This is going to be one of those games that hits page 80 halfway through day 1 and I never quite catch up, isn't it
"waaah i can't keep up"
pull yourself together man!!!!
Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 6:15 pm
by Iconeum
In post 125, Green Crayons wrote:Seems like a particularly confident push over very little. Feels like early scum distancing
yeah sure
Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 6:18 pm
by Umlaut
Thanks for that, TW.
Page 1:
Nothing happened.
Page 2:
Like the early move away from random voting by Datisi (even though I don't really get the reasons for voting Gypyx) and the admission of bias in 33.
Dislike Grumpy coming in and saying "I want Gypyx exiled so I'll vote for... someone else."
Hoopla's data collection seems like more work than scum would do; it's easy enough to say "probably scum chose different numbers" because of course town will think of that, but actually verifying this empirically is unnecessary if it were just for town cred.
Page 3:
Has anyone compared Hoopla's tally of scum draft numbers to the tally of
town
draft numbers? Not sure what it would prove if anything but it was the first thing I thought of when I saw the histogram.
Gypyx' 71 is pretty weak, agreed with Icon there, though more at the level of "yeah that is weird" than "yes this is definitely scum."
Page 4:
Icon's 88 and then 97 are actually kind of weirdly uncharitable, "why did you try to answer Datisi when he asked you something" questions.
98 is a good question to ask, was wondering the same as I haven't seen any reasoning against Icon so far.
Page 5:
105 is pinging me a bit, isn't "the bit where we actually play mafia" exactly what Icon is doing with his points about Gypyx? Why not engage that more?
115 - Why on earth would you take Hoopla's plan seriously enough to object to it? I assumed it was a shitpost.
In post 67, Hoopla wrote:in actuality, i'd probably prefer to wagon a player who hasn't been doubled/tripled up.
can you elaborate on why you'd prefer this when you can pls ty
it was late last night, so i didn't have enough time to finish collating the data.
one more set;
of the 196 slots across 14 games, 42 are scum, 154 are town. a given slot individually has a 21.42% chance of being scum.
how often does each slot fall on a singularly chosen number? a double, a triple etc.
Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 6:26 pm
by Iconeum
In post 277, Umlaut wrote:Icon's 88 and then 97 are actually kind of weirdly uncharitable, "why did you try to answer Datisi when he asked you something" questions.
there was actually more to this, but the bait didn't bite so it's probably nothing
Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 6:27 pm
by Iconeum
In post 277, Umlaut wrote:Gypyx' 71 is pretty weak, agreed with Icon there, though more at the level of "yeah that is weird" than "yes this is definitely scum."
it is, which is why I pressured it
the 'definitely scum' thing is more of a style thing then being absolutely sure
Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 6:29 pm
by Iconeum
In post 259, Hoopla wrote:i'm unsure what to make of the gypyx fake-hammer and fake-reaction fiasco.
when you have players acting in a disingenuous way in order to harvest reactions, you risk players responding in kind (which is what gypyx did).
so, now the question shifts from "was gypyx's reaction genuine?", to "was the decision to fake a reaction to a fake hammer town?", which is just too flimsy of a premise to really parse anything meaningful imo.
if pressed, my intuition leans town on gypyx because it's kind of overt and bombastic to respond to a fake hammer with an equally facetious reaction test.
UNVOTE:
while i agree that the reaction was townish, i'm not sure of it was actually a fake hammer
Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 6:36 pm
by Something_Smart
In post 277, Umlaut wrote:I think S_S' reply looks willfully obtuse.
It was a little willfully obtuse, yes. But I felt like username wasn't saying what he really thought about my post, because "fake" was vague and generic and didn't really make sense in context.
Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 7:07 pm
by word321
doc aint scum with hoopla
Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 7:09 pm
by word321
u dnt question de validity of a scum partners data like in 265, specially if said data favours ur hypothetical play
In post 172, word321 wrote:I dnt like DrDolittle a.k.a. Doc from now on VOTE: DrDolittle
This is a fairly poor choice imo
is it a scummy choice? meh
dnt bully me sempai~
Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 7:18 pm
by word321
na
Im rly bad at making pushes, that much is truth
Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 7:20 pm
by Hoopla
In post 265, DrDolittle wrote:Like for example in this post. Hoopla could notice this is her scum PT as well and say guys let's both pick 5. I can use stats to defend us. Im largely uninterested in using these stats to figure out alignment, especially based on day 1
well yeah, obviously if i am scum i could rig the deck and get me and my buddies to pick unlikely combos i can defend with numbers. that goes without saying.
however, if i'm town, there are some serious inferences we can make throughout the game with the numbers.
Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 7:26 pm
by DrDolittle
even if you are town, how do you know scum players haven't thought about your line, and have players like you in the lobby to provide them with free defense?
independently, I don't buy this line of thinking, and I don't think you should be townread for suggesting it.
Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 7:28 pm
by davesaz
Official Vote Count 1.3
Something_Smart(4) - Gypyx, iamausername, Hoopla, Umlaut
Gypyx(2) - Marquis, Datisi
Dr Dolittle(2) - Grumpy Cat, word321
Iconeum(1) - Green Crayons
Marquis(1) - the worst
iamausername(1) - DrDolittle
Not Voting(3) - Clover Ebi, Something_Smart, Iconeum
With 14 alive, elimination requires 8 votes
Day ends in (expired on 2020-09-13 23:00:00)
Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 7:29 pm
by DrDolittle
In post 277, Umlaut wrote:Hoopla's data collection seems like more work than scum would do; it's easy enough to say "probably scum chose different numbers" because of course town will think of that, but actually verifying this empirically is unnecessary if it were just for town cred.
115 - Why on earth would you take Hoopla's plan seriously enough to object to it? I assumed it was a shitpost.
these contradict each other
Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 7:31 pm
by DrDolittle
the whole of 277 doesn't feel good VOTE: umlaut
Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 7:32 pm
by Something_Smart
Wrt to the latter quoted line, everyone is focusing on the shitpost and forgetting about the distinctly non-shitposty 67. Though it's obviously not a be-all end-all, it is a serious plan.
Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 7:33 pm
by word321
The argument u propose is either based on Hoopla's conciously taking a suboptimal route of play she aknowledges as, wich involves sacrificing prs from scum to town so that u could get some lil capital in the wifom department
I dnt have that much experience, but Ive never found that wifoms r that much worth it as scum; some of em have failed miserably despite working on paper a lot of times
The game works with a ranking
Getting 2 scum with the same number involves giving up ur rank position to every town that is above u
henceforth, severily crippling the capabilities of scum picking prs, nd severely boosting towns
Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 7:36 pm
by word321
every town with a nonduplicate digit, involving shenanigans like 784*
