mini 2140: partition (this is over)
Forum rules
No? Why do people keep saying thatIn post 10, Cat Scratch Fever wrote:Is this a hectic alt?
not yet sentient
I'm listening to Good News right now!In post 20, Ame wrote:Hoc, I'm glad you enjoyed it! She has a couple of other really good ones too.
I feel like this game is going to be a wine tasting contest!
Also V/LA until Friday
not yet sentient
> We shouldn't lynch group 1. Too risky.
> That's
> What if they knew we would think that and we just lose by lynching it??
> It's fine. If there's 2 or 3 scum in there, it's a positive result.
> It's not even that good if there's 2 scum in here. We enter MyLo the next day.
> They're counting on our paranoi, see? We should definitely lynch it.
> What if it's a 1/1/1 split though? We insta-lose then!
> A 1/1/1 split makes no sense for EV purposes, it's either 0, 2, or 3 in group 1. Therefore, we lynch it.
> But the fact you think that is exactly why they do a 1/1/1 split and then we lose by lynching group 1.
> They anticipated you would be afraid and used the airpeed velocity of an unladen swallow...
(Continued Ad Infinitum)
> That's
exactly
why scum would just put all 3 in group 1; we should lynch it.> What if they knew we would think that and we just lose by lynching it??
> It's fine. If there's 2 or 3 scum in there, it's a positive result.
> It's not even that good if there's 2 scum in here. We enter MyLo the next day.
> They're counting on our paranoi, see? We should definitely lynch it.
> What if it's a 1/1/1 split though? We insta-lose then!
> A 1/1/1 split makes no sense for EV purposes, it's either 0, 2, or 3 in group 1. Therefore, we lynch it.
> But the fact you think that is exactly why they do a 1/1/1 split and then we lose by lynching group 1.
> They anticipated you would be afraid and used the airpeed velocity of an unladen swallow...
(Continued Ad Infinitum)
not yet sentient
Mohab entered saying we shouldn't talk about partitions because what's the point, but then discusses them anyway and emphasises how there can definitely be 3 scum in group 1.
He says it's too "risky" to lynch in group 1 and talks about how we shouldn't do it just because, unless we find "at least 1 scum in there worth lynching" - which is a very easy thing to do in 8 players. He's setting himself up later to vote group 1 while being reasonable and fair about it early.
Also, the self-vote is weird.
He says it's too "risky" to lynch in group 1 and talks about how we shouldn't do it just because, unless we find "at least 1 scum in there worth lynching" - which is a very easy thing to do in 8 players. He's setting himself up later to vote group 1 while being reasonable and fair about it early.
Also, the self-vote is weird.
not yet sentient
I'm not saying you are. I'm just wondering if you are in other games. There's incentive for scum to dump 3 lynchbaits into the same group.In post 92, enomis wrote:This is addressed to me? How am I being lynchbait this game?In post 88, Hoctac wrote:@enomis and @mohab: Do you have the tendency to be lynchbait in other games? Be honest.
not yet sentient
He ended up saying to not lynch group 1 unless we found 1 scum in there. Finding a town or two who look like scum in 8 players is very easy. Mafia wouldn't work if that wasn't the case every game. So, my fear is that he knows this and is eventually setting himself up to vote group 1 in the future.In post 99, Cat Scratch Fever wrote:I see. I liked how he was thinking about how to play the setup, which seemed natural. and he did end up saying to not lynch group 1 today
Secondly, it doesn't consider the possibility of there being 1 scum in group 1 who acts like a "jester" of sorts.
not yet sentient
Yep, that's what I thought you were getting at lolIn post 122, Ame wrote:Group 1. One of these things is not like the others.In post 118, Hoctac wrote:I know it's about the groups. I can only think of 1 thing.
not yet sentient
In post 124, Ame wrote:Hoc, who all have you played with here?
I'm played with a couple of people here, but the games are ongoing, so I shouldn't mention them.In post 125, Ame wrote:Or who haven't' you played with rather
not yet sentient
What worries you about this, Morning?In post 144, Morning Tweet wrote:Hoctac (91) - Suggesting we lynch group one if there's enough scummy players in there, although he presently thinks there's scummy players in group three. You're worrying me hoctoc
If
there are enough people acting scummy in group 1, we should lynch group 1. Right now though, I find people in group 3 are acting scumy.Could you expand on what you find scummy about that statement?
not yet sentient
What if Enomis is scum pretending to act demoralised? His emotion doesn't have to be real.In post 210, Morning Tweet wrote:Enomis is either a demoralized player who feels like he has no options today but wants to keep playing so he's blindly voting group #2, or he's acting out that character. I feel like this is a bad course of action for scum to take. I'd expect scum to find ways to scumread clidd and ABR, not claim "I don't want to die" and more or less give up
not yet sentient
IIn post 234, Kanna wrote:you mean this? can you explain it and why you found it townie?In post 168, Hoctac wrote:Ame is probably town for her conspiracy theory. Knowing she was Paragon is interesting though, she felt completely different in that game.
think
I get what she's referring to, but I'm not 100% sure. I'm not going to explain it in case I'm wrong.not yet sentient
He's pretty obvtown. Mixture of things. As scum, he's more reserved, doesn't take hard stances, I'd expect him to talk more setup and less reads/potential slips. Also, being paranoid of his own group is reminiscent of you know what.
What did you see?
not yet sentient
Oh... I'm not going to say. You go first.In post 254, Ame wrote:Hoc, I'm referring to thisIn post 242, Hoctac wrote:I think I get what she's referring to, but I'm not 100% sure. I'm not going to explain it in case I'm wrong.
not yet sentient
Doro!In post 86, dsjstr wrote:I was also thinking of voting for group 3 tbh
Group 1 is too risky and if there is 1 member in group 2 then even without reads it would be a 50/50 we get them the next day.
You mentioned you would rather vote for group 2 over 3 since 2 will only have 1 member at max. But from your perspective, you know you're town, so should group 2 and 3 both have an equal number of potential scum (2)?
not yet sentient
No games with him; I'm quite new here. But I spent a lot of time metaing him pregame and I'm confident in my read, but there's just one hiccup involving the question I asked him. I need to understand why he immediately went for group 3 over 2.In post 267, Kanna wrote:@Hoctac; how much experience do you have with Dsj and how confident are you of your read on him?
not yet sentient
Why though? You know you're town, so both group 2 and 3 have 2 people that could be scum. Using that logic, group 2 is better to lynch since you know you're killing yourself (town) in group 3.In post 283, dsjstr wrote:That came at a time while 1-1-1 was being discussed and at the time I was thinking if that was case then group 3 would be the safest bet.In post 258, Hoctac wrote:Doro!In post 86, dsjstr wrote:I was also thinking of voting for group 3 tbh
Group 1 is too risky and if there is 1 member in group 2 then even without reads it would be a 50/50 we get them the next day.
You mentioned you would rather vote for group 2 over 3 since 2 will only have 1 member at max. But from your perspective, you know you're town, so should group 2 and 3 both have an equal number of potential scum (2)?
not yet sentient
That's beautiful. Change "his tea" to "coffee" and it'd be perfect (clidd's a huge fan).In post 284, Morning Tweet wrote:clidd, the detectiveIn post 266, Hoctac wrote:a haiku about clidd
he takes a sip of his tea
it’s quite delicious
im not sure if the last line is cheating or not
VOTE: Group 2
You have earned my vote.
not yet sentient
https://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?t=81962In post 296, Cat Scratch Fever wrote:Do you have any completed scumgames dsjstr?
https://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=83&t=82403
not yet sentient
Hang on a minute, I just realised why there's probably 2 or 3 scum in group 1. Everyone (as far as I'm aware) in group 1 are good at looking like town and don't get lynched very often.
In group 3, Mohab has said he gets scumread a lot. Doro is usually scumread (even though he's obvtown), and enomis I have a feeling is made of the same cut, given how he's entered strangely with this whole demotivated thing. Should metacheck him.
clidd doesn't really get lynched however. And Albert is a wildcard I guess, but definitely wouldn't call him lynchbait. BUT, they are exactly the sort of players that would have the confidence to put themselves in a smaller group and pull that off as scum. In fact, I think scum have done their homework and have put them both in group 2 so that we fall into the trap of thinking that.
Conclusion: Either, there's 2 scum in G1 with 1 being in G2. Or they're all in G1.
In group 3, Mohab has said he gets scumread a lot. Doro is usually scumread (even though he's obvtown), and enomis I have a feeling is made of the same cut, given how he's entered strangely with this whole demotivated thing. Should metacheck him.
clidd doesn't really get lynched however. And Albert is a wildcard I guess, but definitely wouldn't call him lynchbait. BUT, they are exactly the sort of players that would have the confidence to put themselves in a smaller group and pull that off as scum. In fact, I think scum have done their homework and have put them both in group 2 so that we fall into the trap of thinking that.
Conclusion: Either, there's 2 scum in G1 with 1 being in G2. Or they're all in G1.
not yet sentient
Pregame, I did research on everyone but Daenerys and Dragons, enomis, and Mohab.In post 324, Ame wrote:Hoc, who haven't you played with or "read up on?" on your main account. Ongoing games are irrelevant to this question.
This is my main account. Would be a little silly to have an alt not even a month into the site!
not yet sentient
Let's nuke ourselves together...In post 303, Morning Tweet wrote:YES HOCTAC ILY!! (*≧∀≦*)
I am in total agreement with that assessment
I'm going to gather my reads on everyone in Group 1 first actually.
UNVOTE: Group 2(?)
not yet sentient
Puff, why do you think scum would include you with them in group 1 if you think they've researched you and seen you as a null/scumlean most of the time, rather than put you in group 2/3, so that those could get lynched more easily today?In post 350, Adorable wrote:I'm always a null read or I would be a scum lean since I'm not an active member. I get the feeling scum looked up my completed games and they put me on Group 1 and plan on lynching Group 2 or Group 3 on day 1 and on day 2 they would put me in a group that would get lynched. I also think whoever are scum in this game are trying way too hard to look towny and it is Group 1 who is getting town read alot.
This post looks like shade throwing and you didn't elaborate on why you didn't like my entrance and this is the kind of post I normally scum read when I don't see a player elaborate.In post 142, Cat Scratch Fever wrote:I don't like Adorable's entrance either
I think 2 scum are in Group 1 and that's why I'm voting there.
not yet sentient
So why not put you in Group 2 if they really don't want Group 1 lynched?In post 357, Adorable wrote:The players in Group 3 are scummy and I was also going to vote there yesterday and then I started to think scum must have looked up the players completed games which makes me think the players on Group 3 get scum read more often than me.
not yet sentient
Adorable
- Puff went from thinking it was 1-1-1 to randomly switching to 3-0-0 in 299 with iff reasoning. Unnatural progression. No non-OMGUS reads yet. BUSSING/distancing.Ame
- Conspiracy theory is townie. Poking Kanna is townie. Naked suspicion of clidd is iffy, dodged my question for why she found him suspicious.Cat Scratch Fever
- Russian Blue. Poking holes in clidd's reasoning was townie, spotting Adorable as scum is townie. Some of her questioning feels COLD.
Daenerys and Dragons
- Townslips in 16 and 19 look more fake than real. 231 is scummy in the way it takes Doro's joke too seriously.Hoctac
- Sometimes misreads his role PM. He's probably fine, but there's always the possibility. Nulltown.Kanna
- Newbtown. Her paranoia and coming around to thinking there's 2+ scum in Group 1 is natural. Spoiler: Don't read this part, Kanna
Morning Tweet
- Scumslipped. 144.Raya36
- PoE range. Agreeing with easy stuff and safe(?) takes. Pushing Group 3 and not considering Group 1 reads could be agenda-driven.Q & A:
Raya
- I would love to see one of those fancy coloured readslists from you.Daenerys and Dragons
- Regarding 19: There was an "ie" before "each of them is in one of the groups." Did you miss that?Morning
- How confident are your scumlean/reads?Ame
- Why do you find clidd suspicious, and are your Hoctac/clidd reads independent?Kanna
- What's your read on me?not yet sentient
Really, you don't think that would be a townslip? I struggle to believe you think that.In post 377, Daenerys and Dragons wrote:It’s not the “ie” I missed. I think I read this as “one of them [mafia] must be in each of the groups.”
I don’t even think this could be called a townslip, I just read the rules incorrectly.
- Daenerys
Are you aware mafia form partitions pregame, and would therefore be very aware of how they can insert themselves in the groups, and would be discussing strategies?
not yet sentient
She's fairly new to mafia and I think this is her first game outside of the newbie queue. Does she not read that way to you?In post 379, Daenerys and Dragons wrote:@hoctac, why do you keep calling kanna “newbtown”?
not yet sentient
Sure, but mafia could misinterpret that too before they start their pregame discussion. Perhaps scum!Daegon has that in mind and is ready to drop it when the game starts. It's just the way they come out innocently inquiring about it.In post 394, Mohab500 wrote:Someone called this fake recently: I can confirm I had a similar thought when we began the game, perhaps because the listed mafia partition game had some ambiguous wording which made this seem like the case, so I can't really agree with that claim.In post 16, Daenerys and Dragons wrote:hi friends!
for some reason I thought that mafia had to place at least one of each of themselves in each group. can someone confirm for me whether this is the case?
- Daenerys
not yet sentient
Was this directed at me?In post 396, Ame wrote:@Hectic - associative. You randomly mentioned him earlier. And your interaction looks partnery. Also suspect that you two are likely to have done thins configuration. Not ignoring you or anyone. I'll fully address posts I've gleaned over Friday-Saturday
Thanks if so!
not yet sentient
What?In post 408, Albert B. Rampage wrote:GROUP 3 IS LYNCHBAIT DO NOT VOTE GROUP 3
VOTE GROUP 1 OR 2
1 IF YOU LIKE TO WIN FAST
2 IF YOU LIKE LONG GAMES WITH LOW INFO
THERE ARE YOUR CHOICES
Why is voting Group 2 better than Group 3? Getting rid of "lynchbait" is surely better than yourself and another.
not yet sentient
Yeah, it would be a townslip since that misinterpretation would certainly be addressed and corrected while they formed partitions, as understanding that rule correctly is essential to that process.In post 395, Daenerys and Dragons wrote:I mean I just had the rules wrong in my head this whole time about how mafia have to allocate themselves. I don’t particularly think that’s alignment indicative? Are you saying it’s a “townslip” because mafia would discuss whether or not they have to allocate one to each group?In post 385, Hoctac wrote:Really, you don't think that would be a townslip? I struggle to believe you think that.In post 377, Daenerys and Dragons wrote:It’s not the “ie” I missed. I think I read this as “one of them [mafia] must be in each of the groups.”
I don’t even think this could be called a townslip, I just read the rules incorrectly.
- Daenerys
Are you aware mafia form partitions pregame, and would therefore be very aware of how they can insert themselves in the groups, and would be discussing strategies?
- Daenerys
Do you still disagree it would be a townslip?
not yet sentient
Albert could be scum for this post tbh.In post 408, Albert B. Rampage wrote:GROUP 3 IS LYNCHBAIT DO NOT VOTE GROUP 3
VOTE GROUP 1 OR 2
1 IF YOU LIKE TO WIN FAST
2 IF YOU LIKE LONG GAMES WITH LOW INFO
THERE ARE YOUR CHOICES
Like, why
never
vote Group 3 because "lynchbait", but Group 2 is fine, especially when he should know he's town?not yet sentient
In post 432, Morning Tweet wrote:Albert you act more confident than i would if it were mod confirmed to me that there's 3 scum in group one. How are you so certain scum was lazy. how
I only skimmed but ill reread better later.I am only willing to vote group two right now.To vote group one id need like, four scumreads in there.and that is not happening
In post 435, Morning Tweet wrote:mohab i promise u there is like 2 scum in group one, minimum.
?
Lynching 2 scum is a very positive result.
We go down to 4 players with 2 chances to hit scum (only 1 nightkill in the game, remember?)
not yet sentient
Exactly. Our EV 100% goes up if we lynch Group 1 and there's exactly 2 scum in here.In post 438, Morning Tweet wrote:If 2 scum in group one -> 4 person MYLO is a good result, then we should probably choose group one
5 players -> nightkill -> 4 players 2|1|1
You have to pick one of the 1 groups. Or you can pick the 2, depending on WIFOM
3 players 1|1|1 LYLO
if we think this gives town best chance of winning, then id vote group one cause i feel pretty strongly theres 2 scum in it. Technically we're risking the game on there being 2+ but we may as well live a little
You agree with me that it's very likely there's 2+. So, time to self-destruct?
not yet sentient
It's not mylo. Mylo means "mislynch or lose". 3v1 without a nightkill is the day before Lylo. There'll be information to analyse based on group placements and interactions, so the odds of lynching the last scum in 2 tries (or 1 if they pick the group of 2) should be greater than 50% if town isn't duffers.
not yet sentient
Could you address this please, Puff?In post 360, Hoctac wrote:So why not put you in Group 2 if they really don't want Group 1 lynched?In post 357, Adorable wrote:The players in Group 3 are scummy and I was also going to vote there yesterday and then I started to think scum must have looked up the players completed games which makes me think the players on Group 3 get scum read more often than me.
not yet sentient
About timeIn post 507, Cat Scratch Fever wrote:I just realized I haven’t posted a single cat gif this game
Spoiler:
not yet sentient
In post 502, Kanna wrote:Please explain this because this is the exact opposite to how I'm seeing it.In post 375, Hoctac wrote:Hoctac - Sometimes misreads his role PM. He's probably fine, but there's always the possibility. Nulltown.
If there are 2 scum in Group 1, and say, 1 in Group 2, we absolutely kill Group 1. Yes, scum/town ratio is better, but scum decide the partitions and it messes us up the next day. 1 lone scum is winnable.
?
There are times I view my role PM and think I'm town, despite being scum. So, there is a possibility (around 20%) I could be scum misreading my role PM. Sorry, I refuse to recheck my role PM now, because I feel invested in town's wincon and I think I'm in too deep at this point, but I thought it would be better if I was transparent about it.
Hope this helps.
not yet sentient
I don't really get the logic there though, Puff. You said earlier you thought they put 3 players that were scummier than you in Group 3, so that they would get lynched. Why wouldn't they apply the same logic to group 2, and put you there? If their goal is to get any group but 1 lynched, it seems odd to put you in there, given your logic of yourself being the 4th easiest to scumread player in the game.In post 528, Adorable wrote:I pretty much said this on #350. Two or three scum in Group 1 I think they put me on Group 1 and plan on lynching on Group 2 or Group 3 on day 1 and on day 2 they would put me in a group that would get lynched.In post 491, Hoctac wrote:Could you address this please, Puff?In post 360, Hoctac wrote:So why not put you in Group 2 if they really don't want Group 1 lynched?In post 357, Adorable wrote:The players in Group 3 are scummy and I was also going to vote there yesterday and then I started to think scum must have looked up the players completed games which makes me think the players on Group 3 get scum read more often than me.
Do you really think the scumteam take this plan:
- Make Group 1 towny except for Puff. We want her to be the only scummy person in Group 1.
- Next day, we put Puff in a smaller group so she can be lynched.
not yet sentient
Okay, but seriously, should probably remove some votes from Group 1. Assuming there's 0 or 1 scum in there, and only 1 scum is currently voting for it, it's possible for the other 2 to quickhammer for the win.
I still think it's the best lynch, but unvote so we can have more time to discuss.
I still think it's the best lynch, but unvote so we can have more time to discuss.
not yet sentient
In post 109, Ame wrote:...I just noticed something lmfao
In post 110, Ame wrote:this has Hoc written all over it xDDD
This realisation was hilarious lol
It feels really genuine, so either Ame is scum who only realised this at this moment (less likely), or she's town.
not yet sentient
I'd rather wait. I can still see it being clidd. Also, I want the charmander to come back and start posting.In post 584, Morning Tweet wrote:Basically i took my previous townleans, and threw on the new ones, and here we are. I can reread and fix it as long as we arent terminating group #1 right now. Are you guys considering ending group #1 right now, or are we waiting
not yet sentient
Aww, I wanted to see your thoughts as well, clidd. That was a fantastic read though lol. I kinda wish you guys had gone with the 11-1-1 strat, just to see what would happen.
I'm not sure how I would've reacted to a Ame+clidd+Morning+Raya group. At first glance, maybe suspicious of how there's 3 people in there that can be very good at looking towny. All 3 of you probably would've made it through though, I think.
I'm not sure how I would've reacted to a Ame+clidd+Morning+Raya group. At first glance, maybe suspicious of how there's 3 people in there that can be very good at looking towny. All 3 of you probably would've made it through though, I think.
not yet sentient