Mafiascum.net

In post 898, NorwegianboyEE wrote:Keeping my vote here for a bit.

"A bit" being "the duration of Day 1", right?

You didn't do anything but try to fakeclaim and take control of the town, and maybe even out the PA

You've over played your hand and this sin cannot go unpunished

Go to the dead thread and wait for your scum buddy notsci

Like, a guy who's putting to "protect the real PA" is t making a post that's like "okay everyone follow my lead"

In post 884, maxwell wrote:Okay, now you've set me off, so let's do this. Literally your only conclusions in 724 and 745 were "buhh maybe we should follow the clear?" Which, in a general sense is unfortunately correct but hardly some startling insight and not worthy of your smarm. The blind deference to the clear also encourages passivity from town in talking about who should be inspected, which a distressingly small number of people have actually weighed in on. Even if people disagree with me I think they really should be talking about who they want to see checked. Also I can't see limiting the inspection checks to 1-2 players straight off the bat as anything but objectively pro-scum, in a game with an extremely limited number of executions it's necessary to find a way to narrow the pool and everyone fretting and whining about exposing the TD is forgetting our first goal here is to be catching scum, removing a handful of players as suspects isn't a big deal

because that's going to happen anyway based on what the PA decides

. I'm not really worried if the scum have a 1 in 5 or 1 in 6 guess at endgame. As it is checking 1 person means we'd get 5 eliminations and 4 cop checks to find 2 scum out of 3 in a pool of 15, which...actually, if I'm doing the math right, those are fairly good odds. I might might talk myself into this but I still thing having a larger check on day 1 at least accelerates the game at a fairly small added risk.

First of all, the question was more specific than "should we follow the clear." There are a lot of different options-- for both the execution and the inspection, we could ignore the clear completely, or let the clear dictate exactly what to do, or come up with several possible options and have the clear make a decision between them, or come up with several possible options and have the clear choose randomly between them.

I do strongly believe that the PA should be deciding who gets inspected. This is because having the daughter inspected is game-destroying, and we have the capacity to inspect more than one person at a time, so the odds of the daughter getting inspected randomly are greater than the odds of the daughter getting executed randomly.

As for the PA deciding who gets executed, well, in a perfect world we could just have Icon decide the execution as well, but this has two problems. One, that we are ignoring all of the collective scumhunting capacity of the rest of the town, and two, that there will be nothing for anyone else to talk about and thus the game will likely stagnate.

You are probably right that we can be a little more aggressive in the inspections in the early days, but going above 3 doesn't make sense, because if we find one scum in a group of 4, we don't even have time to kill them all. Like, you said that a larger group helps accelerate the game, but I don't really see what finding tea in a group of, say, 5 does to accelerate the game. It's really easy for searching for the scum in that group to throw us off-track really quickly, but we kind of are forced to do it or otherwise we just wasted that information. It also gives scum plenty of time to prepare the gamestate for after the scum in that group has been found, if they even are.

I think a group of 3 would be reasonable today. The thing is, even if we clear 2 people every day, that's still a ton of information. (Probably more information than we even need, and therefore more information than we should give away.) So that's why I think 1-2; that gives us about 6-8 clears over the course of the game which should be plenty, and helps us narrow it down a lot if we do find tea.

In post 489, notscience wrote:Hot take- nk is lying scum and intends to actively lurk

Also, a changed vote is progress.

Uh yeah

VOTE: Not Known 15

Have to admit notscience's spicy take appears to have been dead-on.

In post 900, Something_Smart wrote:

In post 898, NorwegianboyEE wrote:Keeping my vote here for a bit.

"A bit" being "the duration of Day 1", right?

Well... yeah. I guess you could say that.

If NK15 is town then he’s misplayed hard. But i’m not really willing to take that chance.

In post 903, Something_Smart wrote:You are probably right that we can be a little more aggressive in the inspections in the early days, but going above 3 doesn't make sense, because if we find one scum in a group of 4, we don't even have time to kill them all. Like, you said that a larger group helps accelerate the game, but I don't really see what finding tea in a group of, say, 5 does to accelerate the game. It's really easy for searching for the scum in that group to throw us off-track really quickly, but we kind of are forced to do it or otherwise we just wasted that information. It also gives scum plenty of time to prepare the gamestate for after the scum in that group has been found, if they even are.

I think a group of 3 would be reasonable today. The thing is, even if we clear 2 people every day, that's still a ton of information. (Probably more information than we even need, and therefore more information than we should give away.) So that's why I think 1-2; that gives us about 6-8 clears over the course of the game which should be plenty, and helps us narrow it down a lot if we do find tea.

Right, I agree, 5 is too many for an inspection check and doesn't help us to narrow things down. I think even with a group of 4 though, it shouldn't be TOO hard to scumhunt in that group & it's not like we can't potentially re-check people in a group to help winnow it down (especially as they're basically a "safe" check at that point anyway). The key thing about the information is: we don't have to check the same number of people each day, if at some point we feel we have too many people cleared, we can just stop and not have further inspections. I think I've changed my mind from earlier, probably the best approach for day 1 is to inspect a pool of scummy people (as directed by the PA) and hope we hit tea there, then we can eliminate from that pool & inspect a limited amount of players from outside.

Let's see a VC before we get ahead of ourselves.

I think the best way forward here is for Icon to pick a group of 2-3 to inspect. To minimize info leak, they could maybe do it randomly, or semi-randomly (exclude an unstated pool of townreads, and randomize from among the rest), but I'm okay with either. (Of course, don't offer justification for any player's inclusion/exclusion.)

Heading into radio silence anyway now. So might not change vote due to that reason.

@NK15 do we have your permission to clown you?

In post 909, maxwell wrote:I think even with a group of 4 though, it shouldn't be TOO hard to scumhunt in that group & it's not like we can't potentially re-check people in a group to help winnow it down (especially as they're basically a "safe" check at that point anyway).

That's true, we can re-check. I'd probably be okay with 4 if people thought that was better.

In post 908, NorwegianboyEE wrote:If NK15 is town then he’s misplayed hard. But i’m not really willing to take that chance.

He's literally a safe elimination (and in that sense it would be a mistake to not flip him or check him at some point) but also some of the scummiest players in the game (Datisi, Umlaut) are flocking to voting him like flies on rotting meat

It seems odd that scum!nk would insist on getting to choose the lynch while knowing that the town!PA is out there somewhere and able to CC at any point

And if he really thought it was me and he’s scum, then why worry about it so much? Idk maybe it’s worth it if the equation was that if I was town I never could CC because it would out the tombody daughter but idk

I’m thinking NK town

What's the advantage to scum for getting shipmaster to claim? I can actually kinda believe NOt Known would take 7 seriously, and try and provide "cover".

But if he was doing that, why try and seize complete control? Not Known, don't you think shipmaster!Menalque would counterclaim you after you do something like that which is very beneficial to scum?

UNVOTE:

In post 916, Hel wrote:What's the advantage to scum for getting shipmaster to claim? I can actually kinda believe NOt Known would take 7 seriously, and try and provide "cover".

But if he was doing that, why try and seize complete control? Not Known, don't you think shipmaster!Menalque would counterclaim you after you do something like that which is very beneficial to scum?

UNVOTE:

If NK15 actually believed Menalque's claim was likely to be a genuine slip-up, they would know Menalque couldn't actually hard-cc them because that outs the TD as well. From that perspective grabbing control like that reads as massively scummy.

It seems odd that scum!nk would insist on getting to choose the lynch while knowing that the town!PA is out there somewhere and able to CC at any point

And if he really thought it was me and he’s scum, then why worry about it so much? Idk maybe it’s worth it if the equation was that if I was town I never could CC because it would out the tombody daughter but idk

I’m thinking NK town

Oh ffs

I thought that had been stopped by the petit but apparently not

Umlaut what do you think of the people pushing you?

In post 910, Something_Smart wrote:Let's see a VC before we get ahead of ourselves.

I think the best way forward here is for Icon to pick a group of 2-3 to inspect. To minimize info leak, they could maybe do it randomly, or semi-randomly (exclude an unstated pool of townreads, and randomize from among the rest), but I'm okay with either. (Of course, don't offer justification for any player's inclusion/exclusion.)

I agree with this and think Ico should play everything close to the vest from this point forward and avoid giving reads as further information only benefits scum. I think the pool should probably be come from suspicious people but if it's not sure of its reads then it can randomize the selection (excluding the TD as a possibility, obviously). Thinking on this: if the pool if 5 players and we hit tea, then we can eliminate one and check half of the remaining 4 on the next day, either we get a tea result and eliminate in that 50/50, or we don't and know we can eliminate in the other 50/50. This gives us at least 1 guaranteed scum elimination by day 4, which we need to not lose. If those 5 get cleared, that kind of sucks but we just have to hunt in the remaining pool. If we do a pool of 3 instead, we can guarantee a scum elimination by day 3 if we hit tea, if we don't, we can do another pool of 3 and hope to hit tea there and guarantee an elimination by day 4. A pool of 4 just seems like an unhappy medium now that I look at it this way. I think I might prefer the group of 5 method in this case because it gets us more information sooner but I'm willing to listen to what other people think.

In fact seeing how Menalque responded to that could be used by scum as a way to gauge whether Menalque's claim might have been serious (either a rules misunderstanding or some galaxy brain play). Menalque's immediate response to the NK15 claim doesn't really say actual-PA-struggling-to-find-the-right-reaction to me; I can't really explain this so you can just reread for yourself and see if you agree. In the alternate universe where Menalque was the real PA but had successfully played off that claim, scum could have won the game right then and there.

In post 920, Menalque wrote:Umlaut what do you think of the people pushing you?

I'm reading up now and have that in mind. My kneejerk have-to-decide-now response is that maxwell is the worst of them but I'll have a more informed opinion about it in a bit.

I think umlaut being counterwagoned is probably another point in favour of scum!notscience