Mafiascum.net

catboi, i advise you not to ignore a bomb of my complexity. i could explode on you after all.

since im gonna be busy I'll leave with this for incentive.VOTE: catboi

In post 196, The Praetorian wrote:

In post 194, catboi wrote:VOTE: the praetorian

Why do you want to push to kill people defusing bombs when its a scum chosen defuser? Now that im understanding the mech more your suggestion feels more anti town.

The town alternate win condition is vanishingly unlikely to ever take place. To achieve it would require at a minimum 7 night phases. That would guarantee 11 deaths already (7 from elimination, 1 from teh starting nightkill, and 3 from suxccesful town defusals). That puts us at 8 alive at most.This doesn't meaningfully put 'pressure' on scum because they can either put a member up for defusal to deny town the win condition or cause a failure in there, and at that point it can be delayed enough to prevent town from having any possible chance of meaningfully achieving it.

I am not arguing for unconditionally killing anyone who is selected as a defuser and have clarified the nuance of my position.

In post 198, The Praetorian wrote:

In post 35, catboi wrote:

In post 34, VP Baltar wrote:

In post 33, GuiltyLion wrote:well even if they were mandatory somehow, we'd just intentionally give bad info if we decide we want to fail all bombs by default

oh like use them as a double elim?

The scum are the ones choosing the defusers, please go read the setup again. It's not functionally an elimination but unless someone is towncore there's no point saving them from a nightkill.


I'll shrug and take this as plausibly uninformed, good enough for page 2.

Why did you treat vp differently than myself for making a similar mixup btw?

Because I don't like you.

In post 199, Menalque wrote:No points for making the easiest read in the world there I’m afraid catboi

You said you think you'll be able to read me so it's on you if you can't figure out I'm town~

We know for sure that the bomb defuser cannot submit other instructions than what they got from the bomb experts.

We also know that each bomb expert, at least on Day 1 have 1/4th of the bomb manual, but the bomb defuser needs the whole to successfully defuse the bomb simultaneously.

This effectively puts the entire pressure of getting the bomb right on the experts. And have to make the decision to give out correct information to the bomb defuser.

Question is, what if we succeed in putting in 4 townies as bomb experts, and then scums put one of themselves as the bomb defuser? The responsibility for catching this lies not on a group of four people but on every single individual of these four. And, if the scums defuse just one bomb successfully they get a free nightkill (they need two bomb defusals by town to get one). But what if two of them decide to give out the wrong instructions and kill a townie? I don't think this strategy has been well thought through.

I think this should be a more informed decision than just voting whomever one townreads, especially since you can vote multiple people here, so voting someone else doesn't change the vote - and with a large game you're more likely to forget whom you voted altogether. Plus, 14 days is like loads of time. I feel like we could spend like 2 days just on making sure that everyone understands the setup 100% and then get to action.

Also, apparently I missed the fact that there are two bombs Night 1. Gosh.

I'll read up on the rules some more tomorrow and maybe come up with some ideas. Now, off to sleep.

In post 203, catboi wrote:Because I don't like you.

taking this as a compliment then!

@catboi

In post 173, The Bulge wrote:

In post 160, catboi wrote:

In post 143, Morning Tweet wrote:What is the biggest factor preventing us from just sending people to try and be bomb experts, like in resistance, have them try to succeed, and if there's a failure, it's guaranteed someone sabotaged so we still learn something?

If we play the other way, as catboi mentioned, scum gets an additional nightkill and we can't use the system. But we do stop them from being able to achieve their alternate wincon. Is their alternate wincon so likely though? If scum decides the defuser, and they have to put their own members in the defuser spot a bunch of times to win, and they also need to live, won't we notice that? It's gonna be a huge difference if scum nominates consensus townreads in other to nightkill them, versus tries to slip their own members in that chair. At least, to me it would seem that way

Had I rolled scum this game my goal would have been to propose something more or less like the former, playing it like resistance, and blitz the alternate win condition. Four successes is a small amount and it's certainly easier than trying to cut through an enormous amount of townies with a limited supply of nightkills. I would think there's at least a few other players in this game who'd think that way.

I don't think the scum alt wincon is as scary as you are making it out to be. certainly not something that can be blitzed. reasons morning already mentioned but i feel this post was overlooked.

In post 143, Morning Tweet wrote:If we play the other way, as catboi mentioned, scum gets an additional nightkill and we can't use the system. But we do stop them from being able to achieve their alternate wincon. Is their alternate wincon so likely though? If scum decides the defuser, and they have to put their own members in the defuser spot a bunch of times to win, and they also need to live, won't we notice that? It's gonna be a huge difference if scum nominates consensus townreads in other to nightkill them, versus tries to slip their own members in that chair. At least, to me it would seem that way

In post 202, catboi wrote:

In post 196, The Praetorian wrote:

In post 194, catboi wrote:VOTE: the praetorian

Why do you want to push to kill people defusing bombs when its a scum chosen defuser? Now that im understanding the mech more your suggestion feels more anti town.

The town alternate win condition is vanishingly unlikely to ever take place. To achieve it would require at a minimum 7 night phases. That would guarantee 11 deaths already (7 from elimination, 1 from teh starting nightkill, and 3 from suxccesful town defusals). That puts us at 8 alive at most.This doesn't meaningfully put 'pressure' on scum because they can either put a member up for defusal to deny town the win condition or cause a failure in there, and at that point it can be delayed enough to prevent town from having any possible chance of meaningfully achieving it.

I am not arguing for unconditionally killing anyone who is selected as a defuser and have clarified the nuance of my position.

Ok good point. I didn't think of it that way

the "I don't like you" comment was a bit unnecessary and makes me not want to play rn so I'll be back later.

I didn't ever do anything to you and I don't care if you're scum advancing wincon that was not needed

I had a strategy at first but there's a clear counter if I say it.

In post 209, Titus wrote:I had a strategy at first but there's a clear counter if I say it.

experts should be especially careful about telegraphing their intentions.

In post 175, StrangeMatter wrote:You can't nominate yourself, I'm here but for a short period of time before I have a flight to catch.

But I keep getting the gut feeling to be semi paranoid of Frogsterking entirely on their read on me feeling really off. I didn't get a chance to respond to that I would say even with a small scum range like mine it would be wrong to assume that I couldn't be entirely capable of more as scum, which makes me a little more suspicious of how their playing.

I understand where you're coming from I think you're a player who is vulnerable to profiling and tone reads as a rule because of your temperament, and I think reading by profiles and tone reads gets kind of shitty results in a lot of situations it just happens to be how I can play this game. I want to get a good PoE going so I'm taking some risks and trusting my read on you because I think that's what it takes for my style of play to succeed. I'm not claiming to have an in depth understanding of your game or you as a person, I'm claiming to understand a few general things about you (creative, introverted, perfectionistic) based on observations from the game we played, including things you said about yourself during and after the game, and because of those general inferences I made about your temperament I think you're playing way too open and direct here with your thoughts than you would as scum.

In post 182, VP Baltar wrote:

In post 169, Frogsterking wrote:I think not rolling scum in a legit game in a long time

I just told you I rolled scum in this game: https://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=83&t=88831

Also the words I bolded cause me to suspect someone might be lying coming from almost any person in pretty much any situation ever, even if I said them myself.

Don't know what to tell you on that. I don't track or even think about my games after they are over. I think it's weirder when people can be like "oh, I played with so and so in such and such a game four years ago".

I probably couldn't even tell you the name of our first game together without having to look it up or think about it very hard, and that was not long ago!

VOTE: VP Baltar

VP Baltar is scum guys I'm telling you now, please sheep my vote as soon as you townlean/townread me and don't have anyone else you strongly believe are scum.

In post 188, The Praetorian wrote:regardless i want to be an expert then bc i love ktane and i purely signed up for this minigame

HEAL: Praet

In post 206, The Bulge wrote:@catboi

In post 173, The Bulge wrote:

In post 160, catboi wrote:

In post 143, Morning Tweet wrote:What is the biggest factor preventing us from just sending people to try and be bomb experts, like in resistance, have them try to succeed, and if there's a failure, it's guaranteed someone sabotaged so we still learn something?

If we play the other way, as catboi mentioned, scum gets an additional nightkill and we can't use the system. But we do stop them from being able to achieve their alternate wincon. Is their alternate wincon so likely though? If scum decides the defuser, and they have to put their own members in the defuser spot a bunch of times to win, and they also need to live, won't we notice that? It's gonna be a huge difference if scum nominates consensus townreads in other to nightkill them, versus tries to slip their own members in that chair. At least, to me it would seem that way

Had I rolled scum this game my goal would have been to propose something more or less like the former, playing it like resistance, and blitz the alternate win condition. Four successes is a small amount and it's certainly easier than trying to cut through an enormous amount of townies with a limited supply of nightkills. I would think there's at least a few other players in this game who'd think that way.

I don't think the scum alt wincon is as scary as you are making it out to be. certainly not something that can be blitzed. reasons morning already mentioned but i feel this post was overlooked.

In post 143, Morning Tweet wrote:If we play the other way, as catboi mentioned, scum gets an additional nightkill and we can't use the system. But we do stop them from being able to achieve their alternate wincon. Is their alternate wincon so likely though? If scum decides the defuser, and they have to put their own members in the defuser spot a bunch of times to win, and they also need to live, won't we notice that? It's gonna be a huge difference if scum nominates consensus townreads in other to nightkill them, versus tries to slip their own members in that chair. At least, to me it would seem that way

Okay? I'm not sure if you were expecting a comment from me on that, I'm not sure how you think I "overlooked" a post you quoted me replying to.

It seems largely the difference of opinion is based around whether we anticipate scum to select obvious town or more uncertain players for the defuser position. I would not support killin a consensus townread that is made defuser, as I have already stated.

In post 189, The Bulge wrote:

In post 184, StrangeMatter wrote:@The Buldge. Bad wording, didn't mean other parts of Frogster's play. I'm just saying they're right, but their reason doesn't feel very legitimate from what I can tell.

do you have thoughts on anything else frogster has said? does your current suspicion affect how you're reading their content?

I kind of have thoughts elsewhere on them (mostly through the reads) yet but I have been reading. Though at this and everything else doesn’t give me that impression, but still I can’t shake the feeling of “Are these reads actually real? And do they believe that?”

Also the more people keep talking mechanics the more I’m inclined to think scum is probably there at this point.

Sorry, I meant I don’t really have much thoughts elsewhere on what Frogs is doing.

catboi wrote:

In post 206, The Bulge wrote:@catboi

In post 173, The Bulge wrote:

In post 160, catboi wrote:

In post 143, Morning Tweet wrote:What is the biggest factor preventing us from just sending people to try and be bomb experts, like in resistance, have them try to succeed, and if there's a failure, it's guaranteed someone sabotaged so we still learn something?

If we play the other way, as catboi mentioned, scum gets an additional nightkill and we can't use the system. But we do stop them from being able to achieve their alternate wincon. Is their alternate wincon so likely though? If scum decides the defuser, and they have to put their own members in the defuser spot a bunch of times to win, and they also need to live, won't we notice that? It's gonna be a huge difference if scum nominates consensus townreads in other to nightkill them, versus tries to slip their own members in that chair. At least, to me it would seem that way

Had I rolled scum this game my goal would have been to propose something more or less like the former, playing it like resistance, and blitz the alternate win condition. Four successes is a small amount and it's certainly easier than trying to cut through an enormous amount of townies with a limited supply of nightkills. I would think there's at least a few other players in this game who'd think that way.

I don't think the scum alt wincon is as scary as you are making it out to be. certainly not something that can be blitzed. reasons morning already mentioned but i feel this post was overlooked.

In post 143, Morning Tweet wrote:If we play the other way, as catboi mentioned, scum gets an additional nightkill and we can't use the system. But we do stop them from being able to achieve their alternate wincon. Is their alternate wincon so likely though? If scum decides the defuser, and they have to put their own members in the defuser spot a bunch of times to win, and they also need to live, won't we notice that? It's gonna be a huge difference if scum nominates consensus townreads in other to nightkill them, versus tries to slip their own members in that chair. At least, to me it would seem that way

Okay? I'm not sure if you were expecting a comment from me on that, I'm not sure how you think I "overlooked" a post you quoted me replying to.

It seems largely the difference of opinion is based around whether we anticipate scum to select obvious town or more uncertain players for the defuser position. I would not support killin a consensus townread that is made defuser, as I have already stated.

technicalities. overlooked that part of the post, then.

you haven't responded to a point that i feel is pretty damning to your whole position, don't try and shut me down.

In post 214, StrangeMatter wrote:Sorry, I meant I don’t really have much thoughts elsewhere on what Frogs is doing.

do you agree/disagree with any of their reads in particular?

In post 215, The Bulge wrote:you haven't responded to a point that i feel is pretty damning to your whole position, don't try and shut me down.

I'm not trying to shut you down, I legitimately do not understand the point you are trying to highlight. State it in plain English for me.

scum can't just strongarm their wincon without the majority of them being widely townread. it would be very easy to catch on and simply eliminate scum and put a hiatus on defusing bombs.

In post 218, The Bulge wrote:scum can't just strongarm their wincon without the majority of them being widely townread. it would be very easy to catch on and simply eliminate scum and put a hiatus on defusing bombs.

*eliminate the scum defusers

and to be clear, idk where i stand exactly on when to defuse and when not, but i don't think we should be minmaxing it.

we should just evaluate daily the benefits of defusing a bomb (ie, defuser stays alive, information from nk, etc) and decide what to do based on the circumstances. if by lategame the alt wincon seems viable then we can push for it. otherwise, there's only 4 scum out there. not hard to win via elimination.

although i guess we don't know the defuser until after twilight. if we're nominating consensus townies as experts, it should be up to them to decide amongst themselves in their hood, assuming open discussion is allowed.

In post 213, StrangeMatter wrote:I can’t shake the feeling of “Are these reads actually real? And do they believe that?”

Feel like this is the exact feeling when you know it is Frogster town.

In post 2, Datisi wrote:the defuser and the experts are free to discuss the game as they wish.

definitely thinking the experts should take advantage of this and hold open court before getting to any of the minigame stuff. defuser should probably be excluded from discussion for the most part.

In post 221, The Bulge wrote:although i guess we don't know the defuser until after twilight. if we're nominating consensus townies as experts, it should be up to them to decide amongst themselves in their hood, assuming open discussion is allowed.

Hard thing will be finding 8 consensus townies in the early game of a large probably.

actually, this raises a question for me: