Mafiascum.net

NabakovNabakov wrote:Also odd that Hermit called his hatred of D1 NL's "irrational". Does he have any rational reasons for hating them? Has he considered how they apply to this game? Does he just hate them because he's supposed to?

This is something of an inside joke on another site on which I play mafia. In every game someone mentions the possibility of a Day 1 No Lynch, and I'm the one who always has to explain why it's generally a bad idea. I'm starting to think that some people vote No Lynch solely because it torques me up.

In other words, don't read too much into it.

Yeah Smalltown's generally have an initial discussion about the viability of a No Lynch to start off the game. I'm still not sure what's the right way to go on this. And it obviously depends on the quality of the D1 leads we get.

In Heroes I refused to lynch certain players simply because of the power roles they possessed. I think in this game that is a mistake because the town seems more loaded here than in Heroes, and we got burnt with the scum having two useful power roles.

The lack of a Doc makes the night phase a lot more difficult. I expect the scum to try taking out our protective roles tonight, allowing for our investigative roles to be vulnerable in the future. But the scum have A LOT to worry about in this set up. I'm not sure if we should bring up all the great possible targets for everyone , but this might be helpful as it will bring up a lot of WIFOM when the scum do pick night kill, we may be able to force them towards a less optimal target at the very least.

Anyway I see about 3-4 very nice targets for the Jailkeep. I wouldn't say King is a given as we don't have a Doc. We have one particularly vulnerable role right now. Also a policy we had in Heroes was that the motivator would target a player, that player would use one of their extra targets to hit the role absorber. Don't know how helpful that was, as the absorber was scum in our game, but something to think about if you receive the motivation.

Finally I think my target tonight is the most obvious

Why is Jailer targetting king on Night 1 "a given"?

To prevent him from dying N1 so he can be protected N2 and find a scum.

My main issue is whether I should shoot or track. I'm personally leaning track, but if I do shoot it should be the delayed one.

armlx wrote:

Why is Jailer targetting king on Night 1 "a given"?

To prevent him from dying N1 so he can be protected N2 and find a scum.

My main issue is whether I should shoot or track. I'm personally leaning track, but if I do shoot it should be the delayed one.

One thing to consider is that your odds of tracking a killer increase as the player pool decreases. On the other hand your odds of hilling the right person do the same.

One thing to consider is that your odds of tracking a killer increase as the player pool decreases. On the other hand your odds of hilling the right person do the same.

Its less odds and more who would I be killing? Killing someone with a night action to use seems poor, so that really just leaves Winter (double vote) and Alabaska (double life). To be fair, both of these are roles that if scum are very dangerous to leave around, but then again so is mine. A delayed kill on Alabaska wouldn't be too bad though, as it doesn't eliminate a vote.

armlx wrote:

One thing to consider is that your odds of tracking a killer increase as the player pool decreases. On the other hand your odds of hilling the right person do the same.

Its less odds and more who would I be killing? Killing someone with a night action to use seems poor, so that really just leaves Winter (double vote) and Alabaska (double life). To be fair, both of these are roles that if scum are very dangerous to leave around, but then again so is mine. A delayed kill on Alabaska wouldn't be too bad though, as it doesn't eliminate a vote.

Forgive me if I don't want you to take away Alabaska's double life

EBWOP: But yes I have been concerned about the town's prospects should he be scum aligned.

Forgive me if I don't want you to take away Alabaska's double life Wink

I understand that down side, but I'm pretty sure there are other places for you to hide, and to be honest I would rather you not hide for now as if scum try to kill you its +EV for town as its not a better role dying and we can just get 2 for 1'ed for no reason.

Also, there might be a scenario where delayed kill is actually better the save then auto-kill, like going into night at 3-1 where delayed would be +1 kill for town.

armlx wrote:and to be honest I would rather you not hide for now as if scum try to kill you its +EV for town as its not a better role dying and we can just get 2 for 1'ed for no reason.

It's even better EV if they try to kill me and I'm not there.

I'm really not a fan of early vijings. But I certainly see the value in you targeting Alabaska. And I would highly suggest against basing targets on their possible value to the town. That got us into heeps of trouble in Heroes.

It's even better EV if they try to kill me and I'm not there.

But that will never happen.

armlx wrote:Winter, why would NL be the right play.

We should start discussing night actions for confirming reasons. We have

Vig/Tracker
Hider
Cop/Protect
Jailkeep
Watcher
Tracker
Motivator
Absorber
Replacement.
Forensics

Personally I think JK, tracker, and watcher (and protectors) should not reveal their targets pre-night as thats the best way to find scum, but discussing what the inventor/JoaT should use is probably good. Motivator target should also be discussed.

Because voting anyone else would be the wrong play for me, at the moment. Really only because I know my alignment and having the power to double vote is only useful once we know alignments and how many kills we are dealing with a night. It could be that the SK, Vig, And mafia kill are all being planned by anti-town selectives.


I've been working on a theory, and by working I mean plugging in various variables to see our best plans of action are... So far our Warden is the most powerful role.

Let me finish reading posts after this one that I quoted and i'll be back for more.



(My initial vote was assuming a random phase, at which point it have been my best play.)

I'm going to have to agree with twomz in the sense that Control of power roles is best left for day 3+ Right now I think the focus should be determining the chance that mafia has access to more than 1 kill.

It has been my experience that in games where the mafia have more than 1 kill, it made day choices that much more important. And also, night kills were that much more random.

As for Jailing King night 1, I would beg to disagree with that plan of action when we have so many killing roles that could be expended night one in favor of the mafia... Jailkeeper isn't only a protection role... keep that in mind. Its also a very effective roleblock.

Just some things i was thinking about... I would like to get some input on the concept of mafia having access to multiple NK's.

Really only because I know my alignment and having the power to double vote is only useful once we know alignments and how many kills we are dealing with a night.

What are you talking about? In the random stage no one is in danger of being lynched regardless of double votes.

Definitely not thinking Winter's contributions so far are pro-town. for now with a distinct possibility of upgrading to a vote.

^^(Previewed and agreed, why couldn't Winter have done VV himself?)

As it is there is a 33% chance a bad guy has an extra kill (i.e. armlx is scum or SK)*

Keep in mind that there is no endless fountain of vig** in this game. The JoaT has two, the bomb would have had one if selected. I could absorb the JoaT kills if armlx dies. If Claus is protected and targeted by a kill, he could concievably gain one or two more. No more after that.

*This does not take into account the relative townieness/scuminess of armlx or anybody else in the game.

**That's right, I said vi.

**That's right, I said vig.

While it is pronounced vij, it is still spelled vig

Keep in mind that there is no endless fountain of vig** in this game.

Two with killing groups is fairly close to endless, + absorbings.

I could grant an extra kill, I suppose. I'm not entirely sure why I would do that, though.

I could grant an extra kill, I suppose. I'm not entirely sure why I would do that, though.

I'm not either. Extra jailkeeps seems like the best to me for tonight.

Rishi wrote:I could grant an extra kill, I suppose. I'm not entirely sure why I would do that, though.

I don't think you can motivate 1 shot abilities. Though all vig roles were 1 shots.

armlx wrote:

I could grant an extra kill, I suppose. I'm not entirely sure why I would do that, though.

I'm not either. Extra jailkeeps seems like the best to me for tonight.

This seems like a good idea. And jailkeeping the role absorber is also a good idea, especially if we want to keep king blocked an extra night and then motivate him and see if there is a correlation in the targetting.

Of course, being a good idea doesn't mean that that is what the roles should do because then the mafia would know what they were doing and that would be bad because they could plan for it >.>

Random.org ftw.

armlx wrote:

Really only because I know my alignment and having the power to double vote is only useful once we know alignments and how many kills we are dealing with a night.

What are you talking about? In the random stage no one is in danger of being lynched regardless of double votes.

Definitely not thinking Winter's contributions so far are pro-town.

FOS Winter

for now with a distinct possibility of upgrading to a vote.

I voted for No lynch in my first post as a random vote, and you're attacking it as being anti-town? What are you going on about?

And what contributions are not "pro-town?"

I voted for No lynch in my first post as a random vote, and you're attacking it as being anti-town? What are you going on about?

The point of random votes is establishing player connections and generating discussion. Voting no lynch or yourself deliberately avoids the first.

As for anti-town... avoiding protecting info roles, not wanting to discuss night actions then doing so, and random voting NL all fall there.

since we're out of the random voting stage.

I didn't say to avoid protecting information roles, I said that it shouldn't be an "assumed" action. Because we don't know alignments of the roles being discussed.

Jailing the Forensic Investigator Night 1 and/or night 2 is the best play if we KNOW that both players are pro town. Which is something we don't actually know.

Secondly, I didn't say we shouldn't discuss night actions, I said:

Control of power roles is best left for day 3+

In essence, we shouldn't generate plans for "Guiding actions" and pre-determining the use of night abilities until we have more information regarding player alignments.

Discussing and guiding night actions are different. I have made no move to attempt to establish control of other roles by dictating the "Best plan of action." Or pigeonholing players into using their Night ability through outside influence/threats.

Thirdly: Yes, while voting no lynch may imply an attempt to avoid connections between myself and other players. The same could be said for not voting during the random stage...

On preview: it seems that you, armlx, are the only one to attack my random vote of no lynch. Despite not offering a random vote yourself, or making a move to imply that you believed we were out of, or never began a random voting stage.

TheHermit wrote:

Unvote

since we're out of the random voting stage.

we are?