Mafiascum.net

execution

PookyTheMagicalBear [2]:

Klick, Deimos27

not voting [5]:

Alduskkel, DonCorleone, Dumb and Dumber, PookyTheMagicalBear, Wug

flavour

mod notes

• Datisi is V/LA until Sunday.

I'm prepared to fight in that scenario. What I'm not so sure on is what should happen next.

Deimos is town. If you're town, that leaves Wug/Aldus/DC as potential Sleeper partners. I don't reeeeally think it's Aldus, but if you really did then I'd consider it. I'd be stuck between Wug and DC for a Sleeper partner.

What are your thoughts there Pooky?

PEdit: GeorgeBailey.

if the scum were split 1:1 between the wagons then aldus is the only partner choice available - makes him Lock-Scum - I think this is a pretty strong possibility because it wasn't clear at all which of me and clover were going to hang yesterday and careful scum would be spreading their votes out.

If the scum had a preference for me surviving over Clover then both scum are with me voting Clover, I think Deimos can't be scum because he hammered when he could've NL'ed it - so it'd have to be either Wugs or DC - between the two of them I think DC is more town.

tho I guess Deimos could be counting on his hammer as town-cred - but that'd be just WIFOMing it

In post 1949, PookyTheMagicalBear wrote:wait so re-reading your thing again

It's basically saying in both situations regardless of where the scum lie - there is a reasonable choice for killing - its either a positive or a negative trick -

If there's 2 scum on Coalition - shooting on coalition is to WIFOM the town into not looking at the Coalition
If there's 1 scum on Coalition - its to keep the Off-Coalition Pool as big as possible.

So basically it's just circular logic - depending on what reality is - it has a different meaning.

You don't know what circular logic is

Pooky if you're town you know for a fact there's scum in Klick/D&D can you cease your self-pity and see if you can help us out sorting that can of worms?

Sounds like your bet is D&D + Aldus?

It could still be Klick

I honestly don't know at this point. Gonna be up to you guys to figure out which one of them is scum. I've been off about everything so far

I might've been too arrogantly cocky in calling sleepersoul "definite town" cuz he was my bro in a previous game and I thought I had him down pat

Whatever happens - don't throw down votes quickly tommorrow at lylo - take your time and work out everything. Scum didn't kill Chemist for no reason

Hmm, I still think we lynch Pooky today but something does feel a little off with that nightkill.

Most people were expecting a Deimos kill since he's the towniest off-coalition player, so either he's scum, or scum want to keep the pool of off-coalition players as large as possible for some reason.
If Pooky is town, killing on-coalition makes almost no sense because then even if it's 1 scum on and 1 scum off we have a 50% shot of eliminating scum Day 3, and there's no reason for scum to help us like that.
If Pooky is scum, then either 1) Deimos wasn't killed because Deimos is actually scum, 2) Chemist was killed because his top suspect was SS and that slot is scum, 3) Chemist was killed just for being relatively townread and it's as simple as that, or 4) it's some galaxy brain play that I can't suss out.

In post 1885, Dumb and Dumber wrote:

In post 1880, Deimos27 wrote:I think scumteams with Klick in them have a pretty straightforward win condition: execute in-coalition and don't let Klick die
NKing Chemist works directly contrary to that

Can someone summarize why this logic doesn't work for pooky as well?

- Dumber

Because Klickscum has a reasonable shot of living long, whereas Pookyscum is basically staring down the barrel of a gun and probably expects to die today regardless of who they nightkill.

In post 1905, DonCorleone wrote:Consider my vote spiritually on pooky but I won’t be making it concrete until everyone has commented on who they think is scum in the case that pooky does flip town + what they think of the NK

If Pooky actually flips town then I think Day 3 we probably eliminate D&D. I just don't see the logic in Klick's play if he's scum.

Pooky's posts these last couple pages just seem like scum trying to confuse us and not provide any helpful information.

Assume 1 in, 1 out: you have {1v3|1v3} going into the night.

Here, if scum NKs in coalition, you go into {1v2|1v3}, and a misfire D2 means scum either win the resulting {1v1|1v2} on D3/D4 respectively to win the game.
If scum NKs outside coalition, you go into {1v3|1v2} and the same logic but flipped. If town misfires within the coalition, scum either win the resulting {1v1|1v2} on D3/D4. Note that if scum once again NKs outside, it would be a {1v2|1v1}. This does rely on the assumption that there's 1 off 1 on, but that's a safe enough assumption here.

In effect, both plans are interchangeable; the only difference is that scum has a mathematically higher chance of getting caught if you NK in the coalition N1 (1/3 as opposed to 1/4).
This offers little info, and isn't as damaging to Klick!scum as it's made out to be! A Klick who's confident he'll make it out of 3 people, and maybe having a townread partner out of coalition would to go for a WIFOM kill like this.

I mildly townread Pooky's posting. I have seen Pooky deathtunnel before, I do not think that makes him scum. The "Klick wouldn't do this!" argument was weakened when I thought about the setup from a bigger picture. There are instances where Klick is individually scummy - one instance is where Klick argues that Pookyscum wanted to let DkKoba get fired by someone else, and then argues that it's logically valid... however that seems a little inconsistent with Pooky's deathtunnel which came right after that, no? Another one is Klick townreading our first post, which, c'mon, isn't townie. It felt like Klick had an agenda to fire Pooky today quickly and would have to townread us, so found a way to townread that post.

Both heads have not read most of the game, but we shall go through other important parts together. My other head was considering the idea of Klick bussing Pooky, but that is something we decided we'd visit later. We also note the {Pooky-DnD} association read from Klick, which should be reviewed. If we are fired today, our current preferred FyLo fire will be Klick.

VOTE: Klick

In post 1987, Dumb and Dumber wrote:Assume 1 in, 1 out: you have {1v3|1v3} going into the night.

1. You've taken this assumption as fact, when in reality it's not the only option.
2. You're wrong; it's {1v3|1v4} going into the night, which nullifies the rest of your logic.

There are instances where Klick is individually scummy - one instance is where Klick argues that Pookyscum wanted to let DkKoba get fired by someone else, and then argues that it's logically valid... however that seems a little inconsistent with Pooky's deathtunnel which came right after that, no?

I'm not following? Do you mean that a Pooky who wants someone else to hammer Koba would then not deathtunnel Clover? I don't see why that would be the case.

Another one is Klick townreading our first post, which, c'mon, isn't townie. It felt like Klick had an agenda to fire Pooky today quickly and would have to townread us, so found a way to townread that post.

Yes it is
I also wouldn't have to townread you to execute Pooky today
I feel insulted that you think what you've described here would be my scum play

In post 1988, Klick wrote:You're wrong; it's {1v3|1v4} going into the night, which nullifies the rest of your logic.

I read this wrong, sorry, 1v3/1v3 is correct

In post 1987, Dumb and Dumber wrote:This does rely on the assumption that there's 1 off 1 on, but that's a safe enough assumption here.

You/Pooky is a viable scum pair.

The NK logic is really simple (assuming 1-on-1-off):

1. if scum NK outside the coalition N1, there are 4 execute options D2. If they survive that and kill off-coalition again, there are 3 execute options D3.
2. if scum NK inside the coalition N1, there are 3 execute options D2. If they survive that and kill off-coalition, there are 2 execute options D3.

Play 1 gives scum (3/4)*(2/3)= 50% odds of winning on D3. Play 2 gives scum (2/3)*(1/2)= 33% odds of winning on D3. (The odds of scum winning come D4 after one scum execute are always the same no matter what the play is.)

Choosing to kill in the coalition is suboptimal.

Also

In post 1987, Dumb and Dumber wrote:I mildly townread Pooky's posting. I have seen Pooky deathtunnel before, I do not think that makes him scum.

This is a very reductive version of why Pooky is scum

In post 1987, Dumb and Dumber wrote:It felt like Klick had an agenda to fire Pooky today quickly and would have to townread us, so found a way to townread that post.

Also I literally already had a townread on the Sleeper slot before you came in

Datisi did you create this game specifically to troll votato and then just rolled with it when I replaced in

1. As I said, it's a safe assumption given the interplay with the gametstate.
2. You're debating possibilities. My larger point was that you're reasoning for what you want to push, rather than solving.
3. You would have to townread us to quick fire Pooky today, else you'd have to take it slow and figure out scum between us.
4. There's an underlying assumption that town continues firing in the coalition. As we argued, in either case scum has to win either of a {1v1} or a {1v2} after surviving D2. The only difference is the D2 survival rate on random firing (9%) which doesn't really matter for scum confident enough not to be the execute.
5. The mathematical optimum has to be weighed along with gamestate. The idea that this play coming from scum!you is rubbish is rubbish, and that is my claim.
6. Why would you be insulted that we are calling that your scum play?
7. Sure - please explain why Pooky was town enough to be part of the coalition, but then scummy afterwards. The majority of the case seems to be the Clover deathtunnel to me.

In post 1993, Dumb and Dumber wrote:1. As I said, it's a safe assumption given the interplay with the gametstate.

What does this even mean
You/Pooky is a valid scumteam and that alone invalidates the idea that there must be 1-on-1-off
Youre also making this statememt without having read most of the game

2. You're debating possibilities. My larger point was that you're reasoning for what you want to push, rather than solving.

I am solving
I have come to the conclusion that Pooky is probscum
You would know this if you would read the game

3. You would have to townread us to quick fire Pooky today, else you'd have to take it slow and figure out scum between us.

I can think Pooky is very scummy without thinking you're particularly towny

4. There's an underlying assumption that town continues firing in the coalition. As we argued, in either case scum has to win either of a {1v1} or a {1v2} after surviving D2. The only difference is the D2 survival rate on random firing (9%) which doesn't really matter for scum confident enough not to be the execute.

Town never executes off-coalition until a scum dies on-coalition. We know that there is scum on-coalition. We do not know that there is scum off-coalition.

This is not hard. On a base level from yesterday, there was a 30% chance of hitting scum on-coalition and a 12.5% chance of hitting scum off-coalition (with the possibility of there being no scum at all off-coalition). The odds of hitting scum on-coalition at a base level have only increased.

5. The mathematical optimum has to be weighed along with gamestate. The idea that this play coming from scum!you is rubbish is rubbish, and that is my claim.

The gamestate is literally the main reason why it's not a play scum!Klick would not make the play and why scum!Pooky would. Please read the game

6. Why would you be insulted that we are calling that your scum play?

You seem to think I just made up a reason to townread you on the fly; that is not how I would operate as scum

7. Sure - please explain why Pooky was town enough to be part of the coalition, but then scummy afterwards. The majority of the case seems to be the Clover deathtunnel to me.

Read it yourself.
Tl;dr: I didn't think Pooky was very towny pre-coalition but compromised on him because Koba wasn't going to join a coalition without him. He actually looked pretty towny post-coalition for a bit, and then the Clover tunnel came and was awfully convenient for his place in the game.

1. Which means a likely scum fire in the game anyway. Also, from my perspective the idea is still invalidated.
2. That is not the impression I got from selected instances of your play.
3. Again, there's no solid case behind your thinking that - if there is, please elaborate.
4. You are repeating what I said about town continuing to fire in the coalition. If you shoot inside it, it's 1 versus 2; if you shoot outside, it's 1 versus 3. Which is a 66% vs 75% chance of a misfire, i.e. 9% difference. The increase is not significant enough for this to be a high risk play from you.
5. It's only sufficient that you not be the execution today. There are other indirect benefits of such a NK.
6. That is not how we believe you would operate as town.
7. That is a poor case, and a lot of words to say "his Clover tunnel was scummy".

In post 1995, Dumb and Dumber wrote:If you shoot inside it, it's 1 versus 2; if you shoot outside, it's 1 versus 3

We. Do not. Know. If there is scum. Outside the coalition.

I'll respond to the rest after you've read the game.

If there's no scum outside the coalition, then a fire on either of you slots is a scum fire, which is great; there will be other information we are expecting to discover through the day that will strengthen or weaken this assumption come D4 on a scum fire.
i.e. if there's no scum outside, then it's {Klick|Pooky} from our PoV, and a Klick fire still hits scum.

The stated points hold validity with the information we have, and I do not foresee that reading more of the game will change much of it. You are free to substantiate your case on Pooky and show us why he's "very scummy" off the Clover tunnel.

Is this head Auro?

Or possibly gobbledygook