Mafiascum.net

I got pulled into marathon marketing meetings through 5 pm PST

Bbl

I don't cc jk

Gut says teacher is town af for day 2 posts though, even if day 1 posts still give me bad vibes

A few thoughts, while we're still trying to figure this out.

In post 418, Oxy wrote:correct, c3 is the one setup where it doesn't clear. scum would have to be very lucky to hit this exactly.

After stewing on this, it wouldn't actually be that much luck? Scum knows which column we're in, so if they have no power roles then, based on last night, they know it's c2 or c3. If neither was jailkept, then they can guess it's a more than 50% chance it's c3. Risky, but the odds are technically in their favor.

In post 421, teacher wrote:MY earlier general theory does not work because of C2 and A2 combined, as best I can tell. Or it gets too unwieldy for me to play out well.

So what to do about the fact that we have a claim that --

if true

-- would put us in Row 2 of the setup? Should we counter it or not? I think yes, in the way Oxy suggests. What does the board think of the below?

Oxy's Suggestion

Countering the extant claim at the first level reveals a (cop, neopolitan, jailkeeper). If there is a counter, there are 2 suspects. They reveal actions for info. Lynch among them for a lock scum ID by day 3 at worst (mislynch), PLUS the info from the true PR. At worst, after night 3, it is 3:1, with hopefully usable info.

But if no counterclaim from those powers, NK's claim could still be falsified if there is a tracker AND a doctor - C3 as oxy identifies in 418. But its not as unlikely as he claims. At this stage, it is exactly a 25% chance. So how to address this: presumably a mass "pr no pr claim" without identifying role, as this would (a) validate NK's claim in full if 0-1 pr claims; (b) create a 3 suspect pool if 2pr claims; (c) create a 4 suspect pool INCLUDING BOTH MAFIA if 3pr claims. Option c is guaranteed lock town, so cannot happen. Playing out options A-B further:

• No PR claim (option A): NK is lock town, and kept mafia (no night kill assumption). He reveals action. Board kills target. D3 begins at 5:1. Good.
• One PR claim: NK is now lock town. The other claimaint is probably real too (A2, B2), but could still be false because of C2. NK leads townblock that other claimant MUST follow for all days. Have alternative PR say reveal role and action.
  • IF claimed doctor and NK dies N2, claimant scum. Again D4 begins 3:1.
  • If claimant tracker, NK will die N2. Must assess reasonability of tracker's N1 and n2 actions.
• Two PR claim: clear three suspect pool. Select board-cleared person (Elephant?) to receive PMs from two claimaints identifying roles. A contradiction narrows it to two suspects. If they claim consistent with C3, then there remain three suspects. Doctor reveals. Mafia must kill him, so lynch among remaining two. If mislynch, D3 lynch is guaranteed scum (doctor if doctor survives night; 3d claimant if doctor dies). Worst case-D4 starts 3:1 with info.

If this gets validated, I will respond in the manner Oxy desires.

I'm finding a couple problems. In A, NK15 could have kept town. Killing the target could be a mislynch, leading to NK15's night kill, and we're down to 0-1 PRs and no useful information from NK15. Also it'd be 3:2 if that's the case. In B, I don't think PMs are allowed.

In post 427, Irrelephant11 wrote:After stewing on this, it wouldn't actually be that much luck? Scum knows which column we're in, so if they have no power roles then, based on last night, they know it's c2 or c3. If neither was jailkept, then they can guess it's a more than 50% chance it's c3. Risky, but the odds are technically in their favor.

Townslip or intentional?
No one knows who was jailkept, except me!

In post 427, Irrelephant11 wrote:A few thoughts, while we're still trying to figure this out.

In post 418, Oxy wrote:correct, c3 is the one setup where it doesn't clear. scum would have to be very lucky to hit this exactly.

After stewing on this, it wouldn't actually be that much luck? Scum knows which column we're in, so if they have no power roles then, based on last night, they know it's c2 or c3. If neither was jailkept, then they can guess it's a more than 50% chance it's c3. Risky, but the odds are technically in their favor.

In post 421, teacher wrote:MY earlier general theory does not work because of C2 and A2 combined, as best I can tell. Or it gets too unwieldy for me to play out well.

So what to do about the fact that we have a claim that --

if true

-- would put us in Row 2 of the setup? Should we counter it or not? I think yes, in the way Oxy suggests. What does the board think of the below?

Oxy's Suggestion

Countering the extant claim at the first level reveals a (cop, neopolitan, jailkeeper). If there is a counter, there are 2 suspects. They reveal actions for info. Lynch among them for a lock scum ID by day 3 at worst (mislynch), PLUS the info from the true PR. At worst, after night 3, it is 3:1, with hopefully usable info.

But if no counterclaim from those powers, NK's claim could still be falsified if there is a tracker AND a doctor - C3 as oxy identifies in 418. But its not as unlikely as he claims. At this stage, it is exactly a 25% chance. So how to address this: presumably a mass "pr no pr claim" without identifying role, as this would (a) validate NK's claim in full if 0-1 pr claims; (b) create a 3 suspect pool if 2pr claims; (c) create a 4 suspect pool INCLUDING BOTH MAFIA if 3pr claims. Option c is guaranteed lock town, so cannot happen. Playing out options A-B further:

• No PR claim (option A): NK is lock town, and kept mafia (no night kill assumption). He reveals action. Board kills target. D3 begins at 5:1. Good.
• One PR claim: NK is now lock town. The other claimaint is probably real too (A2, B2), but could still be false because of C2. NK leads townblock that other claimant MUST follow for all days. Have alternative PR say reveal role and action.
  • IF claimed doctor and NK dies N2, claimant scum. Again D4 begins 3:1.
  • If claimant tracker, NK will die N2. Must assess reasonability of tracker's N1 and n2 actions.
• Two PR claim: clear three suspect pool. Select board-cleared person (Elephant?) to receive PMs from two claimaints identifying roles. A contradiction narrows it to two suspects. If they claim consistent with C3, then there remain three suspects. Doctor reveals. Mafia must kill him, so lynch among remaining two. If mislynch, D3 lynch is guaranteed scum (doctor if doctor survives night; 3d claimant if doctor dies). Worst case-D4 starts 3:1 with info.

If this gets validated, I will respond in the manner Oxy desires.

I'm finding a couple problems. In A, NK15 could have kept town. Killing the target could be a mislynch, leading to NK15's night kill, and we're down to 0-1 PRs and no useful information from NK15. Also it'd be 3:2 if that's the case. In B, I don't think PMs are allowed.

A is a valid issue, but minor and does not dissuade me; B is not a valid issue (though apparently correct, my apologies).

A. NK only PR claim at all: This situation requires no other pr, so no other save. mafia attempted to kill night one (I really dont see why they wouldnt). The odds that Mafia AND NK targeted the same individual are roughly 2.4% (1/7 * 1/6) - vanishingly small. And that 2.4% can be reduced to about null further when NK announces whom he held. If he held common suspect, he almost certainly held the mafia actor as mafia would be unlikely to eliminate a potential mislynch target N1. If NK held a mostly-towned slot, likely (but less certain) he held town because Mafia would PR hunt among townies N1. At least this creates a two-town block, if the saved is required to follow NK.

B. OK, so the PM-elimination cant work. By virtue of PEdits then, the multi claim will have to be consistent with C3 to avoid narrowing the suspects to 2. Play as per 421 where the lynch is between NK and the non-doctor claimant. Worst case result is D4 start with 3:1 + info.

Im still down to follow Oxy's suggestion.

By the way, @Thor, Im taking it from the board silence that this requires an IC to sort out. Good luck!

Absent a response from Thor, do people want to proceed with Oxy's proposal? I do. I am going to be V/LA beginning Friday, so I think would be good to get some action.

I do not counterclaim. (Reminder since it’s been a while. Only C.C. if cop, Neapolitan, or JK)

If I am not mistaken then everyone except Thor(and me, of course) did claim Not JK/Cop/Nea. Which means that we have to wait for Thor anyways...

I must have missed severa (elephant and flicker offhand - I know they posted but u I didn’t think they responded)

In post 368, Flicker wrote:@Thor - care to explain?

Well, for starters he phrased it with an @IC that probably my brain just skipped over. That said, his question also wasn't a meta question it was a 'how do you scumhunt' question. I probably would have said 'lots of ways' and skipped it because that's basically asking me to write a book or to give a pithy short answer.

In post 375, teacher wrote:

In post 372, Nauci wrote:Idk about mass claiming.

Maybe tracker/not tracker claims, and/or hypothetical claims after? I have to think on this.

To be clear, I am NOT seeking mass-claiming, but staggered claiming to time counterclaims.

First (Thur-Friday) Doctor(s) claim. If cc - both identify saves, lynch among. If no cc, move on. If no doc claim at all, gain info that general suspect list likely off.

Second (Sat-Sun), if doctor identified, other pr claim. If cc - Doctor then ID save (lock-town), and lynch among ccs (unless one is saved by dr. Then lynch other). If no cc by end of sunday - 2 towns confirmed. 3 if doctor didnt save other pr. Known!town block grinds down mafia.

Again, only a theory. But I think it works.

In post 384, Not Known 15 wrote:At this point a massclaim, with three stages should be in order.
First stage: Everyone claims VT or Not VT.
Second stage: The Not VT claims claim their roles.
Third stage: The powerroles tell us their targets.

Why a massclaim at this stage?
I mean, clearly from reading up I can tell you were super excited to claim, but why advance that to a massclaim idea?

In post 385, Flicker wrote:@Thor - Would you still argue for a tracker claim today?

Yes.
Though now that a JKer has claimed it's a bit more 'meh'.

In post 387, Oxy wrote:Thor I'm glad we have an IC still around.
@Could you please walk us through your IC opinion on mass claiming vs other strategies for this particular situation? Could you also talk about lynching vs no lynching after a no kill? <3

In post 418, Oxy wrote:@Thor I know a lot changed since I asked you my last question. Could you please talk about what good strategy is here, from an IC perspective? <3 again.

In post 420, Nauci wrote:I think claim strats are super complicated and would like to see Thor weigh in before we continue

In post 430, teacher wrote:By the way, @Thor, Im taking it from the board silence that this requires an IC to sort out. Good luck!

In post 434, Not Known 15 wrote:If I am not mistaken then everyone except Thor(and me, of course) did claim Not JK/Cop/Nea. Which means that we have to wait for Thor anyways...

Okay, seriously guys, two thoughts;

1. In the middle of a game (with some people straight claiming) is *not* the best time to figure out your entire mindset on how claims work. Maybe go read some articles about claiming? At the very least stop proposing plans if you're also going to be asking questions - realize you don't have a plan?
2. You're allowed to read that other people are asking me questions. I'm going to do a *single* post about my general outlook on claiming, and include a few notes on specific aspects of claiming int he situation we are in. If you have questions about that post afterwards feel free to ask them. If you have another giant broad sweeping question about the very need of claiming I'm going to just link you to our lovely Mafia Discussion section, where people sit around and talk theory all day. There's a search function. Just saying

Right, so first off let me post this thought;

EVERYONE STOP CLAIMING ANYTHING FOR ABOUT 24 HOURS AND CHILL YOUR JETS!

Thank you.
I'll get my "how 2 claim" post up in a bit.
Then I'll post a game relevant post after that.

Claiming 101
aka - why am I having to write this in the middle of a game where people are already claiming?

So let's start with 'what is a claim?'
A claim is when you announce your role to the world. There are many reasons to do this. A fair few are bollocks reasons.Let's do a quick glance over 'reasons to claim'

1. You're going to be lynched, you claim to try to stop the lynch.
2. You have game relevant info that seems worth exposing yourself to NK (e.g. you can cause the lynch of a scum, you can prevent the lynch of a confirmed town/make a confirmed town)
3. You're doing the gambitz!1!!
4. You're trying to expose enough setup info to allow town to gain a scumhunting advantage (generally this is part of an organized massclaim if it is remotely happening in a good way)

The above are all good reasons to claim, but you'll note that there tends to be certain addendum attached to each, that's because it is very easy to claim in a stupid way for each of the situations. Just as a quick example - let's look through a bad version of each claim reason;

1. You claim at L-2. No one was expressing much intent to vote you who wasn't already voting you, you probably could have just kept arguing against your lynch.
2. You decide your info is game relevant (I tracked Player X going nowhere last night, and there was no kill, he's the scum!) when it isn't.
3. Your gambit is dumb (I'm going to claim to be a day vig and post lulz, this will get great reactions!)
4. Only half the town agrees to the massclaim, and only half claim, and then the claims peter out. Or you do it in a setup where the mod has built to punish mass claim game break plans.

So, at the end of the day, what is the real hope to a claim? That answer is the same as the answer town should have for literally anything they do - that the action will lead to lynching scum or to clearing town. So as you start to think about claiming you should basically ask yourself how the claim does one of those things. If you can't clearly articulate it then it's probably not the right time to claim.

Another good thing to look at is your downside for delaying your claim.

As an example, say it's Day 1 in a Semi Open setup like 2d3.
Someone gets run up to L-1 and claims Cop.
You, however, are the Cop.
Do you claim now and get the scum lynched?
Well...maybe, maybe not. There are a few possible paths;

1. You claim, scum is lynched. The scum team will then try to kill/block your role and town may or may not have a protective role. You got town 1 scum flip at probably the cost of your life and/or functionality besides being a confirmed town.

2. You do not claim. Someone else is lynched (who may or may not be town) You then get an investigate at night - you may or may not be NKed - if you die then scum is lynched the next day, if you live then you have a clear or a guilty to report and can still counterclaim the fake claimed Cop.

Which option offers more benefit to town? I would argue #2 because it provides more info to town overall (though there is some potential risk of how people do or don't react to your counter claim, but by counterclaiming you do assure a scum lynch within two phases). The ramifications of your claim a phase or two down the line are always something to consider, and if there's no downside to not claiming right away, then maybe don't claim (a good classic example of this is a Vig - a Vig literally should almost never counterclaim as long as he still has bullets and a night phase to work with - because a bullet is a really good counterclaim.)

How to claim when you claim?

There are basically two schools of thought to this.
Each has pros and cons.

1. Tell Everything immediately

In this version you claim your role, you claim all relevant night targets and which night you visited each. You claim any results. You claim any relevant bits of fluff or hidden info in your role PM. You reveal that awkward reference to Kevin Costner was your Bodyguard crumb, ect. ect.

Pros: very helpful for trying to setup break. Very helpful to do a full info dump in case you die before revealing something useful. Very helpful in getting a town that has run you up to L-1 with hammer intent to try to trust that you're telling the truth.

Cons: Gives scum maximum information about what is or is not known about their activities.

2. Tell things in drips and drabs.

Pros: Can work to lure in scum counterclaims before you drop more info. Can work to lull scum into a false sense of security in order to try to get them to reveal more info prior to outing them. Helps in the gambitz!1!!

Cons: Can make you look scummy. Can deny town info that would help them scumhunt. Can distract or annoy town, making them suspect you or an innocent person for non-valid reasons. General potential headaches from other roles claiming to counter your semi-false/incomplete claims.


Generally speaking, by the time claiming is a good thing, you should stick to method #1. If you can't clearly and *specifically* describe afterwards why you opt for a #2 claim, then a #2 claim is basically always the inferior move. Naturally thousands of exceptions exist to this broad statements, but it's a good core rule of thumb. I would also suggest that the more a game includes the following words "Normal, Open, Semi-Open" in its name the less valuable #2 method is. The more "Role Madness, Theme, Closed" appears the safer and more reasonable #2 is.

=================================================

For what is happening in this game right now.

At game day start - a no kill is meaningless to everyone except scum.
Now, if you're a town PR who can protect people/prevent actions then the lack of a kill might have more meaning. That said, scum might have no killed just to screw with you/because they're not really present players and gaffed up submitting a kill. Do I think that happened? Probably not, but it is important to at least keep it in your paranoid town mind as a possible reality.

So, at game day start - the only claim I think would have been a good idea was the aforementioned Tracker claim that I mentioned on Day 1 (and I would argue that a full reveal of night results within at least 1-2 real life days would then also have been a good idea).

The thing is, now we have a JKer claim.
That means we either have NK as scum lying to us, NK as derp town lying to us, or we have NK as JKer and have a Doctor, a Tracker, or no other PR at all.

So, what is our over and under for claim info?
In any world where he is telling the truth, NK is the most powerful town role and has outed himself - this is not beneficial for town.
Scum would be dumb not to kill him - because they can't risk him being alive if we manage to lynch a scum.
Scum also know whether there is a Doctor or a Tracker or no other PR - which means now scum has a lot more information than town does (again, showing it was not a good idea to claim if NK is town)

So, here are my suggestions;

1. We treat NK as confirmed town today (this is not a permanent call, but it is a decent one for now) Scum either have to kill him if he's town, or risk him becoming a better Cop if we manage to kill scum. Also, if we have a Doc then Nk's actions start to work like a Cop for us a bit right now - so, bottom line, his lynch today is stupid and I oppose it.

@NK - you should claim your night action within the next 48 hrs or I'll presume you're scum and lying to us. If you're not going to claim your action I request that you present info on your brilliant plan of 'how this will help town for you not to claim action' and then I will explain how that logic makes no sense, will note that you shouldn't have claimed anyway, and demand your night action or we'll lynch you.

2. Any Doctor should not claim unless you're brought to L-1 with a hammer intent - you should protect NK, *especially* if we get a scum lynch today.

3. Any Tracker should not bother to claim now either, as the JKer claim weakens the value of your claim. However, you *should* claim if you have a track result showing someone who is not NK visiting someone else, or if you tracked NK and he claims to have targeted someone other than who you tracked him to. You would do these claims because they would help us with info and catching scum - if people are confused about how that works feel free to ask. Again, you do claim at L-1 with hammer intent if that happens to you, any info you have is less valuable than you getting lynched

If people disagree with any of these ideas feel free to explain why. I'll then explain them more fully (or be amazed at your insight and change my mind). But I suspect you're not changing my mind.

Oh, and any PR that can direct counter the JKer (a Cop, a Neo, et al) I actually softly favor not counterclaiming for about 4 real life days - just so NK can get used to his 'town' position and offer his thoughts.

, Irrelephant11 , , teacher , Oxy , L-0
teacher (1)Nauci ,
Nauci (1)Meji Fan ,
(1)
Not Voting (1)Flicker

Hurm, looking this over, my issues with Nauci and Meji look valid, though maybe I'm overlooking Flicker.

I'm also thinking either teacher is scum or one of my town reads is wrong.
Let's dance with the lawyer.

VOTE: Teacher

I targeted a possible nightkill.
Thor.

What made you think he was a likely nk target?

Also, why I claimed...
I wanted to avoid a quicklynch, or a claim at L-1 that wasn't going to be believed. JB(the only confirmed town at the start of Day 2) named me as their top scumread.

In post 441, Oxy wrote:What made you think he was a likely nk target?

1. IC.
2. They were not suspected (anymore).
3. They were helpful for the town discussion, asking good and intelligent questions.

There is no assurance I was the NK target.

@Oxy - why no vote in play yet?

I thought it best to see what was going to come out claims wise, first.

I like your fos on meji more than I like your fos on teacher. Why did you decide to vote teacher and not Meji?

In post 445, Oxy wrote:I thought it best to see what was going to come out claims wise, first.

I like your fos on meji more than I like your fos on teacher. Why did you decide to vote teacher and not Meji?

In post 439, Thor665 wrote:James Brafin (5)Thor665 , Irrelephant11 , Not Known 15 , teacher , Oxy , L-0

Thor is saying that one of the people who voted James were scum.
What do you think of that, Oxy?

Thor, why do you think it is likely, given how the lynch happened, that there is scum on the wagon at the final votecount?

I'm not sure that Thor is saying that as a certainty.

But assuming the premise for your question is correct,

I think that if there is a scum on the james wagon, it is either you or Thor.

I am very doubtful that there are two scum on the wagon.

realistically, though. I think the team is simply 2 of {meji, flicker, nauci}.

VOTE: Nauci, Meji, Thor, Flicker.