Mafiascum.net

In post 3991, zMuffinMan wrote:then you've never seen a neighbourhood played correctly - though, technically, the neighbourhood you had in cash cabd was a semi-masonry (albeit among two people, not three)

That was neighborization, not a randomly assigned neighborhood.

apropos of nothing, town neighborizer is one of my favorite roles to draw.

whether or not it's a randomly assigned neighbourhood has nothing to do with it; what's important is whether or not mutual town reads can be established in an all-town neighbourhood

nacho pulling the "omg neighbours can never be a town force you're so bad for thinking that" card is a load of bullshit and i gave him an example of a neighbourhood he was in as a counter-point

and I'm saying that the way a neighborhood is started/originates has a huge impact on whether mutual town reads can be established.

When I read your posts about the power of an all town neighborhood, the cash cabd game didn't even occur to me as an example because the start dynamic was so different.

selkies wrote:and I'm saying that the way a neighborhood is started/originates has a huge impact on whether mutual town reads can be established

it really doesn't, though

as long as you can get past the paranoia of "omg 3-man neighbourhood, must be 1 scum in it" and form reads in it while discussing the game, it's really no different to someone being a neighbouriser and neighbourising their town reads (assuming it really is an all-town neighbourhood). in both scenarios, there's possibly scum, and in both scenarios, no one can be sure of the other players' alignments, but they can still be a powerful force

key thing i was asking about here is whether you know of nati's opinion on this - i don't care to delve into theory any further

I don't know how Nati thinks about this, exactly. We talked a little about the cash cabd game after it ended, and I remember he thought town were overpowered compared to scum in that game. He didn't think scum daytalk should have counted for much in the balance of that game, but I think he felt the 2 investigative roles were more problematic than the neighborhood. iirc he thought that particular neighborhood was hell for scum, but it was based on the player/role synchronicity. Different players drawing the neighborizer or doctor roles might have made the neighborhood much less of a factor in the game.

btw since it's now over, if you need any additional proof of how logical and efficient i try to be with night actions, the QT from gif's touhou game is a preeeeeeeeeetty good example - my night actions were planned with a claim in mind, the kills were planned for maxmum efficiency (apart from the first that i didn't really have a say in because scum mates were like "lol ignored") and i was planning for different contingencies the whole time

if you think i would have given up the opportunity to take this game to a D3 mylo as scum here, you literally have no clue about how i play the night game as scum

Will read through it.



Hopefully 24 hours or less.

Would scum Nacho have kept me alive after this yesterday?

In post 3917, Guyett wrote:VOTE: nacho

In post 693, notscience wrote:Aronis Kaboom and Goodfather

Nacho replaced Kaboom here... it is possible ns put his 2 scum buddies in his scum pile but I think its probably only 1

In post 805, Idiotking wrote:Also to keep up with the times, how about this:

I am going to

Unvote

Vote Aronis

For no better reason than other people are doing it, and sheeping is apparently not scummy anymore.
I am only going to post prod-dodge posts until D3, because apparently lurking is not scummy.
I am no longer going to put any thought into any of my votes, because hey, it's just my gut instinct, man, and that ain't scummy.

You have taught me well, guys. I will not disappoint you!

That vote made this VC



Selkies(1): kabooooomm
zMuffinMan(1):


kabooooom(0):
zMuffinMan

, , Katsuki,

Katsuki(3): Selkies, ,
No Lynch(0):

Not Voting():

In post 823, RossWilliam wrote:

Unvote: Aronis

IdiotKing, were you aware you just put him at -1 without mentioning it? Are you hoping he'll just "accidently" end up lynched?

That vote made this VC



Selkies(1): kabooooomm
zMuffinMan(1):


kabooooom(0):
zMuffinMan

, , Katsuki,

Katsuki(3): Selkies, ,
No Lynch(0):

Not Voting():

In post 827, Nachomamma8 wrote:

Vote: Aronis

That vote made this VC



Selkies(0):
zMuffinMan(1):


kabooooom(0):
zMuffinMan

, , Katsuki, Nacho

Katsuki(3): Selkies, ,
No Lynch(0):

Not Voting():

I've just got serious doubts on my nacho townread :/

Nacho should be after ik on that vc.
Ik pushes aronis to l-1
Ross gives out that the vote wasnt announced as l-1
Nacho naked votes aronis to push him to l-1 without announcing it.
to me this looks like a coordinated attempt to get aronis lynched organised from scum day chat.

In post 841, zMuffinMan wrote:may as well mention it now since he's L-1 and intent to hammer etc etc

aronis, idiotking and i are in a neighbourhood (with daytalk obv)

Points to town z

In post 960, Natirasha wrote:

Vote Count 1.28

MafiaSSK(0):

Cabd(0):

Selkies(0):

zMuffinMan(0):

FourTrouble(0):

notscience(0):

The Goodfather(0):

Nachomamma8(0):

Bert(1):

zMuffinMan

RossWilliam(3):

FourTrouble, Bert, Selkies

Aronis(6):

Cabd, notscience, Katsuki, IdiotKing, Nachomamma8, MafiaSSK

Idiotking(0):

Katsuki(1):

The Goodfather

No Lynch(0):

Not Voting(2):

RossWilliam, Aronis

With thirteen alive, it takes seven to lynch.

Deadline:

(expired on 2014-02-04 21:00:00)

Prodding The Goodfather.

Scum selkies prob would have deadline hammered aronis as an excuse
UNVOTE:

Fuck it
VOTE: nacho

If selkies is scum gg

L-1 btw

online

ok

and we are not confirmed yet because that wasn't l-1 lol

Has muffin not voted for nacho yet?!?

guyett wrote:Would scum Nacho have kept me alive after this yesterday?

from a practical standpoint, there is little difference between keeping you alive with 4 alive, 3 to lynch and killing you to make it 3 alive, 2 to lynch - except that the former doesn't incriminate him in any way (which is probably something he'd be wary of after 169, as much as he suggests he could talk it off)

that is assuming it was a conscious choice and not just a failure to submit an action (which is entirely possible given nacho's recent activity issues)

guyett wrote:Has muffin not voted for nacho yet?!?

nope, but it's fairly obvious where my suspicions lie and it really doesn't make a difference whether i'm voting him or not (unless you're just asking to confirm selkies)

I find it a bit odd that despite being so sure that nacho is scum you haven't voted for him...

Opinions on 4009?

guyett wrote:I find it a bit odd that despite being so sure that nacho is scum you haven't voted for him...

then you've never seen me play a lylo before. i am probably more cautious than i need to be, but for all intents and purposes, whether or not my vote is on him makes no difference (except to either confirm selkies or let selkies hammer for the win, so)

i also want to see what nacho tries to say if selkies votes him and i don't hammer

guyett wrote:Opinions on 4009?

i don't really understand your issue here

i didn't really like the way nacho handled the end of D1 (it really didn't look like he was trying to figure out the game so much as trying to figure out where he could be to draw the least suspicion)

but i dunno why those three votecounts specifically made you doubt your read on nacho