Mafiascum.net

Stop pissing off the mafia.

In post 323, RCEnigma wrote:But I only know one person that has voted scum for sure.

?

I see not mafia is being their normal day 1 self too

In post 308, SJReaver wrote:callforjudgement continues their focus on optimal play. I suspect their desire to lecture people over how they ought to play is a NAI personality trait.

I do it to make it possible to distinguish between players who play in an anti-town way out of ignorance and players who play in an anti-town way out of choice. It isn't intended to read me, so much as to read other players.

On that note, VOTE: Nosferatu. I was hoping to sort Nosferatu by seeing where their vote moved after I pointed out that it wasn't doing anything useful, but Nosferatu seems happy to be intentionally hard to read and to make it hard for it to scumhunt other players, even after I explained the consequences of those actions.

I think Frogster's initial case on Nosferatu is weak (but seems to be sincere), but Nosferatu's reaction to it has been pretty telling in its own right.

In post 327, callforjudgement wrote:those actions.

I think Frogster's initial case on Nosferatu is weak (but seems to be sincere), but Nosferatu's reaction to it has been pretty telling in its own right.

which bit didn't you like?

In post 306, Nosferatu wrote:i dont like unvoting; i dont see a pressing reason to switch off, etc

this I amfine with for example.
note that you are buddying up with frogster and using their logic/wagon to justify your own vote

In post 309, SJReaver wrote:

In post 299, Raya36 wrote:There's no wagon on callforjudgement anymore while there is on Walter. Plus I can barely read judgements posts so I need to go back through later

So you voted for Walter because other people were voting for him?

No, I clearly stated in a post who the two people are I think could be scum (Walter and Judgement) and I explained why for each. I switched from Judgement to Walter because my vote was doing nothing and would be more powerful on a wagon

In post 287, geraintm wrote:Only a quick post before bed, will post properly tomorrow, but i think mynaim this game is to make it last long enough that mod runs out of images of bricks

The length of a game normally depends on the length of day 1. In a way, although it would be nice to have a four week day 1, with everyone active and trying out lots of different wagons and getting lots of useful information for future days, it generally doesn't work out like that in practice. People get bored, things go nowhere, you need flips to keep activity up and stop people flaking. So wanting a long game frequently turns out to be a bad thing for town, in practice. (Also worth noting: newbie queue win rates going way up when the deadlines were reduced.)

In post 323, RCEnigma wrote:I think my problem with this game is all of the surface level accusations that are surely to go nowhere.

It's hard to know that an accusation will go nowhere until you make it. Trying it to see what happens tends to produce more useful results than not trying it and getting no information as a result. Even if it doesn't help people read the accused player, it may help them read the player making the accusation.

Nos I think you reducing Frogs case down to unintelligible babble is disingenuous at best. But the strong reaction to a weak case concerning.

This is a good example of a flimsy accusation leading to useful results!

In post 313, SJReaver wrote:That no one has seriously scum read me or pushed my slot is a touch disappointing.

You did get results from this, even if not the ones you expected:

In post 31, WaltertheDunce10 wrote:Bad post Reaver click on the link for normal games, and to answer since this is a mini only one town and one mafia faction.
There is a list of roles on the wiki for normal games.

In post 226, WaltertheDunce10 wrote:is that an actual claim sj in 216?

(For reference, the claim in #216 was Paranoid Gun Owner, a role that is not Normal according to the Normal Game definition, thus it can't be in the setup.)

Apparently Walter, despite knowing that Normals only allow a specific list of roles, decided to rolefish in response to your claim rather than checking it. (Part of the reason there was little response to your claim is likely related to the fact that it's a bad idea to discuss roles too much in a Normal, especially early on; it tends to give scum hints as to where the power roles are, and most Normals become very scumsided if you can't keep the power roles hidden. In my previous Normal, scum won, and a major factor in this was having too many roleclaims on D1. So gaining any results at all were something of a surprise.)

I'm pointing this out in the hope that the information is useful for whatever test you were running.

In post 323, RCEnigma wrote:I think my problem with this game is all of the surface level accusations that are surely to go nowhere. Some of them might even be on scum! But I only know one person that has voted scum for sure.

Nos I think you reducing Frogs case down to unintelligible babble is disingenuous at best. But the strong reaction to a weak case concerning.

What's more concerning is your attention being directed at frog and not the following votes on a wagon that you should recognize doesn't hold much weight.

What's up man talk to me, what's got you bothered?

lmao im like confused lowkey like am i actually scummy its like reading a fever dream

callforjudgement wrote:

In post 308, SJReaver wrote:callforjudgement continues their focus on optimal play. I suspect their desire to lecture people over how they ought to play is a NAI personality trait.

I do it to make it possible to distinguish between players who play in an anti-town way out of ignorance and players who play in an anti-town way out of choice. It isn't intended to read me, so much as to read other players.

On that note, VOTE: Nosferatu. I was hoping to sort Nosferatu by seeing where their vote moved after I pointed out that it wasn't doing anything useful, but Nosferatu seems happy to be intentionally hard to read and to make it hard for it to scumhunt other players, even after I explained the consequences of those actions.

I think Frogster's initial case on Nosferatu is weak (but seems to be sincere), but Nosferatu's reaction to it has been pretty telling in its own right.

im so over this bullshit read my town pm and weep

VOTE: nosferatu

if ur on this wagon you suck at this game

it is anti-town wincon to bleed town d1 and you know it cfg, and that bullshit abt consequences of being on whats basically an rvs wagon is ridiculous

geraintm wrote:

In post 327, callforjudgement wrote:those actions.

I think Frogster's initial case on Nosferatu is weak (but seems to be sincere), but Nosferatu's reaction to it has been pretty telling in its own right.

which bit didn't you like?

In post 306, Nosferatu wrote:i dont like unvoting; i dont see a pressing reason to switch off, etc

this I amfine with for example.
note that you are buddying up with frogster and using their logic/wagon to justify your own vote

thats not what buddying means bro im not pocketing him by telling him his case is shit or endearing myself to him in any fucking way

just send me to the fucking spoiler chat

In post 323, RCEnigma wrote:What's more concerning is your attention being directed at frog and not the following votes on a wagon that you should recognize doesn't hold much weight.

IM VOTING someone on a wagon that doesn't hold much weight like what the fuck am i reading

Like JayZ said "it was all good just a week ago".

In post 335, Nosferatu wrote:

In post 323, RCEnigma wrote:What's more concerning is your attention being directed at frog and not the following votes on a wagon that you should recognize doesn't hold much weight.

IM VOTING someone on a wagon that doesn't hold much weight like what the fuck am i reading

The voters on YOUR WAGON.

In post 313, SJReaver wrote:Stupid DAMN newbies.

I agree that newb!scum might be worried about the attention. (And yes, I know that newb!scum is me in this case so my judgement is suspect as hell)

That no one has seriously scum read me or pushed my slot is a touch disappointing. As scum, I think I'd be a touch more timid? I know it sounds like BS, but if you look at my games, I've only drawn town. I'd love to think that I'd be as aggressive as scum, but until it happens, I can't know.

By the way, I am town

Totally town

RCE is the only one who took my bait and I town read them. It makes me sad.

What was the bait again?

In post 334, Nosferatu wrote:it is anti-town wincon to bleed town d1 and you know it cfg

I can parse this sentence fragment about three different ways, none of which make any sense. Are you saying that you're acting scummy because you think looking town is anti-town? That you think I'm town, but playing badly because I'm trying too hard to be townread? That you think I'm scum because I look town? (Why do you even think that I look town?)

im not entertaining u more votes lemme see the spoiler chat

In post 332, callforjudgement wrote:

In post 313, SJReaver wrote:That no one has seriously scum read me or pushed my slot is a touch disappointing.

You did get results from this, even if not the ones you expected:

In post 31, WaltertheDunce10 wrote:Bad post Reaver click on the link for normal games, and to answer since this is a mini only one town and one mafia faction.
There is a list of roles on the wiki for normal games.

In post 226, WaltertheDunce10 wrote:is that an actual claim sj in 216?

(For reference, the claim in #216 was Paranoid Gun Owner, a role that is not Normal according to the Normal Game definition, thus it can't be in the setup.)

Apparently Walter, despite knowing that Normals only allow a specific list of roles, decided to rolefish in response to your claim rather than checking it. (Part of the reason there was little response to your claim is likely related to the fact that it's a bad idea to discuss roles too much in a Normal, especially early on; it tends to give scum hints as to where the power roles are, and most Normals become very scumsided if you can't keep the power roles hidden. In my previous Normal, scum won, and a major factor in this was having too many roleclaims on D1. So gaining any results at all were something of a surprise.)

I'm pointing this out in the hope that the information is useful for whatever test you were running.

I find it very unfair to expect everyone who plays Normals to be 100% up to speed on what is and isn’t allowed in them. I had a game where I thought I knew my stuff but I made a fatal error that lost the game for town. No one’s perfect.

In post 339, callforjudgement wrote:

In post 334, Nosferatu wrote:it is anti-town wincon to bleed town d1 and you know it cfg

I can parse this sentence fragment about three different ways, none of which make any sense. Are you saying that you're acting scummy because you think looking town is anti-town? That you think I'm town, but playing badly because I'm trying too hard to be townread? That you think I'm scum because I look town? (Why do you even think that I look town?)

I think he’s saying being obvtown early isn’t a good idea for him
Which Idk if I really like that, feels like he’s trying to hint PR in a slick way
I’m open to talking about this if Nosf cares to though.

In post 182, Frogsterking wrote:Like you really think a guy who took the time to upload an animated avatar of some movie star consuming a cigar or joint or whatever the fuck that is would feel too self-aware to post some filler because he's been drinking?

In post 182, Frogsterking wrote:Like you really think a guy who took the time to upload an animated avatar of some movie star consuming a cigar or joint or whatever the fuck that is would feel too self-aware to post some filler because he's been drinking?

In post 182, Frogsterking wrote:Like you really think a guy who took the time to upload an animated avatar of some movie star consuming a cigar or joint or whatever the fuck that is would feel too self-aware to post some filler because he's been drinking?

In post 182, Frogsterking wrote:Like you really think a guy who took the time to upload an animated avatar of some movie star consuming a cigar or joint or whatever the fuck that is would feel too self-aware to post some filler because he's been drinking?

In post 182, Frogsterking wrote:Like you really think a guy who took the time to upload an animated avatar of some movie star consuming a cigar or joint or whatever the fuck that is would feel too self-aware to post some filler because he's been drinking?

wrap it up we found scum! someone is smoking in my profile picture!

In post 342, Gamma Emerald wrote:

In post 339, callforjudgement wrote:

In post 334, Nosferatu wrote:it is anti-town wincon to bleed town d1 and you know it cfg

I can parse this sentence fragment about three different ways, none of which make any sense. Are you saying that you're acting scummy because you think looking town is anti-town? That you think I'm town, but playing badly because I'm trying too hard to be townread? That you think I'm scum because I look town? (Why do you even think that I look town?)

Which Idk if I really like that, feels like he’s trying to hint PR in a slick way
I’m open to talking about this if Nosf cares to though.

that is what im saying, im not hinting at a pr tho i think its optimal play as town unless you have a negative utility role which i don't

In post 341, Gamma Emerald wrote:I find it very unfair to expect everyone who plays Normals to be 100% up to speed on what is and isn’t allowed in them. I had a game where I thought I knew my stuff but I made a fatal error that lost the game for town. No one’s perfect.

I don't expect everyone to be up to speed on what's allowed in a Normal. I'm not scumreading Walter for that (and am not strongly scumreading him for anything).

I did, however, expect SJReaver not to know it, and they're unlikely to get viable reads from their actions otherwise. So it was worth pointing this out purely for SJReaver's sake.

I also think it's a little strange that a player would point someone else to the Normal Game rules without actually reading them, although it's understandable. If you're thinking about jumping in to answer a fully setup-based / mechanical question, wouldn't it be more townsided to leave the explanation to someone who had a better understanding of it? (Or to put it another way, #226 isn't scummy but #31 might be.) It isn't a strong tell, though.

In post 344, Nosferatu wrote:that is what im saying, im not hinting at a pr tho i think its optimal play as town unless you have a negative utility role which i don't

If the townies act like that, the scum will act like that too. Then, how will you ever tell them apart?

If you're thinking in terms of "avoiding the nightkill", that generally isn't a good thing as town. Some townie is going to be nightkilled, after all, and the fewer obvtown players there are, the more of a free choice scum will have to make a kill on someone with good reads / who they expect is a power role / etc. rather than being forced into killing obvtownies to avoid getting caught by the process of elimination.

In post 346, callforjudgement wrote:If the townies act like that, the scum will act like that too. Then, how will you ever tell them apart?

getting good

ik for a fact that you've played with good scumplayers who actively scumhunt and promote pro-town ideas and are totally passable as town by like 80% of this playerbase so that argument falls on its face right there

the whole game is trying to tell them apart lmao

I’m doing Creature style reads this game, deal with it

ItalianoVD
callforjudgement

BananaCucho

Not_Mafia
geraintm
Raya36
Frogsterking

RCEnigma
sordros


Linethrough = townread, italics = not exactly a townread but don’t want to vote there
FYI I will probably work on tuning my reads soon