Mafiascum.net

In post 747, Redados wrote:What are the pros and cons of a policy lynch? Like I said, I just can't imagine rocknil in a LimLo situation. That sounds awful. I would like to make that not possible by limming him today.

In post 750, Nahdia wrote:

rocknil is eligible for another prod. As this is his third prod, I am now seeking a replacement.

In post 733, Casey wrote:Thank you for doing that effort. How much value do you place on kill analysis?

@Italiano: I still wanna know who you think is maf.

In post 749, Frogsterking wrote:

In post 741, Casey wrote:Pretty certain Frog and Lavar aren't buddies.

In post 621, rocknil wrote:

In post 562, LavarManos wrote:I am still townreading Italiano and I still townread you, so I am thinking we can try to find the scumteam in the remaining pool of four players based on how they have interacted. I do not think rocknil is scum with Fredrick because there is no need to open up the day with a vote on his scumbuddy. I also do not like how rocknil chose to ignore my vote on him.

In Day 1, I pushed hard for shellyc. I thought there was something tangible there but I was wrong. I don't blame you for scumreading me. But you are wrong. I am now going over the thread to find the scum team. I have this feeling that I've missed something.

How did that go?

I can confirm this.

In post 753, Fredrick A Campbell wrote:VOTE: Frogsterking

Now I remember why I was scumreading Frogsterking.

In post 753, Fredrick A Campbell wrote:VOTE: Frogsterking

Now I remember why I was scumreading Frogsterking.

In post 756, Casey wrote:If we don't get a replacement within 24 hours, I'm okay with limming Rock as-is.

In post 753, Fredrick A Campbell wrote:VOTE: Frogsterking

Now I remember why I was scumreading Frogsterking.

To be specific, are you saying you think he is mafia?

In post 726, Frogsterking wrote:

In post 689, Fredrick A Campbell wrote:Frogsterking, why do you seem the most obsessed over what everyone thinks of the nightkill.

In the mafia format I have almost all of my experience in (livechat, roughly 5-20 minute days and 1-5 minute nights on average) I relied extensively on analyzing night kills to complement behavioral reads.

Part of the reason that method was useful to me was I understood how players of different levels approached their night choices in that format.

Things are different when players get a couple days to make their choice instead of a couple minutes and I'm not sure how much of what I know carries over to this format and I'm trying to learn quickly.

In post 755, Redados wrote:

In post 753, Fredrick A Campbell wrote:VOTE: Frogsterking

Now I remember why I was scumreading Frogsterking.

Care to elaborate?

In post 672, Casey wrote:Okay so look at these.

In post 640, Frogsterking wrote:Welcome to the town Casey!

In post 659, rocknil wrote:Welcome aboard, Casey.

In post 660, ItalianoVD wrote:Welcome to the game Casey.

Italiano and Rock welcome me to the game / aboard, but you specifically welcome me to the

town

.

In post 732, Frogsterking wrote:Mush seemed fine with Italiano about midway through the day, weakly townreading him. Around post #300 though Mush's opinion of Italiano went sharply downhill and deteriorated rapidly throughout the day.

In the spoiler I have posts 257, 268, 304, 310, 312, 319, 386 and 495

In post 732, Frogsterking wrote:In my opinion the Mush kill benefited Italiano the most next to Frederick obviously. I'll touch on what Mush said about Rocknil a little bit later, but in my interpretation Mush viewed Rocknil as more of a policy lynch with a scumlean and had more substantial concerns about Italiano. I can't imagine a world where Italiano is expecting to win a lylo as scum with Mush alive unless he is expecting to persuade a townie to lynch Mush which seems unlikely. This definitely was a tick in the scum direction for Italiano for me because in my opinion Mush had to die at some point as far as Italiano's win condition is concerned. Consider 386 and 460, it seems as though shelly's erratic play drew all of Mush's attention away from Italiano which was why we did not hear about him more from Mush by the end of the day.

In post 732, Frogsterking wrote:Mush's sentiment toward him was also something he was clearly aware of, because they both acknowledged it to each other in 496, 498 and 499

In post 732, Frogsterking wrote:Italiano is also keenly aware he could night kill Mush to remove a key threat without being overtly blamed for it as evidenced by his response to me in post 627

In post 733, Casey wrote:Thank you for doing that effort. How much value do you place on kill analysis?

@Italiano: I still wanna know who you think is maf.

In post 727, LavarManos wrote:Ok, I suppose I will ignore Casey's scumread on me then. I do think I have shown attempts to solve.

In post 750, Nahdia wrote:

rocknil is eligible for another prod. As this is his third prod, I am now seeking a replacement.

In post 762, ItalianoVD wrote:

In post 733, Casey wrote:Thank you for doing that effort. How much value do you place on kill analysis?

@Italiano: I still wanna know who you think is maf.

I don’t solve for partners so if you want me to try to solve the game that way then you’re gonna be disappointed. I think scum is somewhere within rock, Lavar and you/MagikHorse. I’d be okay eliminating

As I’ve stated already, Redados, Frederick, and somewhat Frogsterking are in my no lynch pool

In post 758, Fredrick A Campbell wrote:

In post 726, Frogsterking wrote:

In post 689, Fredrick A Campbell wrote:Frogsterking, why do you seem the most obsessed over what everyone thinks of the nightkill.

In the mafia format I have almost all of my experience in (livechat, roughly 5-20 minute days and 1-5 minute nights on average) I relied extensively on analyzing night kills to complement behavioral reads.

Part of the reason that method was useful to me was I understood how players of different levels approached their night choices in that format.

Things are different when players get a couple days to make their choice instead of a couple minutes and I'm not sure how much of what I know carries over to this format and I'm trying to learn quickly.

Actually, I just noticed that this answers the question "Why are you so interested in the nightkill?" and not the question I actually asked, which is "Why do you seem the most obsessed over what everyone thinks of the nightkill?"

So that you don't get to pretend to not understand what I am trying to say, let me put it bluntly. Please answer the question (Why are you so obsessed over what everyone thinks of the nightkill?)

In post 759, Fredrick A Campbell wrote:

In post 755, Redados wrote:

In post 753, Fredrick A Campbell wrote:VOTE: Frogsterking

Now I remember why I was scumreading Frogsterking.

Care to elaborate?

Originally, I started to scumread Frogsterking for his obsession of what everyone thinks of the nightkill. Then, Casey made the following post.

In post 672, Casey wrote:Okay so look at these.

In post 640, Frogsterking wrote:Welcome to the town Casey!

In post 659, rocknil wrote:Welcome aboard, Casey.

In post 660, ItalianoVD wrote:Welcome to the game Casey.

Italiano and Rock welcome me to the game / aboard, but you specifically welcome me to the

town

.

The post added more fuel to my suspicions. I first questioned Frogsterking's obsession over what everyone thinks of the nightkill. Meanwhile, I reread some part of the thread and misinterpreted a post Frogsterking made. I prepared to make a post to question Frogsterking on the post and saved it as a draft. Frogsterking appeared to answer the question of why he was so obsessed over what everyone thinks of the nightkill, so I dismissed it. I then posted the draft. After Frogsterking clarified the meaning of the post I misinterpreted, I actually didn't understand the clarification. However, while I started to make another post to further point out what was the problem with the post, I noticed that no such problem actually existed. Instead of questioning on an issue that was now evident to me was non-existent, I unvoted instead since I had no further reason to scumread him. Several hours later, I look at my spreadsheet with the list of all my reads thus far and the post(s) from which I deduced them. I noticed I listed Frogsterking's post 640 as my reason for scumreading him. Actually, when I made the post you quoted, I still thought I only remembered scumreading Frogsterking for post 640 and the post I misinterpreted. It is only while looking into the question I remember asking Frogsterking something that I didn't remember that I remembered my true reason for scumreading Frogsterking.

In conclusion, my current scumread on Frogsterking is over his obsession of what everyone thinks of the nightkill, while my reason for scumreading Frogsterking when I made the post you quoted was for post 640 and my very first suspicions on Frogsterking was because of his obsession over the nightkill.

In post 758, Fredrick A Campbell wrote:

In post 726, Frogsterking wrote:

In post 689, Fredrick A Campbell wrote:Frogsterking, why do you seem the most obsessed over what everyone thinks of the nightkill.

In the mafia format I have almost all of my experience in (livechat, roughly 5-20 minute days and 1-5 minute nights on average) I relied extensively on analyzing night kills to complement behavioral reads.

Part of the reason that method was useful to me was I understood how players of different levels approached their night choices in that format.

Things are different when players get a couple days to make their choice instead of a couple minutes and I'm not sure how much of what I know carries over to this format and I'm trying to learn quickly.

Actually, I just noticed that this answers the question "Why are you so interested in the nightkill?" and not the question I actually asked, which is "Why do you seem the most obsessed over what everyone thinks of the nightkill?"

So that you don't get to pretend to not understand what I am trying to say, let me put it bluntly. Please answer the question (Why are you so obsessed over what everyone thinks of the nightkill?)

In post 629, Fredrick A Campbell wrote:

In post 609, ItalianoVD wrote:@Frederick: what do you think about the Mush kill?

I think nothing of it.

In post 730, Frogsterking wrote:

In post 729, Fredrick A Campbell wrote:

Spoiler:

In post 113, Frogsterking wrote:

In post 111, MUSHSHAGANA wrote:I'm glad I'm not the only one who feels uncomfortable with the dynamics of Shelly, Redados and Italiano. Redados has, at least, modified his play after having been called out to something that could be considered more pro-town, but Shelly is hyper-focused on Redados and Italiano is hyper-focused on Shelly. This doesn't help anyone else make any decisions at all, and might very well end up with two mis-eliminations to satisfy the paranoia of these three so we can actually get down to business.

I have no intent of listing reads quite yet, but this is not good play for town from Shelly and Italiano. I think they should back up and focus attention on other people altogether for a while. Especially Italiano, who hasn't so much as sniffed in the direction of other players, as far as I can tell.

Now then...



Shelly, if town "tunnels" someone, scum don't need to say much to come across as town that's just late to the party. "Yeah, I'm honestly here on this wagon. I have nothing to add, everyone else has made my arguments for me. I think it's the right idea." Scum shouldn't be allowed to direct the conversation either, but if town gets stuck on "YES WE HAVE THE ANSWERS" scum doesn't need to do anything except not rock the boat too much.



Frogster, you have a dependent chain of events for "scum forcing interactions" being a good idea, whether you recognize the chain or not.
First, town has to town read most of town.
Second, town has to mostly not town read at least one scum.
Third, town has to be mostly coordinating rather than throwing suspicion at or questioning each other.
Only if all three things are true does scum have to try to steer the ship, so to speak. I'd like to point out that we can't get reads on enough of the players to fulfill the first chainlink yet, and we are ALL bickering too much for the third link to be fulfilled.

Letting scum force interaction at this stage is a TERRIBLE idea.

I'm really not a fan of how you're spinning my desire to be able to get reads on the majority of players. It's making something that's fairly pro-town into a vehicle for highly pro-scum play, and that is just not a good look at all on you, particularly with how town read I seem to be.

I've mentioned before: I tend to jump the gun, and I am aware of that tendency. So I'm just going to ask if anyone else feels like my words and intent might be getting twisted for hidden motives here. Because I have that feeling, I feel it in my bones, and I don't like it at all.

VOTE: Frogsterking

I always feel more comfortable having voted, and this feels like the right place to rest my vote for the time being.



I also want to bring up that MagikHorse has made himself one of my favorites with just the recently-passed flurry of posts. These are direct, cutting posts that aren't over-determined or stuck on irrelevancies. Good stuff for town, though I have yet to feel comfortable giving reads out.



And last for now, notes on why I'm avoiding giving a player overview or a reads list for so long.

Remember how I mentioned pattern-matching before?

I'm seeing patterns in all of the active users. Some I'm curious about, some I just plain don't like, all of them I want to avoid drawing too much attention to until I have reached a conclusion about the patterns I'm seeing.

If you've posted more than 6 times, I'm considering you in some way. I won't tell you how or for what until I'm good and ready, because that would give away the patterns and make it too easy to disrupt the picture I'm building. I'm going to sit on these and see what comes of my approach before I try giving reads. So you'll all have to wait a little while longer.

I think your dependency chain is an accurate example of the possible late game scenarios I'm visualizing in which town can still win in case there is little aid from prs. I would describe your dependency chain as a win condition following good early town play. I'd imagine you can see how a chain like that is unrealistic on D1 as you pointed out, but could materialize later in a 3-way or 5-way lylo situation as a result of a good D1.

I'm interested in hearing your conclusions about the player patterns and the reads list later and I agree they will be more impactful given some time. I believe this is another benefit of using the full 10 days.

I assure you there was no deliberate attempt to spin what you were saying and my motivation for paraphrasing was to express what I thought you were saying so you could confirm (or in this case deny) that there was a mutual understanding.

I suspect there is an issue with communication rather than underlying ideas about the game because I agree with most of the points you've been making. I suspect the issue is a linguistic one and we are based on different definitions of what letting scum force plays or interactions means. In my mind "forcing an interaction" or "forcing a play" is usually a bad move for the side doing it because it implies the play was unnatural or awkwardly timed (hence it had to be forced in) and will be generally less effective. A "forcing interaction" that is dominant and controls the choices the other side has available is not what I was suggesting we want to allow others to be doing.

The tunneling trio you pointed out is a solid example of what I'm referring to about forcing an interaction (not a forcing interaction.) If the scum team decides to play that way that's fine with me but if it's the town doing that then there will be problems not only today but in the endgame as well.

I believe that Redados, Shelly and Italiano will be receptive to moving forward and focusing on other players. I also believe that the incoming replacements are more likely to be an asset than a liability.

What did you mean by "The tunneling trio you pointed out is a solid example of what I'm referring to about forcing an interaction (not a forcing interaction.)"

(added spoiler so others don't have to scroll past the original quotes)

I meant that the trio of Redados, Italiano and shellyc came in with preconceived feelings about each other and were skewing the discussion toward their point of view.

I was contrasting the early actions of these three with some type of play where one or more players are able to dominate the game, force the other players to respond to them or limit the actions of the other players in some way. I didn't feel like this was what they were doing because I felt like I could read their discussion and then respond to it as I chose.

I remember at this point in time I thought (incorrectly) the conflict between Mush and I was that Mush interpreted my statements about letting mafia force plays and make mistakes as allowing other players to dominate the game, and I was attempting to clarify my point of view in ways I thought might make sense to her.

In post 767, Fredrick A Campbell wrote:The scumread isn't over your obsession of the night kill. It is over your obsession of what others think of the night kill.

In post 731, Fredrick A Campbell wrote:That actually lines up pretty well with what I have observed thus far.

UNVOTE:

In post 737, Casey wrote:

In post 592, LavarManos wrote:That literally doesn't explain why you find me scummy?

In post 594, Frogsterking wrote:The fact you're asking for an explanation instead of accusing me of being scummy (as though you're more worried that I cheated than if I really know if you're scum or not) is another tick in the scum direction from my point of view.

Not a fan of this.

In post 738, Casey wrote:

In post 599, Frogsterking wrote:By don't care I mean I don't care if I have to vote Rocknil or Lavaar, not that I don't care about the outcome of the game! I do want to win and I am town and I think either one of these is the best move.

My opinion of Frog is dropping each time he posts. This "I do want to win and I am town" phrasing is baffling.

In post 739, Casey wrote:

In post 605, Fredrick A Campbell wrote:VOTE: Frogsterking

Congratulations. You have made me suspicious.

Good vote.

In post 742, Casey wrote:

In post 627, ItalianoVD wrote:I think Mush was killed to try and frame Frederick.

Has anyone even hypothesized this today?

In post 744, Casey wrote:

In post 742, Casey wrote:

In post 627, ItalianoVD wrote:I think Mush was killed to try and frame Frederick.

Has anyone even hypothesized this today?

In post 732, Frogsterking wrote:Mush was out for Frederick's blood. If Frederick is on the scumteam they would probably need to kill Mush.

Oh look at that.

In post 745, Casey wrote:I'm feeling pretty confident that Redados, Italiano, and Lavar are town.

In post 753, Fredrick A Campbell wrote:VOTE: Frogsterking

Now I remember why I was scumreading Frogsterking.

In post 759, Fredrick A Campbell wrote:

In post 755, Redados wrote:

In post 753, Fredrick A Campbell wrote:VOTE: Frogsterking

Now I remember why I was scumreading Frogsterking.

Care to elaborate?

Originally, I started to scumread Frogsterking for his obsession of what everyone thinks of the nightkill. Then, Casey made the following post.

In post 672, Casey wrote:Okay so look at these.

In post 640, Frogsterking wrote:Welcome to the town Casey!

In post 659, rocknil wrote:Welcome aboard, Casey.

In post 660, ItalianoVD wrote:Welcome to the game Casey.

Italiano and Rock welcome me to the game / aboard, but you specifically welcome me to the

town

.

The post added more fuel to my suspicions. I first questioned Frogsterking's obsession over what everyone thinks of the nightkill. Meanwhile, I reread some part of the thread and misinterpreted a post Frogsterking made. I prepared to make a post to question Frogsterking on the post and saved it as a draft. Frogsterking appeared to answer the question of why he was so obsessed over what everyone thinks of the nightkill, so I dismissed it. I then posted the draft. After Frogsterking clarified the meaning of the post I misinterpreted, I actually didn't understand the clarification. However, while I started to make another post to further point out what was the problem with the post, I noticed that no such problem actually existed. Instead of questioning on an issue that was now evident to me was non-existent, I unvoted instead since I had no further reason to scumread him. Several hours later, I look at my spreadsheet with the list of all my reads thus far and the post(s) from which I deduced them. I noticed I listed Frogsterking's post 640 as my reason for scumreading him. Actually, when I made the post you quoted, I still thought I only remembered scumreading Frogsterking for post 640 and the post I misinterpreted. It is only while looking into the question I remember asking Frogsterking something that I didn't remember that I remembered my true reason for scumreading Frogsterking.

In conclusion, my current scumread on Frogsterking is over his obsession of what everyone thinks of the nightkill, while my reason for scumreading Frogsterking when I made the post you quoted was for post 640 and my very first suspicions on Frogsterking was because of his obsession over the nightkill.

In post 747, Redados wrote:What are the pros and cons of a policy lynch? Like I said, I just can't imagine rocknil in a LimLo situation. That sounds awful. I would like to make that not possible by limming him today.

In post 748, Frogsterking wrote:

In post 747, Redados wrote:What are the pros and cons of a policy lynch? Like I said, I just can't imagine rocknil in a LimLo situation. That sounds awful. I would like to make that not possible by limming him today.

Off the top of my head:

Pros:
In this game there is a higher chance of hitting scum because I think most players that are active are fairly pro town.

It makes our choice much easier today.

Cons:
May not make our choice any easier if we realize the scum are hiding in the more pro town players.

If we miss we will be in the same situation tomorrow as we are now except scum get a chance to eliminate one more player, so whatever conflict arises may be more in their favor tomorrow than it is today.

In post 753, Fredrick A Campbell wrote:VOTE: Frogsterking

Now I remember why I was scumreading Frogsterking.

In post 731, Fredrick A Campbell wrote:That actually lines up pretty well with what I have observed thus far.

UNVOTE:

In post 747, Redados wrote:What are the pros and cons of a policy lynch? Like I said, I just can't imagine rocknil in a LimLo situation. That sounds awful. I would like to make that not possible by limming him today.

In post 748, Frogsterking wrote:

In post 747, Redados wrote:What are the pros and cons of a policy lynch? Like I said, I just can't imagine rocknil in a LimLo situation. That sounds awful. I would like to make that not possible by limming him today.

Off the top of my head:

Pros:
In this game there is a higher chance of hitting scum because I think most players that are active are fairly pro town.

It makes our choice much easier today.

Cons:
May not make our choice any easier if we realize the scum are hiding in the more pro town players.

If we miss we will be in the same situation tomorrow as we are now except scum get a chance to eliminate one more player, so whatever conflict arises may be more in their favor tomorrow than it is today.

In post 753, Fredrick A Campbell wrote:VOTE: Frogsterking

Now I remember why I was scumreading Frogsterking.

In post 562, LavarManos wrote:I am still townreading Italiano and I still townread you, so I am thinking we can try to find the scumteam in the remaining pool of four players based on how they have interacted. I do not think rocknil is scum with Fredrick because there is no need to open up the day with a vote on his scumbuddy. I also do not like how rocknil chose to ignore my vote on him.

In post 748, Frogsterking wrote:

In post 747, Redados wrote:What are the pros and cons of a policy lynch? Like I said, I just can't imagine rocknil in a LimLo situation. That sounds awful. I would like to make that not possible by limming him today.

Off the top of my head:

Pros:
In this game there is a higher chance of hitting scum because I think most players that are active are fairly pro town.

It makes our choice much easier today.

Cons:
May not make our choice any easier if we realize the scum are hiding in the more pro town players.

If we miss we will be in the same situation tomorrow as we are now except scum get a chance to eliminate one more player, so whatever conflict arises may be more in their favor tomorrow than it is today.