Mini 2011: Partition Mafia (Game Over)

[BuJaber]

Look pre-switch I had RMOJ as more likely scum than nsg. But post switch I'm quite suspicious of nsg and starting to doubt wisdom because of how sure he is that nsg and eddie are town.

I am never lynching group 3 with the groups as they are. Either we lynch group 2 and win tomorrow by lynching koki. Or I convince myself group 1 has scum and lynch there.

[zMuffinMan]

If there's a 4 man group that includes me/koki.. is there anyone here that thinks we are scum together?
If we aren't scum together wouldn't be suspicious to put 2 of the guilty pool together in a 4 man group? Wouldn't that look like lynch bait to you? At first sight it would look like an attractive lynch. Confirm wisdom as guilty OR kill the guilty in koki/buj. But if both fitz/RMOJ are town you can't afford it.
If eddie is scum and doesn't move anybody from g3 you'd know he's happy with the lynch. And if he moves one of them he exposes himself for sure. In today's scenario that actually happened it's not 100% guaranteed that he's scum. Otherwise we wouldn't be having this conversation.
So no if the team is you/eddie/koki you wouldn't start the day with a 4 man group.

i think your thought process is too shallow here, but i'll respond to you and break it down and whether you like my response or not, i'm probably going to leave it at this because it's a discussion of a hypothetical (different starting groups) of a hypothetical (me+eddie+kokichi) and it's going nowhere since you seem stuck on certain ideas that seem obviously wrong to me, which is why i say it's not fruitful

i'll try to keep this simple and spoiler it for anyone who really doesn't care about delving into WIFOM stuff

Spoiler:

pretty much any grouping you can think of has some level of WIFOM attached to it. supposing your hypothetical team, then a 4-man group with {you, koki, fitz, REAL MAN} would, of course, be bait. but

that doesn't mean that people wouldn't be suspicious of it or wouldn't want to lynch it

this is the first place you're going wrong in your reasoning. you seem to be thinking that if people saw that they'd realise that it was a setup. except that's not how things work because anything that could perceivably be seen as a setup is also a good cover for scum to hide behind (and that goes for any game, not just this one - it's why, for example, bussing works and why "why would i do X as scum?" is a common line in any game). so yes, people might be suspicious of it being setup. but people might also be suspicious of it being a cover and that's why it might very well work

so i don't really see your point about "if fitz/RMOJ are both town you can't afford it" - this simply wouldn't be true for a variety of reasons (least of which is that people might just be suspicious of them)

and i don't really see your point about eddie exposing his desire to lynch group 4 because that wouldn't mean anything except that eddie would be fine with lynching group 4 (and that tells you nothing about his alignment)...

and yes, perhaps in a scenario where it was eddie+me in a 2-man group, we'd have come under fire for whatever reason anyway. so what? that's a possible risk regardless of groupings and i don't see why whatever logic you're applying to this hypothetical 2-man group also doesn't apply to the 3-man group today

in essence, you seem to have a very 1-dimensional view about how things would pan out but you don't seem to be considering the reality of the situation; it's harder than you're making it out to be to actually figure things out

none of this really matters though (IMO). the problem is you're drawing a conclusion based on an

assumption

and that's really not healthy for the game state (unless you're scum, in which case it's probably not a bad thing for you to be doing, but it's still annoying to have to deal with). the reason i say that it's not healthy is there really is no defense to an assumption that isn't based on play, regardless of whether it's right or wrong

to draw an analogy; you could say that claiming miller is a good scum tactic because it keeps scum safe from cops. this is true. this is why a lot of people advocate policy lynching millers btw (or used to, i'm not sure how common that line of thought is nowadays). so yes, you can say "that guy claimed miller; that's a perfect fake-claim for scum!" but other than the other guy saying "you're wrong" or pointing out perhaps that claiming miller is bad if there's a town rolecop or whatever, there's nothing more that can be said about it (i'm going on a tangent here, but hopefully you get the point). you might even be right that a miller claim

IS

scum, but that doesn't mean it's a good assumption to make or a good thing to argue

if you think someone is scum, you should be able to show it by what they've actually done instead of a "what if..."

so if you want to talk about eddie's move being anti-town, therefore coming from scum, therefore it's a scumteam of me+kokichi+eddie, i'm not interested (except insofar as it tells me what your reads are). i wouldn't be interested in discussing that even if it was someone other than me in your hypothetical team. if instead you want to talk about whether you think eddie's move being anti-town makes him scum without making indefensible assumptions, then go ahead

i disagree that it makes him scum, but i've already talked a bit about why. it's not impossible that he's scum and there are certainly scenarios in which i could see this being a scum tactic, but i don't currently see any reason to think that's more likely than him being town. if you think i'm wrong, you're free to open a dialogue about why you think i'm wrong - that's much better for the game than discussion about theoreticals because hey, at least if i were scum with him, you'd have game-relevant information to possibly pin me down instead of speculations about hypotheticals that bear no relevance to the game

anyway, i rambled a bit here, but hopefully you get the point i'm trying to make about why i don't see this as a fruitful discussion to be having"

[implosion]

VOTE COUNT 2.4

1	2	3
northsidegal	Eddie Cane	BuJaber
Wisdom	zMuffinMan	havingfitz
		Kokichi Oma
		REALMEN ONLY JUNGLE

Group 1

(1): Wisdom

Group 2

(0):

Group 3

(0):
Not voting: 7 (BuJaber, Eddie Cane, Kokichi Oma, northsidegal, REALMEN ONLY JUNGLE, Wisdom, zMuffinMan, havingfitz, BuJaber)

With 8 alive, it takes 5 votes to lynch.
Deadline is in (expired on 2018-05-28 15:00:00).

[BuJaber]

I already provided reasons why eddie's move makes him scum.
So far nsg, you, and wisdom don't seem to agree with them.
I'll respect your wishes and stop the discussion.

Eddie is scum.
VOTE: g2

He wants to take it up with me post game I'll be here. But if he is town he ruined any chance I have of townreading him.
Given eddie is scum there are only 4 possible teams imo.
From most likely to least:
Eddie/koki/muffin
Eddie/koki/nsg
Eddie/koki/wisdom
Eddie/nsg/wisdom

Good luck hopefully the correct wagon is the one that's lynched whether I'm right or wrong.

[BuJaber]

Wisdom what happened to the idea that one PR has to be scum?

These PRs are already bs.

I think this game is balanced without PRs. Hinestly if all the PRs are town it's way too townsided.

[BuJaber]

They messed up the game and distracted us.

Game would have been all about the partitions and reads.

The PRs made it about something else

[zMuffinMan]

yeah, well, i haven't really seen anything that's convinced me it was anything more than an anti-town move and, well, anti-town moves can come from both alignments

[BuJaber]

So we have 1 PR that flipped town.

We have wisdom/koki/eddie/muffin left.

I believe 1 scum among wisdom/koki and at least 1 scum among eddie/muffin.

If eddie is town muffin is scum or both wisdom/koki are scum or all 3 are scum.

Basically minimum 2 scum in wisdom/koki/eddie/muffin but 1 of them has to be wisdom/koki obviously.

[zMuffinMan]

going back and looking at eddie's posts again, i'm having a hard time figuring out what he was trying to achieve tbh

the kokichi-move seems counter-intuitive based on his apparent wisdom scum read and it's hard to tell why he does that and THEN calls wisdom scum

but i have a harder time believing that was a scum ploy that he came up with overnight, especially with that rationale

*shrug*

[BuJaber]

Wisdom doesn't make sense as scum unless he has another PR partner. So if you townread eddie/koki/muffin you have to townread wisdom.

[BuJaber]

No wait that doesn't make sense..

[BuJaber]

Okay I don't think they needed the day 1 thatrics if muffin/wisdom are partners. They could have distanced each other without wasting time dealing with the switches.

If wisdom is scum he has to be scum with eddie or koki.
If eddie is town wisdom is scum with koki or koki is scum and wisdom is town.

[zMuffinMan]

your PR speculation is flawed, buj, since you seem to be assuming that the PRs that have been made public are the entirety of PRs in this game

i'm currently working on the assumption that a 6th moving PR exists (so far we've had mover, self-mover, swapper, self-swapper, protector... and i wouldn't find it strange if there's a symmetrical self-protector in this game that hasn't yet claimed (and likely may not ever claim since after everything that's happened, it'd probably be considered a scum claim))

but there might not be one and it might just be that one (or more) of the currently claimed PRs is scum

again, this sort of speculation isn't healthy for the game state unless you have a reason to believe that's the case

[BuJaber]

What's a protector?
Koki claimed investigative

[zMuffinMan]

koki scum with wisdom is one of the things i wanted to actually go over today when i re-look at the claims. i've made a mental note of checking that out as well as one other thing when i do my reread

pedit: DV's role

[BuJaber]

Missed that one. Did he claim it? What was it supposed to do?

[zMuffinMan]

it's in his flip (it removes one player from play for the day, making them unlynchable). it wouldn't surprise me if there's a self-targeting variant because that seems to be a theme in this game (probably limited in the same way the night kill is - i.e. can't be used if it would let them win the game)

but i may be wrong and doing awful setup speculation, so i'm not giving all _that_ much weight to this; it's just something i think could be true and would be cool if it were true (from a setup design perspective)

[zMuffinMan]

in essence, it's possible there's one scum among the claimed PRs. it's possible there's two. it's even possible there are three (though i think this isn't all that plausible, least of all because i'm one of them!) but faulty setup spec is what loses people games, so while i'm keeping it in the back of my mind that there could very easily be scum among the claimed PRs, i'm not going to be making decisions solely on that assumption

i'd advise you not to either. even if you get it right in this game, it's a bad habit to develop in general (but we can discuss this post-game if you want)

anywho, reading stuff now that i've eaten

[zMuffinMan]

well actually from your POV if you're town, there is guaranteed to be scum among the PRs but that's a different matter

[BuJaber]

Still no explanation for wisdom buddying me. I'm a crazy guy who can't explain myself well enough. It's the weakest part of my game. I'm right most of the time but rarely able to influence town.
Buddying me nets him nothing more than my reluctance to vote for him.
And since he is obviously distancing his partners if he is scum he still needs more than just my vote.


Pedit - scum self protector is insanely OP. And town should have claimed it by now.

Don't worry about me my assumptions don't travel to other games. I am forced to make loose assumptions because of this particular setup. It works here. Also because I think my assumptions are believable. If they are wrong the game state was created by unrealisticly coincidental things happening.

[zMuffinMan]

i'm not really sure about your point on wisdom's buddying. from a long-term perspective, having town trust you when you're scum is a _good_ thing, especially in a game where he doesn't directly need to kill you off (if he can kill off a group that contains you). getting people to trust you to be town then getting them to die indirectly is how scum wins this setup

(btw, i hope you don't mind that i'm treating you like a newbie in some regards while trying to explain theory-related stuff. it's nothing personal and i'm not trying to suggest that you're a bad player or anything - i just think that a lot of things you've said in this game are theoretically unsound so i'm trying to help you understand that. if you aren't looking for advice though, i'll stop)

[BuJaber]

Not just that but from my pov in day 1 the confirmed scum (koki or wisdom) was in my group and the push was against another group.
Now the push is against my group which makes it more likely that scum are happy with it if not leading it.


Pedit - your advice is amusing to me considering I think you're scum. I don't take offence. I'm egotistical that way that I don't think a player with more experience means he'll be better or more right than I am.

[BuJaber]

Theoritically better *.

Experience definitely makes someone a better player mechanically.. (less obvious as scum, more influential as both alignments, more comfortable in all situations)

[zMuffinMan]

also, fwiw, i'm not convinced wisdom is scum (and some of his early posts do seem townish now that i'm going back and reading them), but your point about the buddying doesn't really hold much water in my view

[zMuffinMan]

(i wasn't trying to suggest i was correct because i have more experience, either... my arguments are either correct or incorrect and that has nothing to do with experience. hint: they're correct. but whatever, not important)