Quote:
Originally Posted by Giraffe
My argument with #3 is that scum Scathach would have claimed a successful investigation right back on scum TexCat. I can't imagine a universe in which two scum decide to take the course of action most likely to get one or both of them lynched.
|
Yeah, that seems very unlikely. But I was listing the possibilities and, however unlikely, that is one of them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Giraffe
TexCat to me is more suspicious in this regard, jumping quickly on the first name claim that came out of the gate and following it up immediately with a claimed successful Night investigation. Even if you disregard Scathach's investigation results as possible scum manipulation, TexCat's actions feel much more like the sort of strategy scum who don't know their names would employ than Visorslash's behavior thus far. Visorslash has struck me as the lazy, non-participatory player you get when Town doesn't get an exciting role and just checks out of the game. While he could be scum, I feel like a scum Visorslash would try harder.
|
This makes little sense to me, pushing the scum as having taken major risks for no obvious gain, whilst townies play cautious for, once again, no obvious gain.
The set-up with the names here looks to have posed an instant danger for the scum, whose lack of knowledge of their first names meant they could get caught out by the kind of gradual reveal strategy adopted by a decent chunk of the players (with all three of those nightkilled so far having championed that approach). To my mind, the most rational move for scum at the start of this game was either to try and disrupt any kind of mass claim, or simply to duck the issue altogether, in both cases hoping to try and make it past the next couple of days until they'd managed to do away with the town leaders and the remaining players had stopped focusing on the initial name claims quite so much.
I'd add that it's always worth bearing in mind that scum don't need to avoid looking suspicious - they just need to get other people lynched instead of them. The most reliable approach is often simply to ensure that they don't invite undue attention at the key moments, and just let other people make targets of themselves (in much the way that Zuma and Colby did here). By claiming successful investigations on day 2, Texcat and I inevitably invited attention on ourselves, and both of us have since acted in ways unlikely to let us fade into the background.
For my own part, I'm fully aware that being more talkative makes me much more likely to get lynched, whilst hiding in the background makes me much less so (especially on a forum where I'm virtually unknown - I survived to the end of a recent game at GitP by doing exactly that; I gave away absolutely nothing, and invited no suspicion at all, not catching a single vote until the penultimate day, when my scum buddies and I already had the game pretty much wrapped up).
As far as Texcat is concerned, I don't know his style, so I can't say if he'd have invited such attention as scum. All I know is that it would have been a bad move if he did. I will say, though, that I can quite believe a townie might have acted as he has, even up to admitting his failure to investigate last night, which was always likely to attract more suspicion than an easy 'no result' claim.
One more thing: Visor slacking off as a townie? I'll accept that it's possible, but I've played quite a few games with him and not seen that. And in a game where townie activity early on was pretty much essential to taking advantage of the set-up with the names, it strikes me as weird to say he looks more townie for being quiet.