Mafiascum.net

In post 1166, jjh927 wrote:

Roden wrote:

In post 1150, jjh927 wrote:

In post 1146, Something_Smart wrote:

In post 1119, mastina wrote:Explicitly so, yes, for multiple reasons.

Share with the class?

-General setup design. Don't assume scum won't have two roles of similar nature or sometimes you will be wrong.
-A traffic analyst flipped. A percentage of scum having communication built into their actual role makes the guilties there more deniable, and makes the TA be more of an inno-hunting role.

Where's the scum power if two of them have useless roles?

In post 2, Datisi wrote:~ if the average is lower than 75% and not lower than 50%, the mafia gets one extra kill to use that night.
~ if the average is lower than 50% and not lower than 25%, the mafia gets two extra kills to use that night.
~ if the average is lower than 25%, the mafia gets three extra kills to use that night.

Where were you when I made the same case earlier?

In post 427, Roden wrote:

In post 303, Something_Smart wrote:The extra mechanic is not pro-scum. It limits the usability of town PR's, but in a way that's entirely in town's control.

I think a town PR limit that, when surpassed, grants scum up to two extra kills with built in Multitasking is very pro-scum. At least when compared to more typical limiters like modifiers.

In post 1148, Roden wrote:

In post 1136, Andresvmb wrote:You’re using the NK to justify your vote, which is always suspect (it’s like you haven’t even considered that Scum make kills to confuse / frame the Town). But the single most important way you’re pointing to for identifying Scum in the game from day play conflicts directly with that vote. The fact that you’re not even acknowledging that is bizarre.

I'm voting Titus because it's a read on how she plays the game as scum. She kills threats and stays low key. I can scum read her independently of how I think the scum team played around Ircher's slip. If you think that's a scummy thought process then you're gonna have to explain why because I don't get it.

I didn’t call it Scummy I called it odd.

Imagine I said that I think Scum went out of their way to defend Ircher. And then I voted Titus. And when you asked me why, I made the NK argument you made. I would fully expect for you to ask me well, Titus actively attacked Ircher the entire time. Doesn’t that give you pause? Wouldn’t that contradict what you’re saying is the main reason to suspect someone to be Scum? That’s more where I’m coming from. Not being consistent with your thought process isn’t Scum indicative actually. At least I don’t think so.

I dont understand this game's mechanic btw so whenever town figures out what best to do let me know i sheep

In post 1174, PenguinPower wrote:like it's grating on me now - base psychology is going to have town using their power because people at heart are not logical.

Some of them are.

In post 1177, Andresvmb wrote:

In post 1148, Roden wrote:

In post 1136, Andresvmb wrote:You’re using the NK to justify your vote, which is always suspect (it’s like you haven’t even considered that Scum make kills to confuse / frame the Town). But the single most important way you’re pointing to for identifying Scum in the game from day play conflicts directly with that vote. The fact that you’re not even acknowledging that is bizarre.

I'm voting Titus because it's a read on how she plays the game as scum. She kills threats and stays low key. I can scum read her independently of how I think the scum team played around Ircher's slip. If you think that's a scummy thought process then you're gonna have to explain why because I don't get it.

I didn’t call it Scummy I called it odd.

Imagine I said that I think Scum went out of their way to defend Ircher. And then I voted Titus. And when you asked me why, I made the NK argument you made. I would fully expect for you to ask me well, Titus actively attacked Ircher the entire time. Doesn’t that give you pause? Wouldn’t that contradict what you’re saying is the main reason to suspect someone to be Scum? That’s more where I’m coming from. Not being consistent with your thought process isn’t Scum indicative actually. At least I don’t think so.

The thing is that I wouldn't question you on that. I don't think it's odd to have conflicting scum reads, or have a specific scum read as an exception to how one thinks scum would play.

And I figured you saw the thought process as scummy because you were voting me. I don't think you voted me just because you think I'm odd.

In post 1159, Ydrasse wrote:i have no clue wat happening this game

But your sig
If anyone is a mason, they screwed up and it's pouring into the game, and elsewhere

Also, you need to balance for town playing optimally, no? Like sure maybe in a normal game a 1-shot doc will go for a hero save N1. But you don't balance around that; you balance around them protecting the claimed cop. Similarly, town can throw by all working 0%, but then they deserve to lose. The game should be balanced if town plays smart.

Yeah but unfortunately some people get a vig role PM and think they should tank the average to shoot a lurker

Factor in logical people with actual good reasons to bank some %s and we're gonna be consistently in 50-75% territory even with a good faith effort to keep it managable.

In post 1179, Something_Smart wrote:

In post 1174, PenguinPower wrote:like it's grating on me now - base psychology is going to have town using their power because people at heart are not logical.

Some of them are.

obviously not enough to your point yesterday

In post 1181, Vivax wrote:

In post 1159, Ydrasse wrote:i have no clue wat happening this game

But your sig
If anyone is a mason, they screwed up and it's pouring into the game, and elsewhere

When in doubt, blame the British

Sure, but we're talking about balance. So if you're wondering "where's the scum power", I think the answer isn't "extra kills", because the game should be balanced if town plays smart enough to not give away extra kills.

Optimal play is also far more difficult to determine in this kind of game than likely play, and it gets fuzzy when you see it from a purely roles perspective.

Like I said in day 1- optimal town play from a balance perspective was most likey for every PR to put in 0%, howevet this inores day play and skill levels, which is a human factor that must also be considered in design

Side note, there is almost no way what mastina is saying is correct. It's starting to lean more and more scum, though there is still a good chance town-mastina believes she broke the game.

In post 1180, Roden wrote:

In post 1177, Andresvmb wrote:

In post 1148, Roden wrote:

In post 1136, Andresvmb wrote:You’re using the NK to justify your vote, which is always suspect (it’s like you haven’t even considered that Scum make kills to confuse / frame the Town). But the single most important way you’re pointing to for identifying Scum in the game from day play conflicts directly with that vote. The fact that you’re not even acknowledging that is bizarre.

I'm voting Titus because it's a read on how she plays the game as scum. She kills threats and stays low key. I can scum read her independently of how I think the scum team played around Ircher's slip. If you think that's a scummy thought process then you're gonna have to explain why because I don't get it.

I didn’t call it Scummy I called it odd.

Imagine I said that I think Scum went out of their way to defend Ircher. And then I voted Titus. And when you asked me why, I made the NK argument you made. I would fully expect for you to ask me well, Titus actively attacked Ircher the entire time. Doesn’t that give you pause? Wouldn’t that contradict what you’re saying is the main reason to suspect someone to be Scum? That’s more where I’m coming from. Not being consistent with your thought process isn’t Scum indicative actually. At least I don’t think so.

The thing is that I wouldn't question you on that. I don't think it's odd to have conflicting scum reads, or have a specific scum read as an exception to how one thinks scum would play.

And I figured you saw the thought process as scummy because you were voting me. I don't think you voted me just because you think I'm odd.

I was trying to put a vote down based on what someone who seems to have a better grasp on the game is voting (I think mastina is Town?). I haven’t actually myself figured out who I think is most likely to be Scum.

I haven’t been historically able to read Titus properly. I think your points aren’t totally silly. I think if the Scum had two shots, shooting petapan who seemed to have a magnifying glass aimed at Titus makes a lot of sense.

Also, what do you make of 468 through 470 from Uncrowned? This is why I think it’s possible they’re Scum (if I had to summarize it).

Personally, I assumed in day 1 that scum might have hidden factional mechanics of their own, but none of the redactions on Ircher's role PM hint at that being the case

That's a weird assumption. This game already has a central special mechanic that's public. Why have more but not make them also public?

Scum power through roles is a constant throughout the game. They don't have a productivity mechanic to deal with. Whereas for town, you get diminishing returns- fewer people to cover for lowered productivity, and increasing costs in a lot of cases. Scum should be expected to be fairly low power in terms of roles as a result

It's kinda telling how the whole Luke - Me exchange seems to fly over everyone's heads who is most likely town, but Mastina who actually has an opinion is scum to S_S. All this mech discussion is just meh
Tells you all about what this game is even up for. Panem et circenses, how'd that turn out last time? Stay tuned

In post 1193, jjh927 wrote:Scum power through roles is a constant throughout the game. They don't have a productivity mechanic to deal with. Whereas for town, you get diminishing returns- fewer people to cover for lowered productivity, and increasing costs in a lot of cases. Scum should be expected to be fairly low power in terms of roles as a result

Well, scum could just have limited-shot roles. But I agree with the logic here. (Though, if a lot of PR's die, it opens up others to act more, which is cool.)

In post 1017, Malakittens wrote:VOTE: FG

Why are you doing scummy first day opening posts

In post 1113, Malakittens wrote:

In post 1019, Lukewarm wrote:

In post 1017, Malakittens wrote:VOTE: FG

Why are you doing scummy first day opening posts

I am treating furtive Glace as confirmed town through unless he is like alive in elo personally.

I’d ask you to share with the class, but I doubt you will.

Why is this the only player who gets it? Because mob rule
Maybe Mastina too but the followup isn't convincing.

FG, luke, fire atm is my working theory
And while fire's posts are super polished and very tone-neutral, I don't think fire's entry was that unsuspicious vibe-wise

It's like a group getting swallowed by Moby Dick, getting slowly digested and their first reaction is to add more stomachs to the whale. And that's 19th century lit

In post 1113, Malakittens wrote:

In post 1019, Lukewarm wrote:

In post 1017, Malakittens wrote:VOTE: FG

Why are you doing scummy first day opening posts

I am treating furtive Glace as confirmed town through unless he is like alive in elo personally.

I’d ask you to share with the class, but I doubt you will.

I actually completely missed this post until Vivax just quoted it.

Because of his push on Ircher Day 1.

I doubt scum!FG sees me ask Ircher about why he said 17 players. Then sees no one else comment on it, sees me say nothing more about it for 5 pages, then suddenly brings it back up, and explains exactly why it makes Ircher likely scum. Like, at that point, I feel like scum would have just started thinking that maybe town would forget about it.

I just don't think that he busses that way at that point.

Except you asked the question, Peta voted Ircher with no reason, you said you were convinced and followed Peta following your reasoning while pretending that it wasn‘t your own.

So if you were in bus mode, there‘s no reason for other scum to not have been.
Confirmed town lol