|
|
Post by gnarlycharlie on Apr 24, 2012 10:06:05 GMT -5
true but does it really hurt to go over past days?
|
|
|
|
Post by gnarlycharlie on Apr 24, 2012 22:03:10 GMT -5
Bill doesn't even need Gadarene's help. everyone's voting Hal.
|
|
|
|
Post by chronos on Apr 24, 2012 22:57:31 GMT -5
Well, at least SBrOwn's second and third guesses are right. I guess it's some consolation that he's probably going to win.
Does equal numbers count as "scum control the vote", for purposes of their win condition?
|
|
|
|
Post by cometothedarkside on Apr 24, 2012 23:08:07 GMT -5
Bah humbug
|
|
|
|
Post by gnarlycharlie on Apr 25, 2012 9:29:28 GMT -5
chronos, i think so.
|
|
|
|
Post by Frank on Apr 25, 2012 9:55:52 GMT -5
Well, at least SBrOwn's second and third guesses are right. I guess it's some consolation that he's probably going to win. Does equal numbers count as "scum control the vote", for purposes of their win condition? That was not my intention, actually. Can I really say that the Scum control the voting if there is a way that they can lose? An unlikely way, of course, but a way nonetheless. I don't know. |
|
|
|
Post by chronos on Apr 25, 2012 10:28:25 GMT -5
I would consider "control the vote" to mean that the other players combined can't stop them, i.e., that (absent any vote-tampering powers or tiebreaking rules that favor them) they are a strict majority. Of course, I'm not exactly impartial in this case.
It would lead to the awkward situation that the winners could be decided by who manages to get online to vote first after the start of Day, but that's an argument against that tiebreaking method, not against the definition of "control the vote".
Another potential awkwardness: Suppose that they lynch Hal now, and the Scum kill Townies at Night, and the non-Scum manage to get their votes in on Scum in time. So, on the last Day, we'd have SBrOwn and one Scum alive. That's not yet a Scum win condition, but nor is it a win condition for anyone else. Then SBrOwn manages to beat the Scum to the first post, and votes to lynch him, leaving a third-party as the last man standing. As I'm reading the rules, that would mean that Town (and SBrOwn) would win, even though none of the Town are alive.
|
|
|
|
Post by gnarlycharlie on Apr 26, 2012 8:58:35 GMT -5
that would be cool.
|
|
|
|
Post by cometothedarkside on Apr 26, 2012 14:04:57 GMT -5
It would be an empty win, as this Town does not deserve it. I'd prefer more of a Three Kingdoms eternal final battle.
|
|
|
|
Post by chronos on Apr 26, 2012 14:58:30 GMT -5
On thinking about it more, even despite my team, I think it would be fairest to score an endgame with a third party as the last man standing as a solo win for that third party.
Though, on thinking about it, if SBrOwn is actually playing to win, he'll have every reason to just side with the Scum toMorrow. I couldn't blame him for that, if he so chose.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pleonast on Apr 26, 2012 16:14:11 GMT -5
Given the tie-breaking rule (which I think is anti-game because of the advantage to players who can be online at dawn), I'd rule the game a win for scum at the dawn of Day Nine. We still have to play Night Eight to see if scum want to share their win with the 3rd party or not (by killing town or the 3rd party). I'd call the game as soon as scum are settled on their victim.
|
|
meeko
New Member
Posts: 47
|
Post by meeko on Apr 27, 2012 4:12:54 GMT -5
Then again, you could argue that "control" is more or less a euphemism for "dominate" and in that regard, one cannot dominate, come out on top of, if the other party is equal.
I would see control, therefore as 50% plus 1. Or a simple majority.
I don't think town deserves the win, and I've said as much. However, the sideways town win speculated above, would not surprise me given the sideways play.
Town would not learn anything from this victory, if they get it.
Not that, that would be any different, than if they won standardly* or lost any event.
*You know what I mean here.
|
|
meeko
New Member
Posts: 47
|
Post by meeko on Apr 27, 2012 4:18:36 GMT -5
Can I really say that the Scum control the voting if there is a way that they can lose? An unlikely way, of course, but a way nonetheless. I don't know. Yeah, but if this is your yardstick, it would mean that Town lost the game a few weeks back. -- I am reading your above in a slightly non-standard manner here. That is, I think there is an implication you put into this one, beyond a dry reading of the excerpt. Read mine in that same manner. You are only asking this question now, in the way I assume you are asking it, given the current game's current game state.
Otherwise, the answer is NO. And I'm surprised any Mod would pose that question. And I don't think you would ask the question in that way. |
|
|
|
Post by Frank on Apr 27, 2012 7:28:27 GMT -5
As you can see, I decided the fairest (and most fun) thing to do, given what the players have been saying and doing publicly and privately, is declare a Scum win upon the death of Hal.
|
|
|
|
Post by silverjan on Apr 27, 2012 13:21:27 GMT -5
Although I wanted Town to win, Scum deserved this one, well done scum!
|
|
