Mafiascum.net

In post 6, midwaybear wrote:hi everyone
looking forward to a good game

In post 25, Pink Ball wrote:*clap*

In post 25, Pink Ball wrote:*clap*

In post 29, Pink Ball wrote:Can I be the one who decides who lives and who dies and one of the two remaining players be Sir Cakez so I can let him die and be conftown for letting scum die?

In post 29, Pink Ball wrote:Can I be the one who decides who lives and who dies and one of the two remaining players be Sir Cakez so I can let him die and be conftown for letting scum die?

In post 8, beeboy wrote:I've thought about the strategy to this game today and it is optimal play for town is to just hand the chain to whoever they are confident is town and is least likely to get a chain from someone else.

The person who holds the most power is the 2nd last person to hold the chain since they choose who dies,

if we get a pool of 3 people, 2 scum and 1 town 33% of the time scum lives, same odds occur if we get a pool of 2 town 1 scum

since 66% of the time we have a 50% shot of hitting scum. So getting a whole bunch of scum at the end of our pool hardly helps us win. And letting town control who dies is incredibly valuable.

We also want a somewhat random town player being 2nd last so we shouldn't just select a "2nd last town" to make the kill, we want a fluid game state that allows for people to have free will especially in the early game since information is more valuable then actually hitting scum day 1 and 2. You can't solve a lot of players without letting them make hard hitting choices and by just shoving choices down their throat we can't ever get a solid read.

In post 36, Dunnstral wrote:^Fake FoS

In post 2, MariaR wrote:3) The Chainleader will also nominate a group of players to go on a quiz. Players can vote to approve or deny this pairing. If the group is denied the chain leader must make a new team. If the teams are denied 3 times in a row the quiz is automatically lost. YOU MAY ONLY VOTE TO APPROVE OR FAIL A TEAM ONCE PER TEAM

In post 8, beeboy wrote:I've thought about the strategy to this game today and it is optimal play for town is to just hand the chain to whoever they are confident is town and is least likely to get a chain from someone else.

The person who holds the most power is the 2nd last person to hold the chain since they choose who dies,

if we get a pool of 3 people, 2 scum and 1 town 33% of the time scum lives, same odds occur if we get a pool of 2 town 1 scum

since 66% of the time we have a 50% shot of hitting scum. So getting a whole bunch of scum at the end of our pool hardly helps us win. And letting town control who dies is incredibly valuable.

We also want a somewhat random town player being 2nd last so we shouldn't just select a "2nd last town" to make the kill, we want a fluid game state that allows for people to have free will especially in the early game since information is more valuable then actually hitting scum day 1 and 2. You can't solve a lot of players without letting them make hard hitting choices and by just shoving choices down their throat we can't ever get a solid read.

In post 39, NDMath wrote:Shouldn't we be controlling who that second-to-last person is?
Because if scum is third-to-last, controlling it means they don't get a chance to save a buddy, when that is a position where scum is highly likely to select a buddy.

In post 39, NDMath wrote:Shouldn't we be controlling who that second-to-last person is?
Because if scum is third-to-last, controlling it means they don't get a chance to save a buddy, when that is a position where scum is highly likely to select a buddy.

In post 41, Raya36 wrote:

In post 39, NDMath wrote:Shouldn't we be controlling who that second-to-last person is?
Because if scum is third-to-last, controlling it means they don't get a chance to save a buddy, when that is a position where scum is highly likely to select a buddy.

What if we select a small pool of players we think are town and someone within that pool must be chosen to be 3rd last and someone else within that pool must be 2nd last. That way our chances of town having full control of the kill are increased?

In post 43, farside22 wrote:

In post 41, Raya36 wrote:

In post 39, NDMath wrote:Shouldn't we be controlling who that second-to-last person is?
Because if scum is third-to-last, controlling it means they don't get a chance to save a buddy, when that is a position where scum is highly likely to select a buddy.

What if we select a small pool of players we think are town and someone within that pool must be chosen to be 3rd last and someone else within that pool must be 2nd last. That way our chances of town having full control of the kill are increased?

I think day 1 should stay as it is. Anything else said will help scum organize and if they slip day 1 then that's on them.
If we just keep those 2 players we find as the scummiest in the pool of those we want to see lynched from each person who forms the chain and the 2nd to last as the most town I think it will be a good plan for day 1.

In post 43, farside22 wrote:

In post 41, Raya36 wrote:

In post 39, NDMath wrote:Shouldn't we be controlling who that second-to-last person is?
Because if scum is third-to-last, controlling it means they don't get a chance to save a buddy, when that is a position where scum is highly likely to select a buddy.

What if we select a small pool of players we think are town and someone within that pool must be chosen to be 3rd last and someone else within that pool must be 2nd last. That way our chances of town having full control of the kill are increased?

I think day 1 should stay as it is. Anything else said will help scum organize and if they slip day 1 then that's on them.
If we just keep those 2 players we find as the scummiest in the pool of those we want to see lynched from each person who forms the chain and the 2nd to last as the most town I think it will be a good plan for day 1.

In post 45, Albert B. Rampage wrote:VOTE: Pink Ball