Mafiascum.net

I am much better now that Tammy is back!

How are you ? :3

In post 467, Klick wrote:On average, yeah? I think she's more likely to dislike the softclear as scum. Especially since she laid out the strongest argument for the softclear being accurate IMO.

Part of this could definitely be a playstyle clash between how I view the game and how she does. But I think she's more likely scum than average out of it.

What argument did I lay out for the soft clear being accurate?

In post 625, PookyTheMagicalBear wrote:I am much better now that Tammy is back!

How are you ? :3

pretty good. i'm mostly being lazy since i'm done with classes for the day. drafting some bad rw decks cause i felt like drafting rw

uw imo is ridiculously strong

disturb is busted

In post 628, PookyTheMagicalBear wrote:uw imo is ridiculously strong

disturb is busted

yeah, uw is my most drafted deck by far, but i got bored of it. and the gameplay is very tiring. good deck though.

thats true

it is super boring

also who r ur scumreads

mafmen kinda but i'm doubting it

In post 622, PookyTheMagicalBear wrote:Trivially easy to fake

I really don't see your point by returning to this. I was the one who made the joke originally that I overuse the phrase but there are successful and unsuccessful ways to read players. Infinity has not played against my scumgame in a completed game since May 2017. Her gut led her extremely wrong in a scumgame she spectated.

its a joke

what are your thoughts on enchant

i used to think he was easy to read but I've seen him replicate his town meta as scum

I need more data

That joke/horse was dead yesterday. Don't miss actual criticisms beating it.

I love beating a dead horse tho.

In post 459, Klick wrote:I lean towards Tammy's argument against Wisdom-town being scum-motivated
And I didn't love the contrast between her answering my self-meta question with 'idunno', followed shortly by talking about how she'd already be proud if she were scum here

?

They're not even the same thing though. I mean they're in the same ballpark, but this is like telling me that because I like the tanginess of an orange I have to like the tartness of a lemon ballpark. But they're two different things.

You asked me a counterfactual. How would I approach the game as scum. I'm not scum, so I didn't consider how I'd approach it. I gave you what generic things I did in the past when scum as what I might do. But I don't know. I took a long break from mafia and haven't played solo scum in four years, and the only time I did draw scum was last year in a hydra which is really different. I haven't had to consider how I would approach a game as scum in a long ass time, so I just do not know.

I do, however, believe that when I do finally draw scum it will be atrocious. I'm kind of terrified of what that will look like and how terribly I'll let down my team. Maybe it won't go as badly as I'm expecting it to, but me not knowing how I would approach a game as scum doesn't nullify me being able to look at how I am playing and thinking if I were scum here I'd be pretty happy at how it's turning out. Literally, if I am this active in a game when I draw scum, no matter what people think of my alignment, that will be a super win for me in my book.

Also, sorry Infinity-I did not notice you shifted your pronoun to they. I will do my best to revise it moving forward.

Tammy puts the bar very low on the ground and proudly steps over it.

Raising her arms in triumph.

Ngl this does feel like town Tammy.

In post 639, Prism wrote:Also, sorry Infinity-I did not notice you shifted your pronoun to they. I will do my best to revise it moving forward.

same

In post 639, Prism wrote:Also, sorry Infinity-I did not notice you shifted your pronoun to they. I will do my best to revise it moving forward.

thanks

what was the game where my gut was terribly wrong again? you linked forest fire

In post 642, Infinity 324 wrote:

In post 639, Prism wrote:Also, sorry Infinity-I did not notice you shifted your pronoun to they. I will do my best to revise it moving forward.

thanks

what was the game where my gut was terribly wrong again? you linked forest fire

In the linked post in Forest Fire, you discuss spectating Newbie 2051, which is my only completed scumgame of the last 4 years.

Infinity you've played quite a few games with scum!me

what made you decide you could confidently townread me on page 2?

is my scum game that one dimensional to you ? :<

In post 644, PookyTheMagicalBear wrote:Infinity you've played quite a few games with scum!me

what made you decide you could confidently townread me on page 2?

is my scum game that one dimensional to you ? :<

didn't confidently townread you on page 2 lol

In post 27, Infinity 324 wrote:pooky town

ok whatever this is then

i liked your reaction to enchant

it was a page 2 read though. of course it wasn't confident

i exaggerate early townreads for content in most games

*nods sagely*

In post 462, Klick wrote:

In post 218, Tammy wrote:

In post 211, MafMen wrote:you guys are definitely being too hard on wisdom here
an 'easy pass'? cmon

*shrug*

Now do I think Wisdom, who I think could figure out how to get town reads without voting or death tunneling, would come out with something hokey like "how do I get town reads without voting?" as scum. Maybe not, even joking. But I don't trust that interpretation of mine either.

See, I read this and struggle to see how the Wisdom paranoia outweighs what looks like a fairly solid argument?

PEdit: Wisdom being town and being soft-confirmed would be bad for scum!Tammy

I'm not paranoid of Wisdom though nor do I think it's a fairly solid argument. That's a small behavioral assessment that might not be right. I haven't played with Wisdom in like 5 years and I don't trust the reasoning on that type of read unless I have a really good understanding of someone and their behavior. And then even then it's flimsy. That's not a good reason for me to feel comfortable town reading someone. It might for you, and that's fine, but it's not for me.

The soft clears due to the trust thingy were poor and they were sketchy. I both do not want scum to be soft cleared for bad reasoning and don't trust people giving poor reasoning like that. I don't buy into the scum scrambling to keep someone from getting clear, and don't think I've ever done that as scum, but I do buy into scum clearing town for bad reasoning. So I'm going to question what looks like poor reasoning to get reads on people. I'll do this even if I think the person is town.

But I don't quite get your argument. You're saying that I'm trying to keep wisdom from getting clear because I'm scrambling scum who doesn't want him town read and I'm doing that by poking at a poor reason for him being town read and offering up instead a stronger reason for him to be townread? Wouldn't that completely defeat the purpose of me trying to keep people from town reading him?

Am I misunderstanding?

But, to be fair if I were scum, I would also be questioning that. Probably. Maybe. In theory definitely because I happen to think writing people off as town for reasoning like that is poor in general, so as scum I'd be able to push that avenue to look like I was scumhunting.

If this was something you were really concerned about though, why not extend it. I think I equally argued against other town reads. It feels like if this was a genuine avenue you'd point out the pattern with me questioning town reads to strengthen your argument but you stopped it with the wisdom thing.