Mafiascum.net

In post 167, LicketyQuickety wrote: I want to know what Testarossa got out of questioning me.

In post 138, Shrek wrote:

In post 132, Gamma Emerald wrote:I feel like a good chunk of the game thus far is just reactionary sus posting
VOTE: dwlee
As you’re the one I can recall doing so that I haven’t seen anything good from yet

i feel like im leaning dwlee town just because his first opening post saying nobody should claim was so out there and attention grabbing i have a hard time believing a scum dwlee would do it

In post 164, MegAzumarill wrote:

In post 161, LicketyQuickety wrote:Shek seems out of sync with the rest of the thread. That's the reason for the vote.

Honestly, I agree with this. It feels distanced and a little detached. There isn't a lot of super great discussion right now to be invested in so I don't think its nessicarily AI.
Shrek could you give some reads out? Any slot in particular you want to hear more from?

In post 177, Shrek wrote:i think they've been contributing to the discussion a good bit and their reasoning for their press on t3 has made sense thus far

In post 179, LicketyQuickety wrote:

In post 177, Shrek wrote:i think they've been contributing to the discussion a good bit and their reasoning for their press on t3 has made sense thus far

You literally said it didn't make sense.

In post 175, Testarossa wrote:

In post 167, LicketyQuickety wrote: I want to know what Testarossa got out of questioning me.

Probably nothing too interesting for you. Your question for his meta seemed so random (at least I wouldn't have come up with it in that conversation). Kind of think you would have tried to come up with some bs if it was just some alibi/filler question by you.

In post 77, Shrek wrote:

In post 72, LicketyQuickety wrote:

In post 65, Shrek wrote:

In post 62, LicketyQuickety wrote:

In post 61, CheekyTeeky wrote:

In post 57, LicketyQuickety wrote:

In post 55, CheekyTeeky wrote:I'll need some raisin with that shade LQ.

1.) They called me LOCKTOWN for something that is NAI.
2.) They said they luck out of pressure (confirmed by another player).
3.) When I voted them, they became leading wagon and left the thread.

1. Yeah weird but why would scum do that?
2. That's nai.
3. Bit hasty to make a call on lurking imo.

I'll keep an eye on it but not convinced this is the jackpot yet.

Never said it was a jackpot. Just that it is just as much if not more reason to vote for T3 over Norweigh.

Then most important part about voting and putting pressure on T3 is to see if they lurk. If they do lurk, then we keep the votes on them. They said they Towntell as Town so assuming we keep the pressure there, then they will A.) Post and B.) Towntell.

tbh i think this is kind of flawed logic because t3 confessing that he lurks as scum could just be a gateway to him not lurking and gaining towncred that way like you said. like i played a game with him before where he was scum and he didnt lurk there so like. take that as you will.

It was confirmed by another player they luck out pressure.

yeah no my point was that he could take that and run with it by not lurking whenever he gets pressured this time around for an ez town read or smth.

In post 6, Dwlee99 wrote:I noticed that the site meta has changed over time.

It used to be that power roles were helpful to the town, and that claims helped solve the game. This is no longer true.

I just finished playing Sybil's Elegy which was a great example of the role distribution being designed to confuse at best, and F up at worse, the town. I have played others with similar anti-town mod shenanigans.

Here's the deal.

We should not claim, ever.

Treating the game as mountainous will increase our chances of winning.

What we should do (and I include vanilla townies) is to crumb our night choices somehow BEFORE the night. Vanilla townies must crumb fake targets.

When you're dead, and we know your role and alignment, we can go back and use the crumbs for the solve.

Solving games by way of RESULTS and CLAIMED ROLES will not work. It just doesn't work anymore.

VOTE: DGB

In post 177, Shrek wrote:for that notion i don't see nero and roden/t3 having partner equity in the slightest, which is why i'm putting him the highest outta everyone.

mega - comes in hot and asking questions which is something i rarely see scum doing if at all. i would like to see some reads of your own (if youve read up on everything) but thats pretty much it

In post 186, CheekyTeeky wrote:

In post 177, Shrek wrote:for that notion i don't see nero and roden/t3 having partner equity in the slightest, which is why i'm putting him the highest outta everyone.

This doesn't add up unless you have T3 and roden as scum reads, which you didn't? Maybe I'm misunderstanding the logic?

In post 190, Shrek wrote:yeah you were calling him sus (57) until you clarified that you were pressing him. i didnt specifically say that it didnt make sense, i said that the logic was flawed. it makes sense in that i can see where you're coming from, even if i didnt entirely agree with it.

In post 192, Shrek wrote:

In post 186, CheekyTeeky wrote:

In post 177, Shrek wrote:for that notion i don't see nero and roden/t3 having partner equity in the slightest, which is why i'm putting him the highest outta everyone.

This doesn't add up unless you have T3 and roden as scum reads, which you didn't? Maybe I'm misunderstanding the logic?

in the hypothetical situation that one of t3 or roden is scum (or nero is scum), he would not be a scum partner with either of those two. am i using partner equity incorrectly?

In post 65, Shrek wrote:tbh i think this is kind of flawed logic because t3 confessing that he lurks as scum could just be a gateway to him not lurking and gaining towncred that way like you said. like i played a game with him before where he was scum and he didnt lurk there so like. take that as you will.

In post 195, CheekyTeeky wrote:

In post 192, Shrek wrote:

In post 186, CheekyTeeky wrote:

In post 177, Shrek wrote:for that notion i don't see nero and roden/t3 having partner equity in the slightest, which is why i'm putting him the highest outta everyone.

This doesn't add up unless you have T3 and roden as scum reads, which you didn't? Maybe I'm misunderstanding the logic?

in the hypothetical situation that one of t3 or roden is scum (or nero is scum), he would not be a scum partner with either of those two. am i using partner equity incorrectly?

Yes incorrectly in that Nero still has scum equity for other reasons. Like if I said Roden is town because he's not partnered with x and y then my logic is missing all the other teams he could be part of not including x and y.

In post 197, MegAzumarill wrote:Most of their posts are either nothing posts or don't seem to have reasonings attached. I'm sure he has them but they don't seem super vocal about it. More interested in hearing from player's that haven't posted at the moment however.

I'll give some examples in a second.