Mafiascum.net

In post 373, Val89 wrote:

In post 368, MargotRosa wrote:Don't forget, whatever you might think about how a Town noob verus a Scum noob might act, that noob might very well be receiving some coaching behind the scenes.

This is very true, but at the same time, I seriously doubt that anyone getting coached behind the scenes is being told to get emotional as soon as you get pressured because that will build you Town cred. It would be hard to pull off convincingly for someone without practice, and much easier strategies already exist

In post 374, DArby wrote:What? Shouldn’t you be putting more focus on reading more of the game like you said you wanted to do? I don’t see how waiting until the limit is helpful. Unless cook role claims we’re just stalling at this point.

This just isn't true. I have played games in which hard and fast eliminations happen, but they happened because it was bleedingly obvious who scum was, and everyone was in solid agreement about it

That's not true here. I imagine Cook will be eliminated. But this isn't a situation in which it's obviously justifiable to cut d1 short by 3 days

In post 330, Facebones wrote:Cook, do you have any town leans or scum leans at this point?

Would have responded to #362 but RL is fun as always.

With the perspective of a nondescript town player who's at the point of no return I'll offer my "I've stepped back and here's what I've noticed":

DArby put trust in strategies please. there's a thing called sacrifice that you have to do sometimes. You're still town.
Galron don't ignore walls. read games please. Null.
Thynhith scumlean.
MargotRosa townlean.
Roden scumlean.
Val89 i for some reason am trusting. townlean.
Facebones is nulltown.
Spangled possibly is scum.


going in to day two i'll take this much out of the strategy as a suggestion. If you get an FN message claim it but not who sent it until either you or person are at E-1. once two people claim FN messages we have effectively an activated IC which is pretty cool.

also look at who's silently boosting the wagon, and look who's actively pushing it. that should give you your sort for tomorrow.

"Shit, I think I've fucked up by doubling down trying to explain that strong townread on Facebones by saying he was prodding and probing, and mindmelded with me. I forgot the ISO was only 3 posts when I gave the read, and Vals pointed it out".
"Well, don't panic yet, just try make it about HOW he said it, not what he said."

I think we ought give noobs a bit of credit.
It seems to have worked because we are discussing his "emotions" and if that can be faked rather than looking at the actual evidence.

I am really going to have to see your flip, Cook, before I can decide if you are really taking the piss here or not.

VOTE: Cook

In post 376, MargotRosa wrote:

In post 374, DArby wrote:What? Shouldn’t you be putting more focus on reading more of the game like you said you wanted to do? I don’t see how waiting until the limit is helpful. Unless cook role claims we’re just stalling at this point.

This just isn't true. I have played games in which hard and fast eliminations happen, but they happened because it was bleedingly obvious who scum was, and everyone was in solid agreement about it

That's not true here. I imagine Cook will be eliminated. But this isn't a situation in which it's obviously justifiable to cut d1 short by 3 days

What are you looking to happen for the next 3 days?

From the Scum PT you linked, Val, I actually think that Cook thinks this strategy works lol.

It doesn't, and I've shown that it doesn't, but seeing how they act when talking openly to scum makes it clear.

What makes it obvious is the bit where she posts the modification of the strategy:

In post 2, Cook wrote:Okay, I figured out the strategy.

This is a modification of a superplaying strategy I made for Town.

• Day One, I'm going to ask the
  Tracker
  to claim and to post results from now on and for protectives to be on that claimed Tracker, should they exist.
  
  Reasoning:
  If the Tracker gets roleblocked then we know we're in the A2 (JK, Tracker vs Roleblocker) setup. If they get a result we treat that as a soft clear of that player.
  As no
  Tracker
  exists, this means we publicly "eliminate" setups A2, B1, and B3.
  
• Day Two, I'm going to ask for a
  Cop
  to claim and to post their clear from last night. If Cop claims, I ask for protectives to stay on Cop. The trick here is that there's
  no protectives if Cop claims
  and Townies aren't going to lie as that will directly harm Town. And then we just shoot the Cop, and we just confirmed we're in C1, both publicly and privately.
  
• If no
  Cop
  claims then
  you claim Cop with a clear on a scummy player
  . If a
  Jailkeeper
  pipes up to counter this claim then I'll shoot the Jailkeeper the next night. If
  Masons
  claim to counter this claim then that's our next two shot targets and then Town is left without a power role to spare.
  
• What your fakeclaiming Cop also does is in the event that you die, your scummy clear looks like it's trying to clear a partner, and then Town might go after them.

This, by the way, is what I would imagine the modification to be. Not the lay out itself, especially given that she doesn't seem to want to give it out at game start, but the actual play by play. She has no reason to lie in Scum chat.

Honestly, my read of this situation is that Cook came into the game wanting to try out the new strategy she'd made. She rolled Scum and was like 'eh, fuck it, I joined this game to try out the strat and I'm going to do it anyway'.

She modifies her strategy on the fly. We know this, because there is an almost day's difference between her posting the first message in Scum PT and the modification. And the modification is bad. It's awful. It takes a strategy heavily weighted to Town and makes a strategy that, if it were employed by Scum, would make it so obvious which players were Scum, by virtue of all the AI shit the modification would require them to guide Town into carry out.

On top of this, we have had no fake Tracker claim. So she can't be using the modification. And why would she use the strategy as Scum if she genuinely believes that the Strategy is Town weighted unless the modification is used?

I honestly feel like moving Cook to a Town lean, just by virtue of this, and the fact that it makes the whole tracker debacle make sense in my head

Someone get off the Cook wagon ASAP. I want to talk about this

If anyone hammers right now, I will tunnel you to kingdom come tomorrow

UNVOTE:

Alright. Let's flesh this out a bit.

In post 384, MargotRosa wrote:If anyone hammers right now, I will tunnel you to kingdom come tomorrow

I disagree with the direction you’re going in but I’m curious
UNVOTE:

In post 382, MargotRosa wrote:From the Scum PT you linked, Val, I actually think that Cook thinks this strategy works lol.

It doesn't, and I've shown that it doesn't, but seeing how they act when talking openly to scum makes it clear.

What makes it obvious is the bit where she posts the modification of the strategy:

In post 2, Cook wrote:Okay, I figured out the strategy.

This is a modification of a superplaying strategy I made for Town.

• Day One, I'm going to ask the
  Tracker
  to claim and to post results from now on and for protectives to be on that claimed Tracker, should they exist.
  
  Reasoning:
  If the Tracker gets roleblocked then we know we're in the A2 (JK, Tracker vs Roleblocker) setup. If they get a result we treat that as a soft clear of that player.
  As no
  Tracker
  exists, this means we publicly "eliminate" setups A2, B1, and B3.
  
• Day Two, I'm going to ask for a
  Cop
  to claim and to post their clear from last night. If Cop claims, I ask for protectives to stay on Cop. The trick here is that there's
  no protectives if Cop claims
  and Townies aren't going to lie as that will directly harm Town. And then we just shoot the Cop, and we just confirmed we're in C1, both publicly and privately.
  
• If no
  Cop
  claims then
  you claim Cop with a clear on a scummy player
  . If a
  Jailkeeper
  pipes up to counter this claim then I'll shoot the Jailkeeper the next night. If
  Masons
  claim to counter this claim then that's our next two shot targets and then Town is left without a power role to spare.
  
• What your fakeclaiming Cop also does is in the event that you die, your scummy clear looks like it's trying to clear a partner, and then Town might go after them.

This, by the way, is what I would imagine the modification to be. Not the lay out itself, especially given that she doesn't seem to want to give it out at game start, but the actual play by play. She has no reason to lie in Scum chat.

Honestly, my read of this situation is that Cook came into the game wanting to try out the new strategy she'd made. She rolled Scum and was like 'eh, fuck it, I joined this game to try out the strat and I'm going to do it anyway'.

She modifies her strategy on the fly. We know this, because there is an almost day's difference between her posting the first message in Scum PT and the modification. And the modification is bad. It's awful. It takes a strategy heavily weighted to

Scum

and makes a strategy that, if it were employed by Scum, would make it so obvious which players were Scum, by virtue of all the AI shit the modification would require them to guide Town into carry out.

On top of this, we have had no fake Tracker claim. So she can't be using the modification. And why would she use the strategy as Scum if she genuinely believes that the Strategy is Town weighted unless the modification is used?

I honestly feel like moving Cook to a Town lean, just by virtue of this, and the fact that it makes the whole tracker debacle make sense in my head

Quote edit in bold.

Does anyone else have any thoughts? Cook, can you corroborate/am I off the mark in an interesting way?

Yes, I certainly have some thoughts.

What is the modification? Thats the simple question I have been asking along. What changed between how she outlined it in 2075, and how she outlined it here?

In post 388, Val89 wrote:Yes, I certainly have some thoughts.

What is the modification? Thats the simple question I have been asking along. What changed between how she outlined it in 2075, and how she outlined it here?

The modification was the things she told her Scum team she was going to do in the quoted post, where she lays out what she's going to do d1, d2, etc.

The reason you aren't seeing any differences, is because this only existed in a Scum chat. Town can't see whether there is a modification or not, because the difference is whether or not she posted this modification in the Scum chat and carried it out, which she can only do if she's Scum.

Jesus what did I wake up to

I legit had stress dreams that Cook flipped as Tracker and freaked out when she got fake hammered during my skim

One of us is GROSSLY misunderstanding the other here. She lays out what she's going to do on d1 d2 d3, just like she does to town in 2075, and in this game.

The only difference is when she is explaining it to town, she tells them its town sided (it isn't). When she lays it out in scum chat, she explains what scum are going to do (either fake claim PRs, or just shoot the ones who are induced in to claiming too early) if town go along with it.

She DOES THE SAME THING IN THIS GAME. Yes, we can't see if she is posting this playbook in scumchat in this game, but there should be a modification to the bit she tells TOWN, in the normal game thread, and to my mind there isn't.

I even asked her direct, and this is what she said:

In post 279, Cook wrote:one crucial detail that differences that game and this one

i have a green role pm

In post 377, Cook wrote:

In post 330, Facebones wrote:Cook, do you have any town leans or scum leans at this point?

Would have responded to #362 but RL is fun as always.

With the perspective of a nondescript town player who's at the point of no return I'll offer my "I've stepped back and here's what I've noticed":

DArby put trust in strategies please. there's a thing called sacrifice that you have to do sometimes. You're still town.
Galron don't ignore walls. read games please. Null.
Thynhith scumlean.
MargotRosa townlean.
Roden scumlean.
Val89 i for some reason am trusting. townlean.
Facebones is nulltown.
Spangled possibly is scum.


going in to day two i'll take this much out of the strategy as a suggestion. If you get an FN message claim it but not who sent it until either you or person are at E-1. once two people claim FN messages we have effectively an activated IC which is pretty cool.

I think I get it now.

I don't understand the scum lean on me and I actually think Thyn has looked a little better as the game as gone on. Not a town lean but at least Null.

I could follow you on a Spangled vote if you're willing to trust me.

In post 2, Cook wrote:Okay, I figured out the strategy.

This is a modification of a superplaying strategy I made for Town.

Day One, I'm going to ask the Tracker to claim and to post results from now on and for protectives to be on that claimed Tracker, should they exist.
Reasoning: If the Tracker gets roleblocked then we know we're in the A2 (JK, Tracker vs Roleblocker) setup. If they get a result we treat that as a soft clear of that player.
As no Tracker exists, this means we publicly "eliminate" setups A2, B1, and B3.
Day Two, I'm going to ask for a Cop to claim and to post their clear from last night. If Cop claims, I ask for protectives to stay on Cop. The trick here is that there's no protectives if Cop claims and Townies aren't going to lie as that will directly harm Town. And then we just shoot the Cop, and we just confirmed we're in C1, both publicly and privately.
If no Cop claims then you claim Cop with a clear on a scummy player. If a Jailkeeper pipes up to counter this claim then I'll shoot the Jailkeeper the next night. If Masons claim to counter this claim then that's our next two shot targets and then Town is left without a power role to spare.
What your fakeclaiming Cop also does is in the event that you die, your scummy clear looks like it's trying to clear a partner, and then Town might go after them.

In post 76, Cook wrote:back now.

Cook's Handy, Dandy Plan

1. Tracker claims Day One. If nobody claims Tracker we just eliminated three setups (A2, B1, and B3).
   Protectives go on the Tracker claim. This will mean that the Tracker is jailkept in A2 and protected in B3.
   
   Tracker reports result D2. If Tracker claims blocked then we know we're in A2 and play the Tracker as an IC. If scum tries to ride the towncred then they're functionally down a player.
   If Tracker claims a result we just go Follow The Cop from here since Mafia only gets a rolecop.
   
2. If no Tracker claims then we have a normal D1 with a normal D1 elimination.
   
3. D2, Cop claims with result. Scum killing either the cop or their clear will result in the other one being IC'd the next day, therefore they must shoot elsewhere.
   
   If Masons exist then one Mason claims Cop with a clear on their partner, since either one dying proves the other one.
   
   If Scum tries to do this with partners then we'll end up 1-for-1'ing cop claims and we'll invariably win.
   
4. If you get an FN message, claim it but not who sent it. If you or the FN are run up to E-1 you may claim the message. We will preserve the FN from elimination for one night to let them send another message, if someone reports it the next day the FN is cleared. Jailkeeper, if there's a claimed FN don't prot them for one night, let them get a message – if scum kills them that leaves us rolecop vs jailkeeper, which we can win. This is our worst possible configuration.
   
5. Prots don't claim unless you're at E-1 or you need to counterclaim.

Again, what is the difference between these two pictures? Cook herself says the difference is this time she has a green role pm, and we just have to take that on faith. I say they are exactly the same.

In post 391, Val89 wrote:One of us is GROSSLY misunderstanding the other here. She lays out what she's going to do on d1 d2 d3, just like she does to town in 2075, and in this game.

The only difference is when she is explaining it to town, she tells them its town sided (it isn't). When she lays it out in scum chat, she explains what scum are going to do (either fake claim PRs, or just shoot the ones who are induced in to claiming too early) if town go along with it.

She DOES THE SAME THING IN THIS GAME. Yes, we can't see if she is posting this playbook in scumchat in this game, but there should be a modification to the bit she tells TOWN, in the normal game thread, and to my mind there isn't.

I even asked her direct, and this is what she said:

In post 279, Cook wrote:one crucial detail that differences that game and this one

i have a green role pm

But don't you see. That IS the difference.

The way the strategy changes are her instructions that she lays out .

In post 393, Val89 wrote:

In post 2, Cook wrote:Okay, I figured out the strategy.

This is a modification of a superplaying strategy I made for Town.

Day One, I'm going to ask the Tracker to claim and to post results from now on and for protectives to be on that claimed Tracker, should they exist.
Reasoning: If the Tracker gets roleblocked then we know we're in the A2 (JK, Tracker vs Roleblocker) setup. If they get a result we treat that as a soft clear of that player.
As no Tracker exists, this means we publicly "eliminate" setups A2, B1, and B3.
Day Two, I'm going to ask for a Cop to claim and to post their clear from last night. If Cop claims, I ask for protectives to stay on Cop. The trick here is that there's no protectives if Cop claims and Townies aren't going to lie as that will directly harm Town. And then we just shoot the Cop, and we just confirmed we're in C1, both publicly and privately.
If no Cop claims then you claim Cop with a clear on a scummy player. If a Jailkeeper pipes up to counter this claim then I'll shoot the Jailkeeper the next night. If Masons claim to counter this claim then that's our next two shot targets and then Town is left without a power role to spare.
What your fakeclaiming Cop also does is in the event that you die, your scummy clear looks like it's trying to clear a partner, and then Town might go after them.

In post 76, Cook wrote:back now.

Cook's Handy, Dandy Plan

1. Tracker claims Day One. If nobody claims Tracker we just eliminated three setups (A2, B1, and B3).
   Protectives go on the Tracker claim. This will mean that the Tracker is jailkept in A2 and protected in B3.
   
   Tracker reports result D2. If Tracker claims blocked then we know we're in A2 and play the Tracker as an IC. If scum tries to ride the towncred then they're functionally down a player.
   If Tracker claims a result we just go Follow The Cop from here since Mafia only gets a rolecop.
   
2. If no Tracker claims then we have a normal D1 with a normal D1 elimination.
   
3. D2, Cop claims with result. Scum killing either the cop or their clear will result in the other one being IC'd the next day, therefore they must shoot elsewhere.
   
   If Masons exist then one Mason claims Cop with a clear on their partner, since either one dying proves the other one.
   
   If Scum tries to do this with partners then we'll end up 1-for-1'ing cop claims and we'll invariably win.
   
4. If you get an FN message, claim it but not who sent it. If you or the FN are run up to E-1 you may claim the message. We will preserve the FN from elimination for one night to let them send another message, if someone reports it the next day the FN is cleared. Jailkeeper, if there's a claimed FN don't prot them for one night, let them get a message – if scum kills them that leaves us rolecop vs jailkeeper, which we can win. This is our worst possible configuration.
   
5. Prots don't claim unless you're at E-1 or you need to counterclaim.

Again, what is the difference between these two pictures? Cook herself says the difference is this time she has a green role pm, and we just have to take that on faith. I say they are exactly the same.

The fact we don't have a tracker claim as a pretty obvious start

Like, the modification is horrific. I've already said that. It mostly comes down to assuming both that:
a) Your strategy is amazing, and also that
b) No-one else is able to come up with a relatively simple modification and create an amazing strategy

And what difference does that make?

Let me put it this way. If Cook was town, and you and me were the scum team, what stops us from following the instructions Cook laid out to WhemeStar in the previous game, if the rest of town had been useufl idiots and brought it from her when she starting selling it early on?

Cook isn't going to be posting it in our scumthread, but she doesn't need to, because we can just read it from the 2075 scum PT. Or is she banking her entire factions chance of sucess of us being too dense to go back and read that previous game?

To put the question back at you Val, do you think that she writes up all these instructions in the maybe 24 hours between when she tells Scum chat that this is what she wants to do, and when she tells Town this is what she wants to do.

Or alternatively, is this a Town strat she's been cooking up for aaaaaages, written down and, in her mind anyway, perfected, gotten very excited about, and is so excited to share that she spills the ebans even when it's the least advantageous time to do so?

In post 395, MargotRosa wrote:The fact we don't have a tracker claim as a pretty obvious start

There was no tracker claim in 2075 either....