Mafiascum.net

In post 1097, Varsoon wrote:If it's looked at solely as a probability question, yes, the probability is 1 out of 12 no matter what.
However, you're neglecting how the scum kill affects that probability.

@MOD: You said that the kill resolves before the sword is claimed, however, does the kill resolve AFTER or BEFORE it is decided which claimer will get it?
IE:
Is it SCENARIO 1: Player A and B go to claim Sword. Sword will random roll to player A. Scum kill player A. Sword is unclaimed in the morning because A died before they could claim it
or
SCENARIO 2: Player A and B go to claim Sword. Scum kill player A. Claim is rolled post-kill and goes to player B since they are the only one going for Sword?

From my understanding, it's scenario 1. And there are two possibilities: Either we let each person choose whether to claim it, in which case scum only have an increased chance of hitting the sword claimer if people say what they're going to do; or we pick one person and tell them to claim the sword, in which case scum have done us a favor in killing the claimer because they eliminated a scummy player and we can immediately use the same tactic the next day-- if they keep that up it's effectively nightless, so they can't.

Even if he's genuinely engaged with mechanics discussion, I fail to see how that allows us to get a better read on him.
So do you think UT is feigning disinterest in a scummy way here or that we've just got 20 odd pages of mechanics-talk-heavy-content without any votes, which is highly contrary to what most people use as a mode of engaging with the game and forming/pushing reads.
I think the experience thing is a cop-out from taking hard stances on players. So what if you're wrong? At least you dedicated a push towards something you believed in, which provides people with a grounds for figuring out the game.

P-EDIT:
Ohoho, now who's talking probability when you're advocating for a smaller-than-12-claimant pool which literally increases scum's odds of killing the claimant given they can scope the game for people who seem as though they intend to claim.

Picking a player to claim the sword is an awful idea. If scum are actually threatened by town offing its weaker players and the game being 'nightless', they just let the claim go through and then the whole claiming thing is off the table unless that town player literally kills themselves and even then we won't be able to retry until the following night.

I've been under the assumption it's the second scenario. He does say the Nightkill resolves before the swordclaim. If they're killed, they just get removed from the equation.

For example, is Varsoon and Maria go for the sword but scum kill Varsoon, that just means Maria gets it.

Yeah I've been assuming it's 2, which is why I realized that it was 1/11 odds to get the sword N1.

Varsoon, what's your opinion on me challenging Lady to a duel? Honest question, what's my chances looking like in winning?

Tell me coach. I can take it.

Eeeeeh probably bad
I imagine most people won't like you taking the gladiate into your own hands like that since the consensus seems to be to gladiate people with majority Hurt tags

I gotta follow my heart though. And my heart says if Lady lives, I'll have no impact on this game. Maybe that's my gut. Whatever.

I gotta make a stand before anything stupid happens further.

Why are you adamant to dukes-up against Lady?

She's the key to having a flowchart of events going on. You and UT will solve yourselves, but she doesn't feel like town to many, either. If You couldn't tell, I havent liked her since her first post, so this isn't really an "outta nowhere" pick.

At this point when she flips scum, I'm confident we can townclear a bunch of people more then we can on the offchance Auro flips scum. And I feel Auro actually engaging and speculating with the mechanics, while it could conceivably be a feint, I'm going off the fact that my heart and gut says he's town. And it's right 85 % of the time.

If I can stop you all from hanging my big townread while having the chance to hang my big scumread, I'll take it.

In post 1044, Varsoon wrote:@Gamma: It's only a multiple-use cop if a non-arthur role gets the sword and suicides with it. Odd-night non-loyal telegraphed-in-thread vigilante isn't cop no matter what way you want to spin it.
I'm going for the sword no matter what.

Lol ok
And what’s your plan afterwards?

In post 1101, Varsoon wrote:Ohoho, now who's talking probability when you're advocating for a smaller-than-12-claimant pool which literally increases scum's odds of killing the claimant given they can scope the game for people who seem as though they intend to claim.

There's two sides to this coin though. People aren't going to claim if they think there's a good chance they'll die night 1, as they're probably towny enough to not need to be confirmed. So if scum kill someone they think likely to claim, they're going to be making a suboptimal kill, which isn't that bad for town if they're right (since the sword can just be claimed the next night-- if we're going to have someone keep it, all that really matters is that they get it before LYLO so they can't be CC'd), and is good for town if they're wrong. I'm not saying it's great, but it's probably better than someone

Picking a player to claim the sword is an awful idea. If scum are actually threatened by town offing its weaker players and the game being 'nightless', they just let the claim go through and then the whole claiming thing is off the table unless that town player literally kills themselves and even then we won't be able to retry until the following night.

If they let the claim go through, then we get to handpick who we want our bulletproof IC to be, and we have a chance for Merlin to influence the decision.

In post 1055, Untrod Tripod wrote:

In post 998, Gamma Emerald wrote:In BoR, FakeGod made a comment post-game about how he meant for town to use the desperadoes optimally when doing balance. So for UT to argue against that concept is a massive scum sign.

Ah yes, remember when I did that point by point refutation of a thing from a different game that I wasn't in

Liar. You were in that game, no matter if you weren’t in it the whole time. I would figure you’d read the postgame but maybe you really don’t care about how games you didn’t bother to finish went. Either way it’s still a shit argument and is rather suspect.

Elsa's arguments here have me thinking about some strategic questions.

First, how we use the dayphase optimally, i.e. how much time we should reserve for the duel phase. Since so much of the town is resistant or lazy with the hurt tags, we could conceivably go off a plurality hurt rather than a majority hurt for resolving duels.

Unfortunately, this would still be off-protocol, but Elsa and Lady both have at least some hurts. I personally am not strongly opposed to an Elsa/LLD gladiation.

Still, my primary concern is that once the gladiation begins, we will stop having significant read developments from many players. I can't guarantee that we'll get *stellar* material beforehand, but I personally would prefer something more like 5-day pre-gladiate, 3-day gladiate.

So, Elsa, what do you think about adding 24 hours to your gladiate clock so we have 5-day pre-gladiate, 3-day gladiate?

Town, what do you think of having a plurality-gladiation at the end of the first 5 days of the day cycle if a majority is not achieved?

Ideally, we will not actually have a plurality gladiation, but knowing that the 5-day deadline will actually be acted on might help encourage people to be more forthcoming with reads and hurt tags.

In post 1112, DVa wrote:for resolving duels.

i.e. for resolving who is gladiated in the pre-duel phase

@Elsa: That makes sense but yeah I'm worried more people'd be critical of you for gladiating like that instead of considering other points.

@Gamma: If I get the sword, cool. If not, whatever.

@S_S: I don't think the sword mechanic ever forces scum to make a sub-optimal kill in this setup.
Also, you can't do both 'We get to handpick who we want our BP IC to be' and 'We get to use the sword to scumhunt'. Doesn't work that way.

@DVa: Why not just split it down the middle and then if we figure we need more time before or after, we adjust accordingly?

Because I think the pre-gladiation phase will be more interesting for almost everyone tbh

I would almost go 6-day pre-gladiate, 2-day gladiation except I think that's risky in case the 2-day falls on a weekend and people are v/la or whatever

In post 1095, Elsa Jay wrote:My countdown to challenging Lady begins now.

(expired on 2018-11-29 01:09:01)

Why not UT, who I’m pretty sure has more hurts?

Tbh I’m fine with Varsoon going for the sword
I’d honestly rather we have 2 going for it so scum can’t just snipe the claimant

In post 1101, Varsoon wrote:I think the experience thing is a cop-out from taking hard stances on players. So what if you're wrong? At least you dedicated a push towards something you believed in, which provides people with a grounds for figuring out the game.

Being wrong helps people get a BETTER read on me?

I've almost never seen that.

I've been mislynched many times for being wrong.

Once I stopped being more confident than I had any right to be, my rate of being mislynched plummeted.

In post 1114, Varsoon wrote:Also, you can't do both 'We get to handpick who we want our BP IC to be' and 'We get to use the sword to scumhunt'. Doesn't work that way.

Why not? There's a lot of people in this game. Surely there's at least one who is both hard to read and strong as confirmed town. I'm pretty sure LLD would qualify.

In post 1112, DVa wrote:Elsa's arguments here have me thinking about some strategic questions.

First, how we use the dayphase optimally, i.e. how much time we should reserve for the duel phase. Since so much of the town is resistant or lazy with the hurt tags, we could conceivably go off a plurality hurt rather than a majority hurt for resolving duels.

Unfortunately, this would still be off-protocol, but Elsa and Lady both have at least some hurts. I personally am not strongly opposed to an Elsa/LLD gladiation.

Still, my primary concern is that once the gladiation begins, we will stop having significant read developments from many players. I can't guarantee that we'll get *stellar* material beforehand, but I personally would prefer something more like 5-day pre-gladiate, 3-day gladiate.

So, Elsa, what do you think about adding 24 hours to your gladiate clock so we have 5-day pre-gladiate, 3-day gladiate?

Well I can grauntee a 12 hour one, but not 24 hours. So your basically getting until like 8:00 am Eastern Standard Time in America if you make me stall. I won't delay it any further.

Yeah, we should NEVER make it so the gladiate happens at the end with no time at all. That just screams laziness and scum agenda.

I'll accept my lynch this time if you all REALLY think Lady is more townie then me, but we got to set a precedent. We dont stall out here or scum wins.

You all can still discuss other stuff while 2 people are dueling btw. So don't get lazy about that either.

In post 1116, Gamma Emerald wrote:

In post 1095, Elsa Jay wrote:My countdown to challenging Lady begins now.

(expired on 2018-11-29 01:09:01)

Why not UT, who I’m pretty sure has more hurts?

UT will solve himself day 2 or day 3. And I atleast can see him in a townie light. Lady doesnt have that luxury.

Ok 12 hours is fine then.

I support these:

HURT: Auro
LLD
Ariane

Curious if anyone else had a negative reaction to 371?

I just won a scum game i am happy

@S_S: I think we have such different ideas of what is optimal play in this game on such a fundamental level that I don't know that I'll ever be able to reconcile if you suggesting what I see as scum-helping play isn't just you having an approach that's entirely contrary to mine.
I've been wrong far more often than I've been right and it's helped people read me time and time again.
The problem with trying to 'clear a scummy town player who would be strong if confirmed town' has already been outlined--it's too volatile and gives players too much space to sheep that player's worst ideas.