Mafiascum.net

In post 96, Toogeloo wrote:

In post 86, Aristeia wrote:i like implos strategy

also if we r throwing the three scummiest into the same spot, it doesnt actually matter which spot we throw them into.

Do you think Luke is town?

nope

In post 89, implosion wrote:here's the old game.
here's the old scum PT.

Here is the one I was in
and the scum chat for it

This game was a scum sweep. The won the keep and then won the wall.

Scum locked in pretty early this game, all three scum were in the first 4 vote ins

which is why i think your early lock in was quite scummy

In post 95, imaginality wrote:Okay I see the added value of that strategy if it's on the Keep. Though it might be moot as Lukewarm and Ari have limited our options to apply it unless we strongly scumread either or both of them.

well, yes, which is why i proposed that i go to the keep immediately when the game started. and then someone lolvoted keep.

In post 98, Lukewarm wrote:I see your suggested plan, but I did not realize that you wanting to go to the keep was contingent on us all agreeing to go with it. I guess since the keep is my top choice, I kinda assumed you might still have it as your top choice sans-plan

i mean, i cannot force people to go to the locations i want them in, so yes, it would depend on the rest of the game agreeing with the plan. the keep is still my favourite choice due to it being the easiest and me being bad at mafia, but eh.

In post 99, implosion wrote:I think there's almost no strategies that strictly increase town's EV from a random-choices perspective. I think there's mostly just strategies that are better or worse at leveraging different kinds of correct reads.

I want to call VP and Tanner town atm.

yeah, i know. i'm thinking it would be a morale-booster for town (and i believe morale is extremely important in mafia) and it would give info for solving the more difficult minigames.

why those two names?

In post 100, Aristeia wrote:

In post 96, Toogeloo wrote:

In post 86, Aristeia wrote:i like implos strategy

also if we r throwing the three scummiest into the same spot, it doesnt actually matter which spot we throw them into.

Do you think Luke is town?

nope

Sad.

I am leaning town on Ari atm for the way she has interacted with the Tanner slot

In post 100, Aristeia wrote:

In post 96, Toogeloo wrote:

In post 86, Aristeia wrote:i like implos strategy

also if we r throwing the three scummiest into the same spot, it doesnt actually matter which spot we throw them into.

Do you think Luke is town?

nope

So then, your comment makes no sense.

In post 102, Aristeia wrote:which is why i think your early lock in was quite scummy

I mean, in that game we all waffled and debated on where to go, and the scum team all got first pick of their locations. I don't feel like every one holding off forever really helped us that game, and it definitely made the game harder for me personally

I think from that game you learned that collectivism is better for the town and that scum have an incentive to just take what they want in order to not let town dictate assignments. So you deciding to unilaterally jump feels like a bit of a scumclaim to me

In post 105, Toogeloo wrote:

In post 100, Aristeia wrote:

In post 96, Toogeloo wrote:

In post 86, Aristeia wrote:i like implos strategy

also if we r throwing the three scummiest into the same spot, it doesnt actually matter which spot we throw them into.

Do you think Luke is town?

nope

So then, your comment makes no sense.

I am not always right on everything and I doubt we can get all 3 into the same location regardless

In post 104, Lukewarm wrote:

In post 100, Aristeia wrote:

In post 96, Toogeloo wrote:

In post 86, Aristeia wrote:i like implos strategy

also if we r throwing the three scummiest into the same spot, it doesnt actually matter which spot we throw them into.

Do you think Luke is town?

nope

Sad.

I am leaning town on Ari atm for the way she has interacted with the Tanner slot

Are you playing to get three scum in the same game? I assume you TR both Ari and Tanner, and you were trying to get Tanner and myself in with you in the Keep.

In post 104, Lukewarm wrote:

In post 100, Aristeia wrote:

In post 96, Toogeloo wrote:

In post 86, Aristeia wrote:i like implos strategy

also if we r throwing the three scummiest into the same spot, it doesnt actually matter which spot we throw them into.

Do you think Luke is town?

nope

Sad.

I am leaning town on Ari atm for the way she has interacted with the Tanner slot

Well

if you correctly townread me it doesnt actually matter if my read on you is wrong so... ~shrug~

Forgive me btw. I just assumed scum would be avoiding getting stacked together, so playing to try and lock 3 scum together seemed like a pointless endeavor to begin with, but people are pushing it anyways.

In post 103, Tanner wrote:why those two names?

Pretty much impressions. I am hoping to consciously force myself to reassess reads more than usual and the corollary of that is that I don't really care about saying reads that I can't really justify strongly right now.

In post 107, Aristeia wrote:I think from that game you learned that collectivism is better for the town and that scum have an incentive to just take what they want in order to not let town dictate assignments. So you deciding to unilaterally jump feels like a bit of a scumclaim to me

...and we're not supposed to consider your unilateral jump a scumclaim because clearly, it's different?

In post 107, Aristeia wrote:I think from that game you learned that collectivism is better for the town and that scum have an incentive to just take what they want in order to not let town dictate assignments. So you deciding to unilaterally jump feels like a bit of a scumclaim to me

No, what I learned was that if I stay uncommitted and talk with everyone over every single minigame, then the scum team and the people not willing to talk are going to all just lock themselves in before the rest of us actually come to a consensus, and I will get pushed out of the game that I want to be in and can just as easily lose anyways

In post 111, Toogeloo wrote:Forgive me btw. I just assumed scum would be avoiding getting stacked together, so playing to try and lock 3 scum together seemed like a pointless endeavor to begin with, but people are pushing it anyways.

I dont think we will succeed but it is fun to try!

oh i guess you weren't in that game. i see

In post 114, Lukewarm wrote:

In post 107, Aristeia wrote:I think from that game you learned that collectivism is better for the town and that scum have an incentive to just take what they want in order to not let town dictate assignments. So you deciding to unilaterally jump feels like a bit of a scumclaim to me

No, what I learned was that if I stay uncommitted and talk with everyone over every single minigame, then the scum team and the people not willing to talk are going to all just lock themselves in before the rest of us actually come to a consensus, and I will get pushed out of the game that I want to be in and can just as easily lose anyways

I think if the meta for this game is that the first person who locks in a location unilaterally without consensus approval is lockscummed, it would be greatly positive for town win rates.

Lukewarm, do you think you being in the Keep increases the town's probability of winning? Or is it simply something you want?

If the former why, if the latter then why should we take you at your word here?

In post 113, implosion wrote:

In post 107, Aristeia wrote:I think from that game you learned that collectivism is better for the town and that scum have an incentive to just take what they want in order to not let town dictate assignments. So you deciding to unilaterally jump feels like a bit of a scumclaim to me

...and we're not supposed to consider your unilateral jump a scumclaim because clearly, it's different?

Once the bottle is broken there is no putting the genie back.

In post 111, Toogeloo wrote:Forgive me btw. I just assumed scum would be avoiding getting stacked together, so playing to try and lock 3 scum together seemed like a pointless endeavor to begin with, but people are pushing it anyways.

Are they? My read is people are trying to optimize minis, not lock scum in a position.

I kind of agree with Aris that first movers probably have +scum due to the simple fact scum have more direct incentive to move first.

Scum will avoid being stacked together - this is exactly why playing to try and lock 3 scum together is a good idea. Basically it lets us read the way in which people push back on plans that are formed, and try to interpret them.

I've generally been of the mind that first movers are +town because being a first mover is very conspicuous.

I think it's hard to clearly read in isolation. In the game I played scum moved 2nd and 6th (and then the last 3 people including the third scum were locked to the last location).

In post 91, VP Baltar wrote:

In post 87, imaginality wrote:VP Baltar, what game were we in together?

Feel like we definitely played together many years ago. I couldn't tell you the game though. Definitely not saying I can read you, was just listing people I am pretty sure I've played with before.

I'd be happy if you (or anyone here) can read me easily. Since this game seems to rely on playstyle reads and a bit of mechanics/wifom rather than the typical game with wagons and NKs to analyse.

You're right, by the way - I dug back into my wiki and looks like we were both in One Flew Over a Cuckoo's Nest (you as scum, me as town) which got abandoned. Back in 2009!

I think position of joining a location is in isolation something that can very much be determined by either personality or alignment. So without extra context it's not that useful. To be fair, Aristeia is trying to give that extra context to justify her Lukewarm read.