider anybody that gets Ascetic to fall into that as well. Also, if you truly think "Scum are the ones that would push multi-night plans", I'm not sure why you keep pushing your cards to the middle of the table here, before everybody has even checked in. You can think I'm trying to have it both ways because I /am/. Strategic ambiguity is good here, letting both options seem viable in early discussions is good here.
3. No. If its GOOD that scum have to try to avoid protection like you said in your previous point, then its BAD if they know who has what, because its easier to avoid protection. I am NOT advocating for swinging the lynch off somebody just because they claimed doctor. I AM saying that fewer actual lynches will result in fewer claims. Weighting this as less important than having an additional flip before committing to lynch #3 is fine, weighting this 0 is not.
4. My only experience here so far has been Off the Grid mafia. Let's just say that it wasn't the shining pinnacle of activity that I would have hoped for. If you say that this playerlist is going to be better about that, I'll take you on your word. Until then, I'll be a bit dubious. And when I say, separation between wagons, I mean, I would be very disappointed if our second lynch today was just the counterwagon for the first lynch. If you're promising actual reconsideration, I'd ideally like to see 4 separate real wagons (3 would also be fine). First lynch and a legit counterwagon, second lynch on somebody completely different AND a counterwagon on somebody else completely different. That's how I try to play Day2, and I'm sincerely worried that doing Day2 on Day1 will result in that not happening.
I fully understand the difference between this setup and WH. But we're not arguing between the difference between no hard information and lots of hard information. We're currently arguing about the difference between 1 lynch w/flip + wagon information + night actions, vs 2 lynches w/flips + wagon information + night actions. I'm saying that 2 lynches has diminishing returns on wagon information and could affect night actions in a bad way, you're saying that you won't let there be diminishing returns on wagon information, night actions are irrelevant, and an additional flip worth of information outweighs everything else.
I really, really think that it's important to be working with as much information as possible before we have a chance of losing; in the case of B, if we mislynch once, we have no information until the game is over, which is incredibly brutal. In the case of C, we don't know if we're about to win or about to lose and I think that's sucks a lot.
Don't get me wrong, option E) is easily the third best option from my initial list (and 4 of the other options are completely unacceptable), and I'd be fine going with it.
I'd just prefer to only do one lynch toDay because:
1. If we have duplicate claims during massclaim, I'd like the option of lynching both. Not necessarily because that's what we'd do, but because the threat of doing so makes scum gambits far less likely and strengthens town power roles.
2. The scumteam knows the setup. We don't. They know if its better for their role and player distribution to have 2 days or 3 days. I think it would better for town to maintain strategic ambiguity on that point until after the massclaim on Day2. And I think that the average strength of plans B) and C) is better than D) and E), mostly because I think option D) is much weaker than the other 3.
3. The more wagons we run up today, the more claims we're going to run into. This is part of the playing the game, but keeping roles on the down low as much as possible is in our interest toDay.
4. I don't think that there's going to be much separation between our two wagons today if we go for lynching two. People just aren't going to care enough on Day1 to reconsider or draw new lines. While I think that Day2, we won't have as much of that problem because we'll either have a pile of lynches to find the scumbuddy and we won't need to do much reconsidering. -OR- we'll need to the second lynch that day like we're in LYLO, which usually does a great job of focusing people's minds.
As far as your concern, not knowing if we're in LYLO or not, that just isn't as much of a concern for me. The other sites I usually play on play -Hunt setups with no flips. I'm used to not knowing if I'm in LYLO or not, and having to plan for multiple possible worlds. Its very very doable, AND it gives you another strong tell to look for (scum know whether you're in LYLO or not, and obviously will be voting very differently if you are).
MY only concern is that I'm not sure we'll actually be up for the logistics of lynching 4 people in a single phase. That's roughly equivilent to 72 hour phases if we spread them out, which I can do, but idk about the rest of the playerlist. If the group really doesn't think that we could actually follow through on a 4 lynch day phase, I'd be fine going with the more conservative and lower payoff option E). Going for the high damage combo doesn't really matter if you drop it half way through.
There's a difference between "Scum don't need to lie, so a plan whose primary benefit is catching scum lying is bad" and "Scum won't ever lie, so we don't need to hedge against them lying". Also, while my current valuation for this setup is "Scum probably shouldn't lie outside of a couple specific gambits", I'm not naive enough to think that everybody else in this game, most of whom I haven't played with and all of whom come from a completely different meta than what I'm used to, will have the same valuation I do. Scum could disagree with me on this, scum could have the roles for "a couple specific gambits", or scum could just be bad at open setups without set alignments for roles.
I understand the normal role of a watcher yes. That's not how it works in this game though. It's still a toss up who to believe between the watcher and the killer, with no real time to sort out what's what. Do the math, we won't have the luxury of lynching one, going to night for a reveal, then lynching the other.
The same applies to the tracker.
This is actually part of why I'd like our plan to be an option select between B) and C).
Had you thought about this issue when you said that you were going to /barn Nacho on 2 lynches Day1 being best?
Long answer:
Given the fact that GJ is the gamehost, I considered it and considered including no-lynch scenarios in my list. But, no-lynching in a setup that doesn't include guaranteed strong town info roles doesn't do much, especially when scum can just generally true-claim. And it completely blanks Day1 for votal analysis.
That's where I disagree. If scum needs to lie, then that creates dichotomies.
We can just lynch those.
If they don't lie, they might have to clear townies.
Scum don't need to lie in this setup, and them telling the truth doesn't really clear anybody.
I think the Doctor, Ascetic, and Tracker should claim, possibly also the Watcher, and they should have lynch immunity for Day 1.
On Night 1, the Watcher targets the Doctor, the Doctor targets the Tracker, and the Tracker runs loose. We lynch on behavior and reconvene later on, and don't waste our investigations or protections on the Ascetic.
Any input on this? At the very least, the Ascetic should claim on Day 1 as they are effectively a Miller, here.
Doctor and Tracker should both claim if they're facing a lynch (and we'll consider moving the lynch elsewhere at that point), but they should absolutely /NOT/ claim right away. Giving people lynch immunity from the start of the day1 absolutely wreck's town's ability to do votal analysis later.
Besides that, I think your plan is exceptionally bad if we only plan on having 2 day phases instead of 3. You're basically making the watcher unable to catch fakeclaims and/or the nk, AND the doctor unable to bounce a kill in order to get a guaranteed Tracker result and more power roles alive going into Night 2. Even if we do have a Night 2, it also loses a lot of value in worlds where any of doc/tracker/watcher are scum because you're giving the doc and watcher safe things to trueclaim and a built in explanation why they didn't catch anybody/bounce a kill, and getting a guaranteed tracker result doesn't do much if the tracker is scum and doesn't have to worry about getting caught out by the Watcher or Ascetic.
As far as an Ascetic claim goes, I do think that the upside of not wasting our tracks/docs on him probably outweighs telling the scumteam which player won't be getting protected toNight and him being able to catch certain varieties of fakeclaims. But he still should /NOT/ claim right now, again because it ruins votal stuff for the entire day. If we decide the Ascetic should claim, they should do so at the last possible moment before Night.
Ok, let's take a moment to go over the implications of the "lynch as many times as we want" rule. Here's a list of what we could do (ignoring doc saves and winning early)
A) Lynch 1 Day1, Lynch 1 Day2, Lynch 2 Day3
Allowable mislynches: 2 (but the second only unlocks after lynching 1 scum)
H) Lynch 6 Day1
Allowable mislynches: 4 (but the fourth only unlocks after lynching 1 scum)
So, we have a tradeoff to make between having more mislynches to play with vs having more information from night actions by deciding whether 4, 5, or 6 of the possible kills this game are directed by the thread.
Additionally, we can decide which lynches we want to maximize flip information on. Compare E) and F) assuming we've lynched twice and we're considering the same player for our 3rd lynch in both scenarios. In E), we'd have more information before actually making that 3rd lynch (#1 & #2's flips + everybody's Night actions). In F) we'd have less information for that lynch, but /more/ information for lynches #4 and #5, because we'd also have #3's flip (though the utility of this could be less than that because of losing the night action from #3's possible role)
So, as an open question to the thread, which of these lynch scenarios should we pursue? (I have an opinion on this, but I'll be withholding my answer until more of the thread has checked in)
Voxx/Vaimes both think I should have been doing my normal town thing tonight, but I didn't really have much time so I decided to go fishing instead.
You should know that the only time I've rolled scum in a game with both of them, Voxx caught me for making an awkward sounding RVS vote. I decided to emulate that this game to see what would happen.
I'm sleeping now, and will post something real in the morning.
Good.
Day1 Vote Cyan
As soon as the game really started, it didn't look like we'd be able to beat any of the three of you in Final 3, and needed to chain lynch Killjoy, Rhand, Ghosting. Which, uh, I made kind of difficult.
Great job being obviously town.
DoTA and NAG didn't deserve the fate I saddled them with.
That said, this setup felt very town favored as long as town was willing to lynch twice on Day1 and lynch through the rest on Day2. Getting 3 mislychnes in such a small game is pretty OP. I probably wouldn't play this setup again as is.
Ok, here's where my head was at on that. I'd split either based on how many lynches people want Day1
0: Killjoy, Rhand
1: mal, Ghosting, DoTA
2: Nacho, grimclaw, Iso
-OR- based on how many days people want the game to be:
2: Nacho, grimclaw, mal
3: Killjoy, Rhand, Ghosting, DoTA, Iso
I sincerely doubt that both scum would decide to push No-lynch here.
I also think that the other two people pushing for only 2 day phases are both town, especially because the arguments against it have amounted to "But but but the PRs, guys?" I really don't see how scum deal with town controlling 5 kills in an 8 person game. Easier to stall and try to keep it from actually happening than give in.
2. Sure
3. If this was a noflip setup, I'd 100% agree. But scum will know who we kill even if they don't claim. And even if scum have doc/watcher/bodyguard, they still have to pretend to shoot around protection if we don't lynch them. Which is /good/ because maybe they'll remove a mislynch from our pool. Which, in a game this small with so many mislynches, could checkmate them.
4. Sure
Ok, here's the argument I was missing before for only lynching one player toDay:
If we're lynching two people today, its because we're trying to maximize our chance of hitting scum. So right after our first lynch, our second lynch is not "The person most likely to be scum if our first lynch hit scum" it should be "the person most likely to be scum if our first lynch hit town". So, lynching 2 people Day1 is not a plan that will ever hit 2 scum in the first two lynches. Which is fine, that's being kind of greedy and unreasonable anyways. But that does a couple things.
1. If we're correct on our first guess, lynching somebody based on that person being town gives us less lynches to aim at possible buddies.
2. If we want to hit scum in our first two guesses, it would be useful if we had an anti-aligned pair where we're pretty certain one is scum. Massclaim could auto give us this, Rhand/Killjoy need to interact with each other more before I'd give them that rating.
So basically, 2 lynches on Day1 gives us a higher chance of hitting scum Day1, but lower reward for doing so. I also think that it decreases our chances of hitting scum in our first 3 lynches, because I think the additional information before lynch 2 is more important than the additional information before lynch 3.
And that's in addition to people agreeing to shruglynch one person toDay if they believe that it will also let them get enough support for the lynch they really want. Don't think that's a healthy dynamic for wagons.
Day1 Vote Ghosting
Here's some detailed comments for you to add:
What's the difference in risk between lynching two town on Day1, and lynching 1 town on Day1 and 1 town as our first lynch on Day2.
Do you think the game should even go to Day3?
What kind of order should the massclaim you support go in?
If you had to sort the players in the game into two groups based on the most important thing that's happened so far, what defining characteristic would you use to sort them? Give the groupings. How many scum are in each group? Is that because of independent reads, or because of the nature of each group?
Literally anything? Not triple posting in the first 5 post of the thread? Not starting the conversation I'm having with Nacho right now until everybody had showed up and posted at least once (oops, that one didn't happen)?
If we are lynching two people today, how should we budget our time? Should we set a soft deadline for ourselves to lynch one player by next monday, and then spend the second week on our second lynch? Or should we spend the full two weeks discussing before lynching both targets back to back before deadline? Something in between?
1. Sure
2. Mixed. Even with the available protection, there's definitely a player type that the heuristic "If the mafia haven't shot you by DayX, you're mafia" applies to. AND you've already said that you'd consider anybody that gets Ascetic to fall into that as well. Also, if you truly think "Scum are the ones that would push multi-night plans", I'm not sure why you keep pushing your cards to the middle of the table here, before everybody has even checked in. You can think I'm trying to have it both ways because I /am/. Strategic ambiguity is good here, letting both options seem viable in early discussions is good here.
3. No. If its GOOD that scum have to try to avoid protection like you said in your previous point, then its BAD if they know who has what, because its easier to avoid protection. I am NOT advocating for swinging the lynch off somebody just because they claimed doctor. I AM saying that fewer actual lynches will result in fewer claims. Weighting this as less important than having an additional flip before committing to lynch #3 is fine, weighting this 0 is not.
4. My only experience here so far has been Off the Grid mafia. Let's just say that it wasn't the shining pinnacle of activity that I would have hoped for. If you say that this playerlist is going to be better about that, I'll take you on your word. Until then, I'll be a bit dubious. And when I say, separation between wagons, I mean, I would be very disappointed if our second lynch today was just the counterwagon for the first lynch. If you're promising actual reconsideration, I'd ideally like to see 4 separate real wagons (3 would also be fine). First lynch and a legit counterwagon, second lynch on somebody completely different AND a counterwagon on somebody else completely different. That's how I try to play Day2, and I'm sincerely worried that doing Day2 on Day1 will result in that not happening.
I fully understand the difference between this setup and WH. But we're not arguing between the difference between no hard information and lots of hard information. We're currently arguing about the difference between 1 lynch w/flip + wagon information + night actions, vs 2 lynches w/flips + wagon information + night actions. I'm saying that 2 lynches has diminishing returns on wagon information and could affect night actions in a bad way, you're saying that you won't let there be diminishing returns on wagon information, night actions are irrelevant, and an additional flip worth of information outweighs everything else.
Don't get me wrong, option E) is easily the third best option from my initial list (and 4 of the other options are completely unacceptable), and I'd be fine going with it.
I'd just prefer to only do one lynch toDay because:
1. If we have duplicate claims during massclaim, I'd like the option of lynching both. Not necessarily because that's what we'd do, but because the threat of doing so makes scum gambits far less likely and strengthens town power roles.
2. The scumteam knows the setup. We don't. They know if its better for their role and player distribution to have 2 days or 3 days. I think it would better for town to maintain strategic ambiguity on that point until after the massclaim on Day2. And I think that the average strength of plans B) and C) is better than D) and E), mostly because I think option D) is much weaker than the other 3.
3. The more wagons we run up today, the more claims we're going to run into. This is part of the playing the game, but keeping roles on the down low as much as possible is in our interest toDay.
4. I don't think that there's going to be much separation between our two wagons today if we go for lynching two. People just aren't going to care enough on Day1 to reconsider or draw new lines. While I think that Day2, we won't have as much of that problem because we'll either have a pile of lynches to find the scumbuddy and we won't need to do much reconsidering. -OR- we'll need to the second lynch that day like we're in LYLO, which usually does a great job of focusing people's minds.
As far as your concern, not knowing if we're in LYLO or not, that just isn't as much of a concern for me. The other sites I usually play on play -Hunt setups with no flips. I'm used to not knowing if I'm in LYLO or not, and having to plan for multiple possible worlds. Its very very doable, AND it gives you another strong tell to look for (scum know whether you're in LYLO or not, and obviously will be voting very differently if you are).
MY only concern is that I'm not sure we'll actually be up for the logistics of lynching 4 people in a single phase. That's roughly equivilent to 72 hour phases if we spread them out, which I can do, but idk about the rest of the playerlist. If the group really doesn't think that we could actually follow through on a 4 lynch day phase, I'd be fine going with the more conservative and lower payoff option E). Going for the high damage combo doesn't really matter if you drop it half way through.
Sure.
There's a difference between "Scum don't need to lie, so a plan whose primary benefit is catching scum lying is bad" and "Scum won't ever lie, so we don't need to hedge against them lying". Also, while my current valuation for this setup is "Scum probably shouldn't lie outside of a couple specific gambits", I'm not naive enough to think that everybody else in this game, most of whom I haven't played with and all of whom come from a completely different meta than what I'm used to, will have the same valuation I do. Scum could disagree with me on this, scum could have the roles for "a couple specific gambits", or scum could just be bad at open setups without set alignments for roles.
On a related note:
This is actually part of why I'd like our plan to be an option select between B) and C).
Had you thought about this issue when you said that you were going to /barn Nacho on 2 lynches Day1 being best?
<.<
There's only 5 people around so far so somebody confirmed without posting in the thread. Which would be Killjoy, Ghosting, or
Day1 Vote DoTArchon
Must be busy in scumchat, huh?
Short answer:
Because its really bad.
Long answer:
Given the fact that GJ is the gamehost, I considered it and considered including no-lynch scenarios in my list. But, no-lynching in a setup that doesn't include guaranteed strong town info roles doesn't do much, especially when scum can just generally true-claim. And it completely blanks Day1 for votal analysis.
Scum don't need to lie in this setup, and them telling the truth doesn't really clear anybody.
Doctor and Tracker should both claim if they're facing a lynch (and we'll consider moving the lynch elsewhere at that point), but they should absolutely /NOT/ claim right away. Giving people lynch immunity from the start of the day1 absolutely wreck's town's ability to do votal analysis later.
Besides that, I think your plan is exceptionally bad if we only plan on having 2 day phases instead of 3. You're basically making the watcher unable to catch fakeclaims and/or the nk, AND the doctor unable to bounce a kill in order to get a guaranteed Tracker result and more power roles alive going into Night 2. Even if we do have a Night 2, it also loses a lot of value in worlds where any of doc/tracker/watcher are scum because you're giving the doc and watcher safe things to trueclaim and a built in explanation why they didn't catch anybody/bounce a kill, and getting a guaranteed tracker result doesn't do much if the tracker is scum and doesn't have to worry about getting caught out by the Watcher or Ascetic.
As far as an Ascetic claim goes, I do think that the upside of not wasting our tracks/docs on him probably outweighs telling the scumteam which player won't be getting protected toNight and him being able to catch certain varieties of fakeclaims. But he still should /NOT/ claim right now, again because it ruins votal stuff for the entire day. If we decide the Ascetic should claim, they should do so at the last possible moment before Night.
A) Lynch 1 Day1, Lynch 1 Day2, Lynch 2 Day3
Allowable mislynches: 2 (but the second only unlocks after lynching 1 scum)
B) Lynch 1 Day1, Lynch 2 Day2, Lynch 1 Day3
Allowable mislynches: 2
C) Lynch 1 Day1, Lynch 4 Day2
Allowable mislynches: 3 (but the third only unlocks after lynching 1 scum)
D) Lynch 2 Day1, Lynch 1 Day2, Lynch 1 Day3
Allowable mislynches: 2
E) Lynch 2 Day1, Lynch 3 Day2
Allowable mislynches: 3 (but the third only unlocks after lynching 1 scum)
F) Lynch 3 Day1, Lynch 2 Day2
Allowable mislynches: 3 (but the third only unlocks after lynching 1 scum)
G) Lynch 4 Day1, Lynch 1 Day2
Allowable mislynches: 3
H) Lynch 6 Day1
Allowable mislynches: 4 (but the fourth only unlocks after lynching 1 scum)
So, we have a tradeoff to make between having more mislynches to play with vs having more information from night actions by deciding whether 4, 5, or 6 of the possible kills this game are directed by the thread.
Additionally, we can decide which lynches we want to maximize flip information on. Compare E) and F) assuming we've lynched twice and we're considering the same player for our 3rd lynch in both scenarios. In E), we'd have more information before actually making that 3rd lynch (#1 & #2's flips + everybody's Night actions). In F) we'd have less information for that lynch, but /more/ information for lynches #4 and #5, because we'd also have #3's flip (though the utility of this could be less than that because of losing the night action from #3's possible role)
So, as an open question to the thread, which of these lynch scenarios should we pursue? (I have an opinion on this, but I'll be withholding my answer until more of the thread has checked in)