Posted: Sat May 15, 2021 1:09 pm
@norwee, do you currently think Bingle or Not_Maifia is more likely to be the scum in your neighborhood?
https://forum.mafiascum-staging.net/
The read on Norwee is recent. I've been solidly pushing Hopkirk for a while now and the only real content Norwee has had has been to shade that push (and literally everyone willing to give it the time of day) and jump on every possible cw.In post 474, marcistar wrote:(472) i have no idea how to read him, he's one of the people i'm unsure on rn so i'm willing to vote along with u VOTE: vanderscamp i like these points you made though, i didn't really think of it like that. that's whats making me comfortable to vote here
i don't really see it, i probably missed it but where is your last read on norwegianboyee? 403 i see you mentioning you see hopkirk with both, but i don't really see you do much to that..? like you responded to norwegianboyee, but it doesn't seem like you had a mind change in those posts..In post 473, Bingle wrote:I'm pretty sure it's just Hopkirk/Norwee at this point, tbh, and I don't see my vote moving.
But if Norwegian got totally fooled by her last game, why would it be weird that he is hesitant to townread her again this game?In post 345, Lukewarm wrote:Imo, she was a lot more active and asking more questions. I get the feeling that she feels a lot of pressure as scum to "not let her partner down", so tries a lot harder in that role. In our last game, she was TR by almost everyone pretty early in Day 1In post 341, Vanderscamp wrote:Do you think she's obviously different from last game?In post 339, Lukewarm wrote:Okay, if we are all going to start town reading Marci, can we talk about how weird it is that Norwee would push her here?
Like he has the added benefit of having seen her play, so there is no "she uses emojis, so I can't trust her" - which is 100% something people have scumread her for lol
Because that's the thing that would make it weird, I also think she sounds scummy so I don't mind it
Norwee had her as his #1 town read as of post 67, and he kept her as a town read even when he was sitting in the Ghost Chat. And post game saidIn post 1111, NorwegianboyEE wrote:Sorry everyone, my reads were awful this game. I usually am not that bad, but Marcistar's style is one that just didn't ping me as scummy at all... Well played to them.
Really dislike the last lineIn post 364, Lukewarm wrote:Looking at the 6p neighborhoodIn post 363, Hopkirk wrote:can you give us a readslist Luke?
TR - Marci / Guilty Lion
TL -
Null - Vander / Hopkirk
SL - Dunn
SR -
Still trying to get a better feel on Vander and Hop before I try any kind of push on Dunn.
I am gonna answer this in a spoiler, because I feel like the conversation has moved past this and I don't wanna clog the thread.In post 478, Vanderscamp wrote:Spoiler:
But if Norwegian got totally fooled by her last game, why would it be weird that he is hesitant to townread her again this game?
Do you have anything else?In post 449, Dunnstral wrote:I reread Vanderscamp, not feeling like voting there
I don't want to vote for Marci or Guiltylion either
So for me it's Luke or hopkirk in the 6
VOTE: Hopkirk
This is how I feel, I like Luke's latest defence of this stuff while disliking what he said previouslyIn post 462, NorwegianboyEE wrote:442 is an interesting post.
I feel like it’s more likely to come from town tbh. But i haven’t liked their other "cases" recently on me/Hopkirk.
I’ll need to give this some more time. UNVOTE:
I don't agree that everyone has been townreading me?...In post 468, GuiltyLion wrote:why the hell is everyone townreading Vanderscamp this game?? I really can't remember a single post or comment he's made that has made me feel like he's earnestly game solving. I'm going to re-ISO him again after I respond to the posts we've had but I'm also asking myself this: if town!Vander, why am I the only person who has even looked his direction? Who is scum in either pool who's keeping Vander on the table as a potential mis-elimination today?In post 449, Dunnstral wrote:I reread Vanderscamp, not feeling like voting there
I am aware, which is why I mentioned it.In post 469, GuiltyLion wrote:I'm mulling over this comment on reread... I feel it's less likely town would forget who is in which pool and which interactions can or can't be S/S. I've had my fair share of poorly thought out comments/takes this game, but certainly the entire game I've beenIn post 331, Vanderscamp wrote:I feel like it's pretty likely that if lukewarm joined this game to encourage Marci to step out of the newbie queue (which I have no reason at all to doubt) then he's probably going to be buddying up with her as any combination of alignments.Was going to say it didn't feel like a S/S interaction from them before I remembered that isn't possible anyway.constantlypaying attention to interactions cross-pool and keeping in mind potential scum candidates of each pool. I'm skeptical town!Vanders wouldn't really be aware that Marci/Luke can't be scum together 300+ posts into the game.
VOTE: Vanderscamp
Yeah: I'm ready to proceed to an eliminationIn post 482, Vanderscamp wrote:Do you have anything else?In post 449, Dunnstral wrote:I reread Vanderscamp, not feeling like voting there
I don't want to vote for Marci or Guiltylion either
So for me it's Luke or hopkirk in the 6
VOTE: Hopkirk
This feels extremely disingenuousIn post 472, GuiltyLion wrote:No.In post 471, marcistar wrote:is this the only point you have on him?In post 469, GuiltyLion wrote:I'm mulling over this comment on reread... I feel it's less likely town would forget who is in which pool and which interactions can or can't be S/S. I've had my fair share of poorly thought out comments/takes this game, but certainly the entire game I've beenIn post 331, Vanderscamp wrote:I feel like it's pretty likely that if lukewarm joined this game to encourage Marci to step out of the newbie queue (which I have no reason at all to doubt) then he's probably going to be buddying up with her as any combination of alignments.Was going to say it didn't feel like a S/S interaction from them before I remembered that isn't possible anyway.constantlypaying attention to interactions cross-pool and keeping in mind potential scum candidates of each pool. I'm skeptical town!Vanders wouldn't really be aware that Marci/Luke can't be scum together 300+ posts into the game.
VOTE: Vanderscamp
I already called out that 147 combined with 150 looks like fake reasoning to me - he's giving reasons to scumread both N_M and Lukewarm but not paying any attention as to whether those scumreads made sense together.
I didn't feel like his vote on you had any conviction or intent to solve.
The strongest/most meaningful content he's posted has been about Bingle, his questionable reasoning about both the Dunn & Norway slots, but it's rather easy for me to imagine that content being either a) scum!Vanders jumping on a townie making illogical/reachy assertions without justifying why those assertions indicatescumalignment or b) scum!Vanders distancing/bussing a buddy!Bingle. He's also just holistically been pretty inactive this game, he hasn't bothered to fight harder against the thread consensus to eliminate in the 6p despite his strongest SR being Bingle, and he hasn't taken a lead or a stake in substantially building nor defusing any wagons.
Given that it's D1 and he's played pretty careful, I don't have any surefire scumtells to nail him on, but the overall profile of his posting and votes this game vibes very much to me like scum treading water and trying to let town eat itself up in the meantime.
In post 142, Vanderscamp wrote:I still maintain that it's marginally better to kill into the small pool first, but more important is just to vote the person we think is most likely scum.In post 22, NorwegianboyEE wrote:Ok, i'm on a keyboard finally.
So my first nuanced thought is that it would be weird for Bingle to put himself in the 3P hood as scum when he was put in it as town in the last game and saw how bad it went for Skitter. I feel like Bingle would see himself as a much better player than me or N_M so for him to put himself in there seems really bold. N_M however, might feasibly do it for the memes.
But whatever i think we should eliminate in the 6P hood. Because then we can win in day 1 just like the last time Divide and Conquered was hosted.
But it's imo definitely wrong to want to prefer killing into the big pool, we will win just as easily by killing the scummiest player in the big pool and being right on D4 as we will on D1.
In post 143, Vanderscamp wrote:We did the math last game on killing into the different pools and there was something like a 4% increase in win rate by going small pool first, practically I think it is even better because it ensures one mafia dead at some point in the game, which I think is a lot more valuable than the zero value that an assumption of random killing attributes to it.In post 39, Lukewarm wrote:My gut reaction to this set up, is that it makes more sense to eliminate from the 3 person neighborhood, unless someone from the 6 person neighborhood really stands out as a scum read.
But last game the scummiest person was the scum in the big pool and we just killed them D1 for an easy game.
In post 143, Vanderscamp wrote:We did the math last game on killing into the different pools and there was something like a 4% increase in win rate by going small pool first, practically I think it is even better because it ensures one mafia dead at some point in the game, which I think is a lot more valuable than the zero value that an assumption of random killing attributes to it.In post 39, Lukewarm wrote:My gut reaction to this set up, is that it makes more sense to eliminate from the 3 person neighborhood, unless someone from the 6 person neighborhood really stands out as a scum read.
But last game the scummiest person was the scum in the big pool and we just killed them D1 for an easy game.
In post 148, Vanderscamp wrote:Going to try to not respond to every single one of these but this stance is absurdIn post 137, Dunnstral wrote:If we vote wrong the mafia kill likely lands in the group of 6, making it easier to figure outIn post 102, Lukewarm wrote:I have reconsidered, and I think I am on now leaning towards voting from within the 6 player neighborhood now.
I think I have come to the conclusion that shooting in the 6p neighborhood is better even if we miss Day 1
There is just a much higher reward for hunting within the 6p Mafia
I actually agree that getting out the 3-person hood mafia today makes the game harder than miseliming in the 6 person hood
In post 143, Vanderscamp wrote:We did the math last game on killing into the different pools and there was something like a 4% increase in win rate by going small pool first, practically I think it is even better because it ensures one mafia dead at some point in the game, which I think is a lot more valuable than the zero value that an assumption of random killing attributes to it.In post 39, Lukewarm wrote:My gut reaction to this set up, is that it makes more sense to eliminate from the 3 person neighborhood, unless someone from the 6 person neighborhood really stands out as a scum read.
But last game the scummiest person was the scum in the big pool and we just killed them D1 for an easy game.
In post 148, Vanderscamp wrote:Going to try to not respond to every single one of these but this stance is absurdIn post 137, Dunnstral wrote:If we vote wrong the mafia kill likely lands in the group of 6, making it easier to figure outIn post 102, Lukewarm wrote:I have reconsidered, and I think I am on now leaning towards voting from within the 6 player neighborhood now.
I think I have come to the conclusion that shooting in the 6p neighborhood is better even if we miss Day 1
There is just a much higher reward for hunting within the 6p Mafia
I actually agree that getting out the 3-person hood mafia today makes the game harder than miseliming in the 6 person hood
In post 222, Vanderscamp wrote:Because miskilling D1 almost always does not make the game easier than killing correctly.In post 152, Dunnstral wrote:Why?In post 148, Vanderscamp wrote:Going to try to not respond to every single one of these but this stance is absurdIn post 137, Dunnstral wrote:If we vote wrong the mafia kill likely lands in the group of 6, making it easier to figure outIn post 102, Lukewarm wrote:I have reconsidered, and I think I am on now leaning towards voting from within the 6 player neighborhood now.
I think I have come to the conclusion that shooting in the 6p neighborhood is better even if we miss Day 1
There is just a much higher reward for hunting within the 6p Mafia
I actually agree that getting out the 3-person hood mafia today makes the game harder than miseliming in the 6 person hood
I think the point you are trying to make is that killing into the big pool first, missing, and getting another NK in there makes solving that pool easier, but I don't think that is close to worth the value of not having to solve the small pool first.
The small pool scum is NOT someone we can just freely guarantee being able to kill if we kill aggressively into the big pool and do badly.
In post 143, Vanderscamp wrote:We did the math last game on killing into the different pools and there was something like a 4% increase in win rate by going small pool first, practically I think it is even better because it ensures one mafia dead at some point in the game, which I think is a lot more valuable than the zero value that an assumption of random killing attributes to it.In post 39, Lukewarm wrote:My gut reaction to this set up, is that it makes more sense to eliminate from the 3 person neighborhood, unless someone from the 6 person neighborhood really stands out as a scum read.
But last game the scummiest person was the scum in the big pool and we just killed them D1 for an easy game.
In post 148, Vanderscamp wrote:Going to try to not respond to every single one of these but this stance is absurdIn post 137, Dunnstral wrote:If we vote wrong the mafia kill likely lands in the group of 6, making it easier to figure outIn post 102, Lukewarm wrote:I have reconsidered, and I think I am on now leaning towards voting from within the 6 player neighborhood now.
I think I have come to the conclusion that shooting in the 6p neighborhood is better even if we miss Day 1
There is just a much higher reward for hunting within the 6p Mafia
I actually agree that getting out the 3-person hood mafia today makes the game harder than miseliming in the 6 person hood
In post 222, Vanderscamp wrote:Because miskilling D1 almost always does not make the game easier than killing correctly.In post 152, Dunnstral wrote:Why?In post 148, Vanderscamp wrote:Going to try to not respond to every single one of these but this stance is absurdIn post 137, Dunnstral wrote:If we vote wrong the mafia kill likely lands in the group of 6, making it easier to figure outIn post 102, Lukewarm wrote:I have reconsidered, and I think I am on now leaning towards voting from within the 6 player neighborhood now.
I think I have come to the conclusion that shooting in the 6p neighborhood is better even if we miss Day 1
There is just a much higher reward for hunting within the 6p Mafia
I actually agree that getting out the 3-person hood mafia today makes the game harder than miseliming in the 6 person hood
I think the point you are trying to make is that killing into the big pool first, missing, and getting another NK in there makes solving that pool easier, but I don't think that is close to worth the value of not having to solve the small pool first.
The small pool scum is NOT someone we can just freely guarantee being able to kill if we kill aggressively into the big pool and do badly.
In post 224, Vanderscamp wrote:IIRC Bingle did some initial math which was very wrong, I went back and corrected the math and we both agreed that the correct numbers were something along the lines of 41% town win rate vs 45% town win rate by killing into big pool first and little pool first respectively.In post 153, Lukewarm wrote:So I looked back at the last game.In post 143, Vanderscamp wrote:We did the math last game on killing into the different pools and there was something like a 4% increase in win rate by going small pool first, practically I think it is even better because it ensures one mafia dead at some point in the game, which I think is a lot more valuable than the zero value that an assumption of random killing attributes to it.In post 39, Lukewarm wrote:My gut reaction to this set up, is that it makes more sense to eliminate from the 3 person neighborhood, unless someone from the 6 person neighborhood really stands out as a scum read.
But last game the scummiest person was the scum in the big pool and we just killed them D1 for an easy game.
It is interesting that you site back that the math was done in the last game, without acknowledging that Bingle was the one that did the math, and that he was town that game, and that he also concluded that it was still better to shoot in the 6P pool.
I have been informed by a monkey that I should treat Bingle's mechanical talk as gospel, regardless of his alignment, but here I can clearly see that ConfirmedTown Bingle made the case that shooting from the 6P pool first is the better strategy.
From a math standpoint it's definitely better to kill into the small pool first, bingle and some other people made some arguments about why killing into the big pool first was better that I don't agree with since I think they mostly make assumptions about things being good that are actually neutral.
I don't mind killing into the big pool first if the scummiest person in the game is there but I will advocate very strongly for not avoiding killing into the small pool today just because it is the small pool.
In post 143, Vanderscamp wrote:We did the math last game on killing into the different pools and there was something like a 4% increase in win rate by going small pool first, practically I think it is even better because it ensures one mafia dead at some point in the game, which I think is a lot more valuable than the zero value that an assumption of random killing attributes to it.In post 39, Lukewarm wrote:My gut reaction to this set up, is that it makes more sense to eliminate from the 3 person neighborhood, unless someone from the 6 person neighborhood really stands out as a scum read.
But last game the scummiest person was the scum in the big pool and we just killed them D1 for an easy game.
In post 148, Vanderscamp wrote:Going to try to not respond to every single one of these but this stance is absurdIn post 137, Dunnstral wrote:If we vote wrong the mafia kill likely lands in the group of 6, making it easier to figure outIn post 102, Lukewarm wrote:I have reconsidered, and I think I am on now leaning towards voting from within the 6 player neighborhood now.
I think I have come to the conclusion that shooting in the 6p neighborhood is better even if we miss Day 1
There is just a much higher reward for hunting within the 6p Mafia
I actually agree that getting out the 3-person hood mafia today makes the game harder than miseliming in the 6 person hood
In post 222, Vanderscamp wrote:Because miskilling D1 almost always does not make the game easier than killing correctly.In post 152, Dunnstral wrote:Why?In post 148, Vanderscamp wrote:Going to try to not respond to every single one of these but this stance is absurdIn post 137, Dunnstral wrote:If we vote wrong the mafia kill likely lands in the group of 6, making it easier to figure outIn post 102, Lukewarm wrote:I have reconsidered, and I think I am on now leaning towards voting from within the 6 player neighborhood now.
I think I have come to the conclusion that shooting in the 6p neighborhood is better even if we miss Day 1
There is just a much higher reward for hunting within the 6p Mafia
I actually agree that getting out the 3-person hood mafia today makes the game harder than miseliming in the 6 person hood
I think the point you are trying to make is that killing into the big pool first, missing, and getting another NK in there makes solving that pool easier, but I don't think that is close to worth the value of not having to solve the small pool first.
The small pool scum is NOT someone we can just freely guarantee being able to kill if we kill aggressively into the big pool and do badly.
In post 224, Vanderscamp wrote:IIRC Bingle did some initial math which was very wrong, I went back and corrected the math and we both agreed that the correct numbers were something along the lines of 41% town win rate vs 45% town win rate by killing into big pool first and little pool first respectively.In post 153, Lukewarm wrote:So I looked back at the last game.In post 143, Vanderscamp wrote:We did the math last game on killing into the different pools and there was something like a 4% increase in win rate by going small pool first, practically I think it is even better because it ensures one mafia dead at some point in the game, which I think is a lot more valuable than the zero value that an assumption of random killing attributes to it.In post 39, Lukewarm wrote:My gut reaction to this set up, is that it makes more sense to eliminate from the 3 person neighborhood, unless someone from the 6 person neighborhood really stands out as a scum read.
But last game the scummiest person was the scum in the big pool and we just killed them D1 for an easy game.
It is interesting that you site back that the math was done in the last game, without acknowledging that Bingle was the one that did the math, and that he was town that game, and that he also concluded that it was still better to shoot in the 6P pool.
I have been informed by a monkey that I should treat Bingle's mechanical talk as gospel, regardless of his alignment, but here I can clearly see that ConfirmedTown Bingle made the case that shooting from the 6P pool first is the better strategy.
From a math standpoint it's definitely better to kill into the small pool first, bingle and some other people made some arguments about why killing into the big pool first was better that I don't agree with since I think they mostly make assumptions about things being good that are actually neutral.
I don't mind killing into the big pool first if the scummiest person in the game is there but I will advocate very strongly for not avoiding killing into the small pool today just because it is the small pool.
In post 234, Vanderscamp wrote:The important thing is that if we lynch correctly into the 3p pool, we have an extra kill we can use and about a 56% chance of winning from there.In post 223, Dunnstral wrote:The reason I say that is because if we correctly eliminate in the 3 person pool today, the next 2 nightkills are going to be the other 2 in that pool
If we eliminate in the 6p pool today, and start from the 3p pool tomorrow, I think we have better odds, including if they take the 3p pool down to 2
If we miskill into the big pool first and then start aiming for the small pool first we get three shots into essentially a pool of three and a pool of what will be either three or four, but needing to find two scum, which is definitely not better.
I can math it out, but hopefully it's clear?
Why would you hammer me if you're pretty sure it's hop/Norwegian?In post 477, Bingle wrote:I'll hammer Scamp if he hits E-1 on the premise we turbolim Hop then Norwee after.
Do you have anything alignment related?In post 487, Dunnstral wrote:Yeah: I'm ready to proceed to an eliminationIn post 482, Vanderscamp wrote:Do you have anything else?In post 449, Dunnstral wrote:I reread Vanderscamp, not feeling like voting there
I don't want to vote for Marci or Guiltylion either
So for me it's Luke or hopkirk in the 6
VOTE: Hopkirk