Mafiascum.net

There's dozens of possibilities that are both ACTUAL OUTCOMES IN THIS GAME as well as potentials that you could not have possibly known the chances of existing in this game or not.
The point I'm trying to make here is this; you lynching the player you are sure is scum is always a better play in a closed non-normal setup than going with a no lynch.
Here, it would have literally lead to you winning the game.
Yes, skitter was the first to drop off and vote for the no lynch, but you still proposed and were complicit in that plan. All of town was. This isn't just advice for you, this is advice for the four townies who all voted for a no lynch in MYLO in a closed non-normal setup that is confirmed to have role growth and extra kills available to scum.

Should be either instead of both in that first sentence but
yeah.

Gamma, why'd you vote for no lynch here?
Nos, I can get--he just wanted the game to be over.
Skitter already explained it--she was having second thoughts and doubting everything.

I voted because arguing for the lynch was too much effort then

...but every single town player had either voiced a scumread of NSG or voted NSG with the exception of porkens.

Next time, please put in the effort.

Again, I agree with you that no lynching COULD have caused the loss, just as it COULD cause a loss in any game. But it didn't in this game. And it hasn't in the vast majority of games where towns no lynched at MYLO.

I would appreciate if you could separate your theoretical belief that no lynching is always bad from the reality of what happened in this game -- no lynching here did NOT decrease the town's chances of winning. Scum didn't gain any advantage from the no lynch. As a factual matter, the no lynch didn't CAUSE the loss.

I agree with most of your points -- as an uninformed player, we don't know what capability scum has to end the game before we get to LYLO -- but I disagree that this means you shouldn't ever no lynch. It just means that there's risks to no lynching. Your view rests on speculation about what could happen. But there's also risks to lynching at MYLO (i.e. the risk of mislynching) and no lynching could provide new information that substantially lowers that risk on the following day phase, at LYLO. In other words, your logic also applies to the risk of mislynching at MYLO vs the risk of mislynching at LYLO with an extra night of information.

How do you weigh these risks/benefits? Despite your tone of certainty, there's no clearly correct answer. You can't deny that some games reward no lynching at MYLO, while others punish it. The reality is that it depends on the specific circumstances in each game.

In this game, you say the risk was very high that scum would end before we got to LYLO through an extra kill, but I thought that risk was lower precisely because of Gooey's flip. Scum had already lost their extra killing power, as well as removing the hated townie from the game, making the risk of no lynching much lower. And while you might disagree, the reality is that no lynching didn't give scum an advantage in this game. They didn't have an extra kill. And if town had played better (e.g. skitter using her role on town), town would have ended up with more information than they otherwise would have at 3p LYLO.

I don't think it's correct to blame what Nos did on our decision to no lynch. The two actions don't have any connection.

It also seems that you have a strong preference for games that punish no lynching, as a game designer and player, but that doesn't mean there's anything wrong with games that reward no lynching. Maybe it's not your cup of tea, but it's still a legitimate game design and strategy decision.

If you want to talk facts, there are two hard facts:
1. You all went with a no lynch over a lynch on scum.
2. The gacha had a 1 out of 7 chance of giving Porkens a vigilante shot and a 2 out of 7 chance of giving him a ton of gold (enough to put him at 358 or 458, would have been enough for Switcheroo if Porkens handled his gold gain right)

If you somehow think that no lynching here didn't decrease town's chances of winning, you're literally wrong.
Even in the actual situation that played out, you're still wrong, because a no-lynch here still lowered the lynch threshold to 3 instead of 4, which made it so only one town had to vote wrong, and go figure, Nos voted wrong.

The potential benefits that you get from a no lynch in a closed non-normal setup, by design, will always be weaker than the risk posed. No lynching in MYLO just sets you up for scum to fake a guilty result off of some action and force a 1v1 if things are looking bad for them--and if things aren't looking bad for them, then they just win.

It is completely fine to say that No Lynching went hand in hand with Nos' game-throw vote because Nos would have never been able to make such a vote if you had simply kept the lynch threshold at 4 and evaluated the ENTIRE GAME OF EVIDENCE that you already have. If you are so incapable of catching scum with 100 pages of content and 5 nights of role interactions and a claimed roleblocker on scum that resulted in a no kill, I can't fathom how you think one more night of interactions behooves you.


There are games that reward no lynching and I'd highly argue that games designed for that (intentionally or not) are poorly designed games of mafia. That's neither here nor there, though.

If you're in a normal setup in MYLO, sure, no lynch.
If you're in an open or semi-open and it's clear the roles in play would give town better info to use, sure, no lynch.
But even then you run high risk of scum forcing a 1v1 with a fake claim.