Mafiascum.net

In post 191, NorwegianboyEE wrote:Wow you’re really persistent on me bothering to analyze everything those goobers said aren’t you Profii? Fine i’ll analyze it deeply when i get back home.

Yep - it helps if people post more, there is a lot of ~I just feel like this is scummy~ in this game which is rubbish

Majority only needs 5.
So if 1 disagrees it's not an issue.

In post 195, NorwegianboyEE wrote:

In post 194, NorwegianboyEE wrote:I doubt either of these two are town.

"I doubt either of these two are scum"
^Corrected mistake.

Agreed - thanks for you contribution

I think you guys will just have to learn to deal with the way i am. Most of my posts are reactive and i usually only point out things that stick out to me. I read everything people say here but i can't be bothered to add my comments to absolutely everything. If you guys think that's scummy then by all means lynch me. If i get mislynched as town in like 5 games maybe people will begin to understand that this is just my personality and it is usually not alignment indicative.

I get it but if people dont comment on stuff and offer opinions it's hard to sort people so you will also need to get used to me - I'm very demanding;)

Well at least i can post my reads. Their not very good since we are in day 1, but it will help town regardless of alignment, so i hope everyone else can write a simple reads list like this at some point. If people start writing it when we have more information then that's ok.
My reads:

Light townlean:
Luca Blight
Garmr
profii
Skellen

Unsure:
Mohab500
Billy Pilgrim
Emperor FlippyNips

Scumlean:
Kraeg

Also can someone tell me how many freaking mafia are in this game so i can know what to look out for? 2 or 3?

I'm working on the basis of 2 because that's what the newbie games were

In post 203, NorwegianboyEE wrote:I think you guys will just have to learn to deal with the way i am. Most of my posts are reactive and i usually only point out things that stick out to me. I read everything people say here but i can't be bothered to add my comments to absolutely everything. If you guys think that's scummy then by all means lynch me. If i get mislynched as town in like 5 games maybe people will begin to understand that this is just my personality and it is usually not alignment indicative.

I want you to think about this post. You're basically recognizing that you're playing in a way that the group perceives as bad because you keep getting lynched. Yet your response to that is for the group to change it's perception of you. Why should we? If you keep playing badly, you're either scum or bad town. Why would we want you in LYLO? You're a potential liability there. So if you keep playing badly, the solution from a town perspective is to policy lynch you. That means we Lynch you D1. And we do that because we know it's bad to have you in late game situations. So while you think the site will just have to adjust to you, you may not like the way it adjusts to you. Please stop playing so reactively and start reading. I saw your reads list, care to develop that at all?

In post 207, Billy Pilgrim wrote:

In post 203, NorwegianboyEE wrote:I think you guys will just have to learn to deal with the way i am. Most of my posts are reactive and i usually only point out things that stick out to me. I read everything people say here but i can't be bothered to add my comments to absolutely everything. If you guys think that's scummy then by all means lynch me. If i get mislynched as town in like 5 games maybe people will begin to understand that this is just my personality and it is usually not alignment indicative.

I want you to think about this post. You're basically recognizing that you're playing in a way that the group perceives as bad because you keep getting lynched. Yet your response to that is for the group to change it's perception of you. Why should we? If you keep playing badly, you're either scum or bad town. Why would we want you in LYLO? You're a potential liability there. So if you keep playing badly, the solution from a town perspective is to policy lynch you. That means we Lynch you D1. And we do that because we know it's bad to have you in late game situations. So while you think the site will just have to adjust to you, you may not like the way it adjusts to you. Please stop playing so reactively and start reading. I saw your reads list, care to develop that at all?

I'm not good at analyzing dense posts and creating essays that address each and every point. I'm just gonna say that right now. I still don't think i'm a bad player, so getting policy lynched on day 1 because my playstyle is "different" from the "accepted townie standard" just feels like elitist BS.
I can elaborate on any points you want, just tell me which reads you want me to further elaborate upon and i'll do it.

In post 207, Billy Pilgrim wrote:

In post 203, NorwegianboyEE wrote:I think you guys will just have to learn to deal with the way i am. Most of my posts are reactive and i usually only point out things that stick out to me. I read everything people say here but i can't be bothered to add my comments to absolutely everything. If you guys think that's scummy then by all means lynch me. If i get mislynched as town in like 5 games maybe people will begin to understand that this is just my personality and it is usually not alignment indicative.

I want you to think about this post. You're basically recognizing that you're playing in a way that the group perceives as bad because you keep getting lynched. Yet your response to that is for the group to change it's perception of you. Why should we? If you keep playing badly, you're either scum or bad town. Why would we want you in LYLO? You're a potential liability there. So if you keep playing badly, the solution from a town perspective is to policy lynch you. That means we Lynch you D1. And we do that because we know it's bad to have you in late game situations. So while you think the site will just have to adjust to you, you may not like the way it adjusts to you. Please stop playing so reactively and start reading. I saw your reads list, care to develop that at all?

I think we are some way off even considering policy lynching players - we cant give up on scum hunting that easily

In post 208, NorwegianboyEE wrote:

In post 207, Billy Pilgrim wrote:

In post 203, NorwegianboyEE wrote:I think you guys will just have to learn to deal with the way i am. Most of my posts are reactive and i usually only point out things that stick out to me. I read everything people say here but i can't be bothered to add my comments to absolutely everything. If you guys think that's scummy then by all means lynch me. If i get mislynched as town in like 5 games maybe people will begin to understand that this is just my personality and it is usually not alignment indicative.

I want you to think about this post. You're basically recognizing that you're playing in a way that the group perceives as bad because you keep getting lynched. Yet your response to that is for the group to change it's perception of you. Why should we? If you keep playing badly, you're either scum or bad town. Why would we want you in LYLO? You're a potential liability there. So if you keep playing badly, the solution from a town perspective is to policy lynch you. That means we Lynch you D1. And we do that because we know it's bad to have you in late game situations. So while you think the site will just have to adjust to you, you may not like the way it adjusts to you. Please stop playing so reactively and start reading. I saw your reads list, care to develop that at all?

I'm not good at analyzing dense posts and creating essays that address each and every point. I'm just gonna say that right now. I still don't think i'm a bad player, so getting policy lynched on day 1 because my playstyle is "different" from the "accepted townie standard" just feels like elitist BS.
I can elaborate on any points you want, just tell me which reads you want me to further elaborate upon and i'll do it.

I have to agree with Norwegian boy here. My style of play is pretty different I tend to get town read then ignored. My reads last game were 100% on the mark yet I got ignored even through the logic was right. It's just people didn't understand it and thought it was bad. It wasn't even caught scum for the wrong reasons as their reasoning for moves like the night kill were the exact ones I said and the motivation as well. I told town they were hunting for protective roles and I was told we don't have enough information to think that, when we did if they were smart enough to pay attention and listen to me.

The group mentality with game play in mafia scum is toxic. People have unique ways of hunting and just because people don't understand it doesn't mean they are wrong. Forcing everyone to play the same neuters the game as well and can take away some those unique traits that people have.

I get some adjustments should be made but it's more a give and take thing instead of some borg assimilation shit.

In post 209, profii wrote:

In post 207, Billy Pilgrim wrote:

In post 203, NorwegianboyEE wrote:I think you guys will just have to learn to deal with the way i am. Most of my posts are reactive and i usually only point out things that stick out to me. I read everything people say here but i can't be bothered to add my comments to absolutely everything. If you guys think that's scummy then by all means lynch me. If i get mislynched as town in like 5 games maybe people will begin to understand that this is just my personality and it is usually not alignment indicative.

I want you to think about this post. You're basically recognizing that you're playing in a way that the group perceives as bad because you keep getting lynched. Yet your response to that is for the group to change it's perception of you. Why should we? If you keep playing badly, you're either scum or bad town. Why would we want you in LYLO? You're a potential liability there. So if you keep playing badly, the solution from a town perspective is to policy lynch you. That means we Lynch you D1. And we do that because we know it's bad to have you in late game situations. So while you think the site will just have to adjust to you, you may not like the way it adjusts to you. Please stop playing so reactively and start reading. I saw your reads list, care to develop that at all?

I think we are some way off even considering policy lynching players - we cant give up on scum hunting that easily

I definitely didn't mean to suggest that we do that today in this game. I read my message back and I realize it could have come off that way. I was mainly referring to his resigned attitude here that he would just keep playing this way into the future. So to clarify, I think you should try and play better and try and get reads off those dense posts. And no we shouldn't policy lynch him today.

In post 211, Billy Pilgrim wrote: I definitely didn't mean to suggest that we do that today in this game. I read my message back and I realize it could have come off that way. I was mainly referring to his resigned attitude here that he would just keep playing this way into the future. So to clarify, I think you should try and play better and try and get reads off those dense posts.

And no we shouldn't policy lynch him today.

But in the future is ok?
My reads are mainly based on tone and emotions of the people i'm analyzing. If i see two people making huge blocks of text i'm thinking. "What mindset are these two people in right now? They are both very worked up and convinced that the other is scum... ergo= Both are most likely town"
See? No fifty paragraph line by line essay necessary.
I really don't have anything more to say about the 1v1 between Gramr and Luca. So the fact that you called me out for my "resigned attitude" honestly surprised and perplexed me.

In post 212, NorwegianboyEE wrote:

In post 211, Billy Pilgrim wrote: I definitely didn't mean to suggest that we do that today in this game. I read my message back and I realize it could have come off that way. I was mainly referring to his resigned attitude here that he would just keep playing this way into the future. So to clarify, I think you should try and play better and try and get reads off those dense posts.

And no we shouldn't policy lynch him today.

But in the future is ok?
My reads are mainly based on tone and emotions of the people i'm analyzing. If i see two people making huge blocks of text i'm thinking. "What mindset are these two people in right now? They are both very worked up and convinced that the other is scum... ergo= Both are most likely town"
See? No fifty paragraph line by line essay necessary.
I really don't have anything more to say about the 1v1 between Gramr and Luca. So the fact that you called me out for my "resigned attitude" honestly surprised and perplexed me.

See I liked this post. I think the logic is wrong, but you explained a read. Thank you. Was it that hard?

Yes it was.

I'm interested in pressuring Mohab and Emperor at the moment. Emperor's slot is a bit worse atm so
VOTE: Emperor

Let's see if seeing his name in lights brings him back.

Tldr versions of my reads at the moment.


-Billy Pilgram
This is my biggest town read. I can see how his brain ticks, he gets caught up in Luca's post and the flow of it and sheeps. But then he self reflects on it adjusts and comes out with something logical. That's would be some high level scum play and it comes more natural from town.

Skellen- this was hard to order with my next read but I put it here first. The skellen posts have been logical and in the beginning textbook. But the conclusions they get and the way they hold them selves seem townie and 152 is literally spitting townie at me. Also I think the wagon on them seemed a bit suss and at least one scum on it.

NorwegianboyEE - It's hard to describe in words it's a lot of their personality. Also them standing up to profii about their beliefs made me town read them even more.




Mohab- This is pretty much all gut

-Profii I was originally really keen on this slot being town. Even through I disagreed with their skellen vote I thought it was a good ice breaker. Then they made a good but wrong point about me being scum and I'm like ok they are going to vote me. That didn't happen which puzzled me so I didn't give in to their demands to see if they would vote me. They continued pushing me from the side while keeping their vote off me. I was wondering when they would vote me because at certain points I only had 1 or 2 votes on me. Then they voted NorwegianboyEE and it was for the shit reasoning when they could of gone on me. But I don't think they are scum with Luca Blight.


Null-
Emperor FlippyNips-Null for reasons only post I didn't like was the oh I'm drunk. It read a little jumpy and defensive but nothing to really scum read.

null-scum
Kraeg-Literally god awful the vote on me was trash his actions were so bad but lacked scum motivation. But they lacked town motivation either now I think about it. Might just be a noob scum since they never had a scum game before.

Scum-
Luca blight- do I need to explain after my 1v1.


Would of posted this earlier but my net is playing up again. So if it shuts down I'll have to do phone posts.

Ha ha

I started asking you about stuff mainly because of the comment you made along the lines of I'm town because of the flow of the game. I wanted you to admit there wasnt much really to read me on to reaffirm my view that you made me town because TMI rather than any legitimate read but it became a game of holding our cards close to our chests

At the moment I think you have some unfounded bold certainty in your read of luca but I think it comes from town as i dont think a scum player keeps going at it like you have with no one following

In post 178, profii wrote:I'd like to see those 5 players take a stance on Luca vs Garmr and I will accept any of SvS, SvT, TvT as long as it comes with a rationale

Sure. As if I would say no to a request that would allow me to go wall mode.

Regarding Garmr I think he was during their 1v1 pretty straight forward and always easy to follow in his line of thinking. His case on Luca is pretty comprehensible to me, I think only the point that Luca only voted after Garmr's push and not when he did his catch up looked bad to me. But I think this was just an accidental misrep than something purposeful. I kind of think he was (purposely?) provocative at some points during their exchange (like the omgus comment as example), but I don't necessarily think these have a malicious intent, especially because he was suspecting that Luca doesn't have any real reasons to scumread him and I could see him trying to lure more out of Luca. Going by Garmr's general play it would look in character with his personality to me. I think in regard of Garmr's alignment I think his handling of Billy after that 1v1 is more telling though (positively obviously if that was not clear).

As for Luca I said already one important point in #152 yesterday. My main problem with Luca in that 1v1 is that I feel his arguments don't feel genuine, emphasized by the defensive nature of his posts. I mean while Garmr is pretty straight forward with his arguments I feel while Luca responses to these points it looks to me like he is beating around the bush a bit instead of directly addressing Garmr's points with not elaborating on the scum motivation he seems to focus on the defensive hairsplitting (like the passive-aggressive stuff). Ugh, I hope it kind of is clear what I mean here, but i don't know how to phrase it otherwise.
One thing that I disliked about Luca was how he treated Garmr's Kraeg read as "forced" (how so?), because Garmr's read in #98 had a consistent build-up of three posts before and is not forced at all, it's literally the logical conclusion of Garmr's interactions with Kraeg. I also don't see how it is compensating anything.

Generally it looked to me a bit like scum that picked the fight with the wrong opponent, but I can also see the angle of an annoyed townie backing out of the fight who just happens to have this defensive attitude generally. However I wonder if Garmr and Luca already ever have played a game together before?
His flip on me at the beginning is a bit redeeming here though, I don't see a specific scum motivation in doing so. Also I think I need to see more of Luca outside of his Garmr 1v1 to get a better overall read on him.

In post 186, Mohab500 wrote: I haven't really delved into the possibility of a Garmr + Kraeg scum team, on the surface from what I remember it looks a bit unlikely but not impossible.

I am not too good with these pre-flip team associations, but I don't get why you stick these two together? (sure, they are both your scumreads) Particularly if your first tendency is that is a bit unlikely?

In post 219, Skellen wrote:However I wonder if Garmr and Luca already ever have played a game together before?

First game together unless Luca was on a alt I don't know.

Anyway...

VOTE: Kraeg

Went through his ISO that quick that I don't know what to say. I feel like he has his guard up the whole time. His reads seem vague and don't give that much away. I can get his point with his Garmr vote with coming from his point of view. But then again he only voted exactly those two that I have for the longest in my townreads, so I don't really like it. And I still think #25 looks like a typical scum opening post as I have outlined in #112.

In post 221, Garmr wrote: First game together unless Luca was on a alt I don't know.

Ah, I see. Too bad, if it would have been the case it could have been a slight town indication with seeking that 1v1 (and always coming back).

Is it just me or does post 183 feel like an excuse to shirk responsibility? Kraeg seemed so eager to scumread me from the start, then he goes full 180 with his "nah just forget it bro." response.
Did he really reconsider his vote or is it a cop out?
Kraeg can you please explain your thought process in full detail?