Mafiascum.net

In post 774, Micc wrote:would it help if I pulled up self meta of every final 3 i've been in the last 3 years? I don't think there is a single one that ends in any other way besides me being mislynched.

"micc has argued really well but it doesn't feel genuine" or "it feels manipulative" being classic deciding factors.

Pretty sure that is a fallacy of some kind. Saying you are Town now because you have been Town before doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

In post 775, Micc wrote:VOTE: LicketyQuickety

I'm not sure why you would bait me into voting you first if you are Town here.

In post 768, LicketyQuickety wrote:He even said he didn't want to engage with me if I was going to vote him.

for the record, i don't. i'm not interested in arguing for pages at a time if this is a situation where we are both trying to convince one another that the other person is mafia. that's not productive.

we probably could have been productive day 3, but that route ended with you not wanting to talk about how you make reads. so like what do you want to engage with me about at this point?

on top of that you call me out for dropping off or not wanting to win....and its like, I spent my Sunday doing things that are not playing this game. I'm sorry for that but get over it. it's not like ive abandoned the game.

In post 776, LicketyQuickety wrote:

In post 774, Micc wrote:would it help if I pulled up self meta of every final 3 i've been in the last 3 years? I don't think there is a single one that ends in any other way besides me being mislynched.

"micc has argued really well but it doesn't feel genuine" or "it feels manipulative" being classic deciding factors.

Pretty sure that is a fallacy of some kind. Saying you are Town now because you have been Town before doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

that's kind of my point tho! you've done the same thing yourself

for the record any questions in that post are rhetorical and I don't expect you to answer them.

In post 778, Micc wrote:we probably could have been productive day 3, but that route ended with you not wanting to talk about how you make reads. so like what do you want to engage with me about at this point?

I gave my reason for that. If that's your reason for SRing me... yeah, IDK.

on top of that you call me out for dropping off or not wanting to win....and its like, I spent my Sunday doing things that are not playing this game. I'm sorry for that but get over it. it's not like ive abandoned the game.

That's... not really my argument. My argument is that showing a real concerted effort to sort the game shows Town mindset. It has nothing to do with you taking it easy on Sunday.

In post 776, LicketyQuickety wrote:

In post 774, Micc wrote:would it help if I pulled up self meta of every final 3 i've been in the last 3 years? I don't think there is a single one that ends in any other way besides me being mislynched.

"micc has argued really well but it doesn't feel genuine" or "it feels manipulative" being classic deciding factors.

Pretty sure that is a fallacy of some kind. Saying you are Town now because you have been Town before doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

that's kind of my point tho! you've done the same thing yourself

I've not like... explicitly stated I am Town because I have been Town in all these other games. That's even more what Tl is saying than I am.

GG.



...

Just kidding. I am town. I have a bit of stuff to do this morning, but will have a proper read later today when I have some time.

In post 776, LicketyQuickety wrote:

In post 774, Micc wrote:would it help if I pulled up self meta of every final 3 i've been in the last 3 years? I don't think there is a single one that ends in any other way besides me being mislynched.

"micc has argued really well but it doesn't feel genuine" or "it feels manipulative" being classic deciding factors.

Pretty sure that is a fallacy of some kind. Saying you are Town now because you have been Town before doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

LOL

I wish I could see the dead thread right now. This isn't exactly an easy choice...

In post 774, Micc wrote:

In post 756, Town looter wrote:Briefly where I am at (phone post so apologies in advance): leaning Micc as scum. While I initially agreed with votato about LQ posting differently, they have reverted to norm (from a very brief skim of their other threads). Also I think getting on me when there was an opportunity to pile on Micc is indicative of town behaviour. And in this scenario it makes sense for Micc trying to pocket me using LQs odd misrepresentation - which for the record, could be AI, but could also be due to LQs style and trying to apply pressure, so nullish for me.

It’s not 100% thou. LQ

has

been making a pretty weird argument by focussing on the micro of my behaviour (which is will tend to always make someone like me look scummy, as I tend to summarise thoughts rather than be very detailed, which leads to micro inconsistencies). And there is good scum motivation to target me given I am probably an easier target than a town!Micc.

can you give more details about his meta read you have of LQ? what baseline of town and maifa LQ are you are comparing to? i ask because this sounds like a classic misuse of meta.

i think you need to reevaluate how you feel about the LQ posting that I took issue with. If you are still unsure about them yourself, I think its unfair for you to be already docking town equity from me.

There is a bunch of stuff, but it mostly comes back to me empathising with someone who seems to have similar play as I do. Not similar in approach or style, but similar in the sense we both seem to be regularly read as scum. I found myself thinking that any case I built on LQ would be, in a sense, identical to the one he built on me - and a case there (minor scum motivations, little inconsistencies, etc.). So I am sort of applying some super dodgy logic that if his case can be semi-legit, but wrong, its possible mine can as well.

So then if you step back and think about motivations, Scum!LQ doesn't really have any interest in throwing shade at me. The easiest path to his win condition would have been stay consistent with the reads he had earlier in the game, and pocket me. You would've fought him, but you are fighting him anyway, so the risk of him being outplayed in a 1v1 was largely moot. Conversely Town!LQ has every reason to investigate and pressure me. He doesn't know I am town (well, he does now), and there was a real scenario based on vote records that I was scum (I wish I was that good...). On the surface it looks very much like proactive scum-hunting.

On the other hand, you haven't really bothered to pressure me at all. You have largely tunnelled LQ and, at times, white knighted me. This kind of aligns with a Scum!Micc scenario.

That being said, there is lots of WIFOM here, and this isn't LQs first rodeo, so I am feeling like its about 60/40 right now.

In post 774, Micc wrote:

In post 760, Town looter wrote:I am, currently, buying your argument about sounding scummy, but actually being town

yikes

In post 760, Town looter wrote:(obviously not just based on you word lol).

still kinda yikes tbh

would it help if I pulled up self meta of every final 3 i've been in the last 3 years? I don't think there is a single one that ends in any other way besides me being mislynched.

"micc has argued really well but it doesn't feel genuine" or "it feels manipulative" being classic deciding factors.

Why do you get mis-eliminated so often?

In post 785, Town looter wrote:There is a bunch of stuff, but it mostly comes back to me empathising with someone who seems to have similar play as I do. Not similar in approach or style, but similar in the sense we both seem to be regularly read as scum. I found myself thinking that any case I built on LQ would be, in a sense, identical to the one he built on me - and there is a case there (minor scum motivations, little inconsistencies, etc.). So I am sort of applying some super dodgy logic that if his case can be semi-legit, but wrong, its possible mine can as well.

I get why you might feel empathy in this situation, but transitioning that into a read is a mistake. LQ can have all these playstyle based things that make him look like mafia when he's town, but he'll also have them as mafia. He can claim, and he has, that he's so good at playing as mafia that none of those things are present, but it won't be true. At the end of the day, your empathy for LQ doesn't affect his alignment, it just adds to your baseline for what LQ may be thinking at any given time.

In post 785, Town looter wrote:So then if you step back and think about motivations, Scum!LQ doesn't really have any interest in throwing shade at me. The easiest path to his win condition would have been stay consistent with the reads he had earlier in the game, and pocket me. You would've fought him, but you are fighting him anyway, so the risk of him being outplayed in a 1v1 was largely moot. Conversely Town!LQ has every reason to investigate and pressure me. He doesn't know I am town (well, he does now), and there was a real scenario based on vote records that I was scum (I wish I was that good...). On the surface it looks very much like proactive scum-hunting.

I agree with this take at the surface level, like you mentioned later it falls into WIFOM the more you think about it. The question I asked myself when thinking about how LQ has handled your slot today is "is this push genuine suspicion or not?". I came to the conclusion that it wasn't. Do you think his case that your post showed excitement at a town elimination during twilight was a reasonable case? I didn't. There's a non zero list of reasons you could be pushed in this game, and he picked one of the most unreasonable. It's because that wasn't a genuine read.

The question of, what does Mafia!LQ have to gain from the push gets a little more clear when you look back at the context. It starts all the way back in post 685, which is significantly before I had directly stated my intent to vote for LQ. At this point keeping options open is something that mafia!LQ is very much interested in. So much so that you can see his desire to make the last move throughout the end of day 3. It would have continued into day 4 (and kinda did regardless) had I not came out strong with my intention to vote him. I won't deny LQ and I cross voting probably being the play for Mafia!micc, but I promise you that Mafia!micc would have been just as open to going the other way if it benefited him as LQ was here.

In post 785, Town looter wrote:Why do you get mis-eliminated so often?

It really does feel like it comes down to "micc isn't genuine" or "micc is being manipulative" most of the time. I believe at least some of that comes from my general lack showing emotion. its easy to mistake passion and a desire to win for townness, LQ even made it part of his case. I don't show much of that early in the game and it doesn't change for final 3. I want to win yeah, but i also want to have an interesting pleasant game where newbies can learn something, and I don't find any amount of emotional appeals helpful to those goals.

There's another aspect to final 3 where I'm pretty aggressive with cross voting the player i think is mafia, and I'm very often right. so I get into cross votes often and once the game reaches that point I'm pretty unwilling to engage unless its brought on by the person holding the hammer. i think some people take issue with that just because its an unconventional mafia theory opinion but it should be NAI overall.

so in accordance with that mafia theory opinion, i'm gunna let you direct the direction of engagement here. I can whip up a case and argue it at LQ's face all week long if you'll find it helpful, but only if you find it helpful cause it sure won't be helpful to me.

Good post, and I don't disagree with much in it, although I do think there was enough to justify pressure on me.

The problem is, I would be remiss if I took what you said at face value. A quick meta showed you can hold your own very well in ELo as scum (while you said you didn't play well, you sure sounded convincing in 1846).

I am just about ready to take a punt, just want to ISO votato one more time.

that seems like a really unfair use of meta.

do you not think i hold my own at elo in my town games? like what difference have you noticed that makes meta relevant here?

In post 785, Town looter wrote:On the other hand, you haven't really bothered to pressure me at all. You have largely tunnelled LQ and, at times, white knighted me. This kind of aligns with a Scum!Micc scenario.

I kinda skipped past this but feel like I should come back to it.

You look more town here than you're giving yourself credit for. Even when you were being wagoned Day 2, the wagon was lead by Nash (who flipped mafia) and you were never really in danger of being eliminated.

id be happy to put together a TL town case to back this statement up if you find it helpful, but this was one of the more clear cut final 3 votes i've ever made.

Mikul saw it too. LQ not seeing it is indicative that he's not reading you in good faith.

Oh, what I mean is your post is good, and in a vacuum it suggests Town!Micc. But given Scum!Micc is very good at sounding like Town!Micc, the post itself is kinda null. I am having the same issue with the four of you (current and predecessors) to be honest, with Brass probably giving me the most genuine town vibe.

I guess what I am saying is I am going to have to go off what little mechanical information I have (even if it is fraught with WIFOM). I also realise my odds of getting it right are not much different than what statistics would suggest. Hence I don't think there is a lot of point in drawing it out. I will sleep on it tonight though.

pedit: Yes, apart from when Ydrasse flipped green.

Oh and votato giving me a scum vibe, but I think that is bias by his style.

yeah but at some point you got to realize that play style isn't alignment indicative and get to the point where you're making reads based on motivation.

the second paragraph of 785 is the best piece of scumhunting you've given in this thread. you didn't quite get to the right conclusion, but that was a matter of choosing a really tricky piece of the game to analyze. The way you went about analyzing what each player has to lose or gain as each alignment was really good.

i think if you ask yourself those same questions about motivation about some better, more alignment indicative sections of the game you can get this decision right.

some recommendations:

I’m holding out how that the mechanical information you referenced is the thing where you can be reasonably sure my slot didn’t carry out the N1 kill, but I have a sinking suspicion that’s not it. Although I’m not exactly sure what you are referencing.

Tl, I would be happy to field questions. Micc seems like he would be peeved if I attacked what he said to you, and though I probably could come up with some arguments for why that makes him Scum, I'd rather respect his wishes to not go that route.

^ That's granted I can remember why I did what I did most the time.

You can say whatever you want LQ.

I’m just not going to spend pages at a time arguing with you about anything.

In post 795, LicketyQuickety wrote:Tl, I would be happy to field questions. Micc seems like he would be peeved if I attacked what he said to you, and though

I probably could come up with some arguments for why that makes him Scum

, I'd rather respect his wishes to not go that route.

I would be keen for you to elaborate.

In post 793, Micc wrote:I’m holding out how that the mechanical information you referenced is the thing where you can be reasonably sure my slot didn’t carry out the N1 kill, but I have a sinking suspicion that’s not it. Although I’m not exactly sure what you are referencing.

Sorry maybe mechanical was the wrong word. Just a decision based on motivations and mechanical information rather than how towny/scummy your posts look.