Mafiascum.net

sorry, let me correct myself:

at the start of the day, lynching locke was a scum-motivated idea lol

So what? Lynching Locke is suddenly town motivated now? On what virtue?

This is my problem with you. You may think what you say makes sense, but it actually doesn't when you think two seconds about it. Your thoughts and reads are not absolute truth.

Now that Eragon and roster aren't lockscumming each other anymore, that is indeed no longer a problem!

sigh

A -> B -> C -> D

urgh time to rethink my life choices

@nom

how confident are you that ank is scum

@ank

i think i know your answer on this
:3

In post 1601, nomnomnom wrote:

In post 1595, rosterfoster wrote:Nom do you think there’s a world where Ank is groupscum?

I mean, with daychat, I think anything is possible at this point.

Though I have to say: the logical side of me thinks that this game very likely doesn't have a traitor. Like, think about it: JK, Loyal Neighborizer and disloyal blocker vs Goon + Traitor + Another scum? That makes absolutely NO sense, even if the last scum was a strong PR.

From a setup standpoint, it's more logical to assume all scums are inside a group. I think it's highly unlikely this setup has a traitor in it.

Anyway, I still think there's a good chance Ank is scum, even with all of this.

ank is never groupscum

im just saying this rn

if ank is group scum some REALLY weird shit was going around mafia chat, and im gonna ask for some of that stuff after the games over.

Distancing is a thing in mafia, yes.

but normally distancing is like, an actual push.

Theres no way GW hard pushes on Alacrity for being an ALT, while being on the SAME TEAM as alacrity.
this looks really bad on GW, and likely gets him suspicious early on, and lynched. As what happened.

On top of the actual pushes not feeling w/w, ank probably would have told GW to shut up, and/or Ank would have outed that they were playing as an alt, so that they scumteam knew who they were playing with. I've seen that happen before where alts are scum and they end up revealing themselves by their account name.

In post 1602, rosterfoster wrote:An odd-night disloyal RB is pretty weak tbh.

Loyal Neighbouriser and JK is reasonable, but I don’t think it necessarily means there’s no traitor.

Your reticence to this plan makes me think it’s you/locke though and 3 groupscum.

There is no way GW does that thing because of DayChat IMO.

odd night disloyal roleblocker is strong though, because it can ONLY BLOCK SCUM.


if it targets town, nothing happens.
theres no risk to it, at all.

additionally, if mafia claims roleblocked for whatever reason, they will also be outed mafia

In post 1603, Ankamius wrote:https://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=53&t=66833

Town Odd-Night Mason Recruiter
Town Jailkeeper
Town Motion Detector

vs

Mafia Goon
Mafia Neapolitan
Mafia Jailkeeper Enabler

those three roles are WEAKER than the ones in this setup (Odd-Night Mason Recruiter is MUCH weaker than a loyal neighborizer; Jailkeeper is the same, Motion Detector is not as useful as the Odd-Night Disloyal Roleblocker in single-groupscum scenarios)

and yet there were three groupscum with them having two roles that helped keep town from snowballing EVEN WITH THAT LEVEL OF POWER

there's been

some

change to the normal guidelines since then but the general level of balance really shouldn't be changing enough to make it so that town has THIS MUCH power and scum can get completely fucked two different ways by the end of Night 1

it's absolutely insane

some games just have fucked balance, i don't think its the case here, but i remember reading that one game that was like, 9 v 3 v Maf traitor that was really unbalanced.
and sometimes something seems balanced in theory but ends up not being

and also something from 2016 isn't very helpful, communities and players grow as a whole, get better/worse, etc...

like on our homesite, 3 years ago some of the best players on our site were active, it was great.
now.
people suck
games are over-run with shitters and slankers

i see what you are saying

i just don't think we should setup spec a 2019 closed game off of a 2016 game

different hosts/mods also have a different idea of balance, even if there are "guidelines"

In post 1607, nomnomnom wrote:

In post 1606, rosterfoster wrote:Yeah tbh I think it’s Locke/Nom.

But we do need to go through Locke first.

Pedit: Nom, I really don’t see how Ank can be scum with no traitor. Only other possibility is Eragon scum which is a minor possibility and the only way we don’t win, from all our points of view (unless you think I’m scum, but that idea has kind of been dispelled).

I can't sanely approve of this knowing one scum is pushing Locke, regardless if he ends up being scum.

At least not without discussion first.

what

what

what

even if locke is scum

you can't approve of the plan?

sigh

this game makes no sense

I still like nom's overall early play as well as being the first to catch my "slip" because if nom is mafia, they know that i didn't post in mafia chat, so that would be a weird conclusion to make. but i will go re-read that.

Ank is never groupscum, and is *possibly* a traitor given
1) a traitor
2)being the traitor
which is a bit of a stretch

Roster going full 360 on me rn is a good look, because dropping me as a read forces them to go explore other options, as well as bringing them more into the spotlight. I don't think they're strongly town, but i see town!Roster as a possibility now.

Locke... just really doesn't have anything going for them, and plenty of things that look bad.

this whole interaction with nom/ank is never SvS(which i know is obvious, just ignore)
I could possibly see it being TvT, but i think
its more likely to be TvS

out of the two, i actually townread them both strongly, and now that one of them is basically mechanically scum, i think i always go for nom before ank.
as previously stated
the only way ank is scum is if there is a traitor and they rolled that traitor slot. Both of which are more unlikely than nom just being scum.


So i think locke is scum every time
And then one of ank/nom is likely scum
with roster being the remaining town?

lynch order for me is Locke >>> nom > roster >> ank

In post 1611, Ankamius wrote:I have no reason to shield rosterfoster like I did as scum.
I have no reason to shield Eragon like I did as scum.

Doing BOTH as scum is even more fucking ridiculous.

I know I call my scumgame pretty bad, but it's because I can't execute on my strategies, not because I'm so fucking stupid that I can't even think of them in the first place.

as a blanket

i absolutely hate posts like this, saying "i wouldnt do ____ as scum" relating back to my abhorrance of self-meta

because if you know you "cant" do something as scum

then you can force yourself to do it as scum...

and get townread baselessly

Actually

revising the lynch order


Ank is only the final lynch if
1)Chibi confirms traitors get endgamed
and
2)Ank is willing to commit to voting locke

else I'll have to revisit it again

In post 1615, nomnomnom wrote:

In post 1614, Ankamius wrote:you haven't explained what my plan is this game, nom.

That's a good question and if I'm frank, I can't come up with a cohesive answer.

It's just the way you explain everything, the way you put everything, the way you want things to go. They're not natural, there's a certain sense of secrecy to it, and when it's not, it's just you going in a thousand directions with your reasoning and your votes. I can't trust you.

Trying to decode your actions feels like an impossible task, given the kind of person you are. I just stick to what I think is right, and to any other logic I can stick to.

why is secrecy inherently wolfy?

In post 1621, Ankamius wrote:I strongly believe that you would not have responded the way you did to me saying that locke isn't the lynch today if you were town.

so you are saying you were reaction testing by saying you thought locke should never be the lynch?

am i understanding this right?

In post 1625, Ankamius wrote:sorry, let me correct myself:

at the start of the day, lynching locke

and only locke

was a scum-motivated idea lol

uhhh nom never said they wanted to lynch locke and only locke at the start of the day

In post 1626, nomnomnom wrote:So what? Lynching Locke is suddenly town motivated now? On what virtue?

This is my problem with you. You may think what you say makes sense, but it actually doesn't when you think two seconds about it. Your thoughts and reads are not absolute truth.

uhh

Some people may think what they say makes sense and other people dont

so why don't you ask for clarification to see if you misunderstood?

In post 1627, Ankamius wrote:Now that Eragon and roster aren't lockscumming each other anymore, that is indeed no longer a problem!

In post 1629, Ankamius wrote:A -> B -> C -> D

what?

In post 1589, Eragon wrote:

@Chibi

: in the event that this game has a traitor, would a traitor be endgamed when all the Groupscum are dead. Or would they still be alive and be converted to groupscum?

https://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?title=Traitor

In post 1637, Eragon wrote:

In post 1607, nomnomnom wrote:

In post 1606, rosterfoster wrote:Yeah tbh I think it’s Locke/Nom.

But we do need to go through Locke first.

Pedit: Nom, I really don’t see how Ank can be scum with no traitor. Only other possibility is Eragon scum which is a minor possibility and the only way we don’t win, from all our points of view (unless you think I’m scum, but that idea has kind of been dispelled).

I can't sanely approve of this knowing one scum is pushing Locke, regardless if he ends up being scum.

At least not without discussion first.

what

what

what

even if locke is scum

you can't approve of the plan?

Because this plan will end in a loss, regardless of how Locke flips. You already made a pact to lynch me tomorrow and agreed to collectively lynch Locke then me. If this game ends like this, town loses 100%.

I can't really stop you 3, except give you the better alternative.

Which is

VOTE: Ankamius


I am dying on this hill. Screw this.

In post 1639, Eragon wrote:

In post 1611, Ankamius wrote:I have no reason to shield rosterfoster like I did as scum.
I have no reason to shield Eragon like I did as scum.

Doing BOTH as scum is even more fucking ridiculous.

I know I call my scumgame pretty bad, but it's because I can't execute on my strategies, not because I'm so fucking stupid that I can't even think of them in the first place.

as a blanket

i absolutely hate posts like this, saying "i wouldnt do ____ as scum" relating back to my abhorrance of self-meta

because if you know you "cant" do something as scum

then you can force yourself to do it as scum...

and get townread baselessly

That's not self meta as much as "what the hell am I trying to do if I am scum because a pretty clear path to victory is available to me and I chose to make the game really hard on myself"

I'm asking what my plan to win is with this play

I planned out the kill and the rampage and who I wanted to bring into lylo even during the first day in mustard and completely based the only kill we got around that, scum won that game partially because I strategized well enough to avoid town being able to recover during day two and because nobody knew my playstyle well enough to see that it was a textbook scum game for me.