##role confirmed

I'm more of the law abiding, evidence-driven persuasion. I came into this thinking the odds were too bad for us to try and hang someone the first night. JJ is extremely suspect though...

##role confirmed

Well in the original version of the game I could say that I heard JJ shuffle around at night but right now I can only say: How suspicious it is that someone starts accusing people randomly? We want to kick goon buttocks not to organize a massacre. We have the Imperial garrison in Mos Eisley for that...

22 minutes ago, Norell said:

##role confirmed

Well in the original version of the game I could say that I heard JJ shuffle around at night but right now I can only say: How suspicious it is that someone starts accusing people randomly? We want to kick goon buttocks not to organize a massacre. We have the Imperial garrison in Mos Eisley for that...

I dunno. I did the same thing last time just to get the game kicked off and I was town. He could be doing the same thing here.

5 hours ago, Truthiness said:

##role confirmed

I'm more of the law abiding, evidence-driven persuasion. I came into this thinking the odds were too bad for us to try and hang someone the first night. JJ is extremely suspect though...

Yeah I need to look into like, the strategy of the game. It does seem to me like theres this accepted coventional wisdom that you are supposed to gank day 1, but I don't understand why. Odds are against that play working out.

I'd pass my day laughing if that analysis of JJ turns out to he right. It was a blind shot at trying to do some Chiss level of perception

Lol you guys. I guess I somewhat expected suspicion, but I was really only trying to kick start the conversation. However, I guess starting with myself is as good a place as any! The only subconscious influencing I may be doing is trying to set myself up as a veteran of social deduction, or some important role in this game, thus making myself a target. My only reason for doing that is to draw out the Hutt's night kill on myself, thus saving the actual important town roles. Or maybe I am just blowing smoke with good old reverse psychology....

Then again, looking at my previous history of mafia games, such stratagems have a bad habit of getting me lynched...so maybe I need to reevaluate my approach. (*withdraws into contemplative silence)

When it says 6 to hammer, what does that mean?

We need 6 votes on one person to lynch them, once you type ##vote "insert name here" you cast your vote. At any point if one person has 6 votes they are dead. I'll also note that you can ##unvote "insert name here" and then change your vote to someone else.

10 minutes ago, JJs Juggernaut said:

Lol you guys. I guess I somewhat expected suspicion, but I was really only trying to kick start the conversation. However, I guess starting with myself is as good a place as any! The only subconscious influencing I may be doing is trying to set myself up as a veteran of social deduction, or some important role in this game, thus making myself a target. My only reason for doing that is to draw out the Hutt's night kill on myself, thus saving the actual important town roles. Or maybe I am just blowing smoke with good old reverse psychology....

Then again, looking at my previous history of mafia games, such stratagems have a bad habit of getting me lynched...so maybe I need to reevaluate my approach. (*withdraws into contemplative silence)

The way I see it, JJ is definitely too smart for a local moisture farmer. Is he a... Rebel Agent!?

My association with the rebel alliance has non bearing on this current conversation! So long as I'm not working for the Hutt's! (and I'm not).

1 minute ago, JJs Juggernaut said:

My association with the rebel alliance has non bearing on this current conversation! So long as I'm not working for the Hutt's! (and I'm not).

Wait! I thought we're all here to hunt Rebels! (And I definitely am!) Is it Hutt season already?

It's definitely Hutt season! Playing uninformed? Or trying to draw suspicion off of a Hutt sympathizer?? (if needed check page 1 for backstory)

18 minutes ago, Madaghmire said:

Yeah I need to look into like, the strategy of the game. It does seem to me like theres this accepted coventional wisdom that you are supposed to gank day 1, but I don't understand why. Odds are against that play working out.

Yeah, after watching that last game, I don't like the odds of a day one gank. I'd rather give the power roles time to work. JJ, consider yourself on notice.

Oh, right, because my thought process was that it was the number of villagers to die so that the Hutts win, if 6 died, the hutts won, therefore there wouls be 2 Hutts. With the addition of PT, as I saw the number to hammer didn't go up, I thought he'd have to be a Hutt, otherwise the hutts would be less than villagers. Sorry PT, almost accused you wrongly

Hutt want our melange but they are not going to get it.

Embrace the cause fremen brothers! Kill the Hutt's, kill the black witches.

NOTE to myself: don't go back to that cantina. They added something in the blue milk.

1 hour ago, Madaghmire said:

Yeah I need to look into like, the strategy of the game. It does seem to me like theres this accepted coventional wisdom that you are supposed to gank day 1, but I don't understand why. Odds are against that play working out.

The conventional wisdom is often right. In this instance, it's because - power roles notwithstanding - the most important thing we can do to find the Hutts is discussion. And nothing spawns discussion like the threat of the lynch.

In my opinion, it's not actually always necessary to go through with the lynch, but our d1 discussion has no teeth if we don't back it up with at least the threat of a lynch.

And, in the final analysis, if we come to the end of a day, if we haven't find someone through the discussing that we'd like to bring the hammer down on, we can always either hammer subgenre who hasn't been contributing or choose not to lynch at that point.

Another point to look at - even if we don't find anything useful out immediately, it is often the case that later events will put the first cycle events in perspective and give us less that wouldn't have otherwise been there.

TL;DR - if we don't back up or conversion with the threat of the lynch, we don't get information.

Also, if you're really serious about not lynching, I suggest voting (insert pound signs)no lynch. IIRC, it's a valid vote

17 minutes ago, Onidsen said:

The conventional wisdom is often right. In this instance, it's because - power roles notwithstanding - the most important thing we can do to find the Hutts is discussion. And nothing spawns discussion like the threat of the lynch.

In my opinion, it's not actually always necessary to go through with the lynch, but our d1 discussion has no teeth if we don't back it up with at least the threat of a lynch.

And, in the final analysis, if we come to the end of a day, if we haven't find someone through the discussing that we'd like to bring the hammer down on, we can always either hammer subgenre who hasn't been contributing or choose not to lynch at that point.

Another point to look at - even if we don't find anything useful out immediately, it is often the case that later events will put the first cycle events in perspective and give us less that wouldn't have otherwise been there.

TL;DR - if we don't back up or conversion with the threat of the lynch, we don't get information.

Also, if you're really serious about not lynching, I suggest voting (insert pound signs)no lynch. IIRC, it's a valid vote

Thanks Oni. So is it best to just throw a dart at a board and start applying pressure wherever it lands?

3 minutes ago, Madaghmire said:

Thanks Oni. So is it best to just throw a dart at a board and start applying pressure wherever it lands?

Well...i like throwing multiple darts at the board to see who flinches.

As far as specific strategies go, the games at this site are the first I've played with a hammer mechanic, so I'll need to figure out a decent d1 voting strategy.

I think Gink's approach of keeping h-2 as a buffer is a good one. My Mafia games have all been IRL, and used end of round voting procedures, so this is new to mee as well.

I am with @Onidsen

He enlightened me.

More than that. I am going to trust him a bit more.

Supporting a coherent debate (with or without lynching) seems a poor Hutt game to me.

However the "first day" is something really new for me. It is actually my second game and I died that day the first time so I still having no ******* idea about how to proceed.

The only thing I know is that I shouldn't put poison and meat in the same post.

Just now, ovinomanc3r said:

The only thing I know is that I shouldn't put poison and meat in the same post.

****! ! I did it.

Again.

Well that tears it. Time to shear the sheep.

1 minute ago, Madaghmire said:

Well that tears it. Time to shear the sheep.

I would like to watch you try it.

We can't really judge things in night 1, because you literally CAN'T TRUST ANYONE. EVERYONE who posted talked about how to get the Hutts out, but who is really wanting and who is following the crowd to hide their identity? I think the wisest decision is to see how the night turns out and from there we can deduce and analyze what we have from a base of happenings. Right now, voting blindly has:

1. More chances of hitting a villager

2.A chance of hitting a vital role