Pickle Rick Posted March 25, 2020 Share Posted March 25, 2020 Where @SwAg and @theuntouchable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malfatron Posted March 25, 2020 Share Posted March 25, 2020 1 minute ago, Whicker said: I am just incapable of collaborating with people. There’s only one way to do things: my way. And if you disagree then you’re wrong. End of story im with you 100 percent 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pickle Rick Posted March 25, 2020 Share Posted March 25, 2020 1 minute ago, Whicker said: I am just incapable of collaborating with people. There’s only one way to do things: my way. And if you disagree then you’re wrong. End of story I second this I am the same way, but I'll hear you out. What you thinking? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malfatron Posted March 25, 2020 Share Posted March 25, 2020 lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whicker Posted March 25, 2020 Share Posted March 25, 2020 1 minute ago, MWil23 said: Ok, let me see if I understand where you are coming from. You're not advocating a completely random 1/3 chance. You are advocating putting up your best 3-4 reads (or fill in whatever number makes the most sense to you), and then from those 3/4 people, encouraging people not to plop down other 1/2 votes, but to spread those 1/2 votes on "random" people onto the 3-4 biggest reads? From a rationale perspective, I agree with this. You still get clear separation and better odds, because you're incorporating the threadplay and voting trends. I'd be up for that. I’m saying that the townie perspective of the randomized lynch is to get as many of his reads as a possible lynch as possible. The scum perspective is to minimize the chances of scum lynch. So “being suspicious” of someone plopping down a random vote is the opposite of what we would have thought. But now that it’s in the open it’s done Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malfatron Posted March 25, 2020 Share Posted March 25, 2020 i mean, he just said it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whicker Posted March 25, 2020 Share Posted March 25, 2020 1 minute ago, Pickle Rick said: I second this I am the same way, but I'll hear you out. What you thinking? I’m saying that wanting to reduce the number of potential players on a randomized lynch is the scum perspective 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MWil23 Posted March 25, 2020 Share Posted March 25, 2020 2 minutes ago, Whicker said: I’m saying that the townie perspective of the randomized lynch is to get as many of his reads as a possible lynch as possible. The scum perspective is to minimize the chances of scum lynch. So “being suspicious” of someone plopping down a random vote is the opposite of what we would have thought. But now that it’s in the open it’s done Right, that's what I just said in the underlined below man. I think that we are saying the same thing. 2 minutes ago, Whicker said: Ok, let me see if I understand where you are coming from. You're not advocating a completely random 1/3 chance. You are advocating putting up your best 3-4 reads (or fill in whatever number makes the most sense to you), and then from those 3/4 people, encouraging people not to plop down other 1/2 votes, but to spread those 1/2 votes on "random" people onto the 3-4 biggest reads? From a rationale perspective, I agree with this. You still get clear separation and better odds, because you're incorporating the threadplay and voting trends. I'd be up for that. So, for example, lets say I had 4 scum reads. I'd want to encourage town, if we were unable to get one of those 4 on the 12 person lynch wagon (what it looks like), to spread those votes out on those 4 so that I could get an even chance of one of them "hitting", whereas scum would want to lynch just one person (a mislynch). Correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pickle Rick Posted March 25, 2020 Share Posted March 25, 2020 Just now, Whicker said: I’m saying that wanting to reduce the number of potential players on a randomized lynch is the scum perspective I like that. Everyone vote for players 7-15 sounds good me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MWil23 Posted March 25, 2020 Share Posted March 25, 2020 Just now, Pickle Rick said: I like that. Everyone vote for players 7-15 sounds good me Whicker meltdown in 3...2...1... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pickle Rick Posted March 25, 2020 Share Posted March 25, 2020 Just now, MWil23 said: Whicker meltdown in 3...2...1... Week 2 of the 3 main trains are in that group lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MWil23 Posted March 25, 2020 Share Posted March 25, 2020 Just now, Pickle Rick said: Week 2 of the 3 main trains are in that group lol ...huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theuntouchable Posted March 25, 2020 Share Posted March 25, 2020 9 minutes ago, Pickle Rick said: Where @SwAg and @theuntouchable? Feeding my face Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whicker Posted March 25, 2020 Share Posted March 25, 2020 4 minutes ago, MWil23 said: Right, that's what I just said in the underlined below man. I think that we are saying the same thing. So, for example, lets say I had 4 scum reads. I'd want to encourage town, if we were unable to get one of those 4 on the 12 person lynch wagon (what it looks like), to spread those votes out on those 4 so that I could get an even chance of one of them "hitting", whereas scum would want to lynch just one person (a mislynch). Correct? 33 minutes ago, MWil23 said: So those who seemingly plop a random vote down to get somebody 1 vote should be a major red flag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pickle Rick Posted March 25, 2020 Share Posted March 25, 2020 7. @MWil23 8. @squire12 9. @Malfatron 10. @JoshstraDaymus 11. @amac 12. @SwAg 13. @theuntouchable 14. @Matts4313 15. @Counselor @MWil23 The main trains right now are Mwil Josh Swole Amac That's actual 3 of the 4 main trains being from this group Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts