Newbie 2016: Snapdragons (Game Over)

[LuckyLuciano]

My keyboard short circuited, so I'll be stuck on my phone while a new one comes in from Amazon. Might be relatively inactive for ~2 days bc I have posting from my phone.

VOTE: 72 <3

[LuckyLuciano]

Hate*

[LuckyLuciano]

UNVOTE: 72
VOTE: Blopp

[LuckyLuciano]

He's mafia, my vote is no longer random.

[LuckyLuciano]

UNVOTE: 72
VOTE: Blopp

Why the change of vote?
Same question for 72

He's mafia, my vote is no longer random.

Explain?

7 is a slight ping. It's a commonly known tell that true newbies are statistically more likely to start their first post in forum games with a greeting when they roll mafia.

23 is a slightly larger ping. It's LAMIST (Look at me, I'm so town). She's 'trying to move from RVS' by asking Clark what moved their game from RVS without moving the game forward herself. More specifically, she's offering content that at first glance appears to look town but upon closer inspection is not in any way AI because it doesn't offer any real thoughts. That's typically scum.

Finally, I don't like how she disappeared after getting 2 votes on her in quick succession. She posted after them, and with the preview feature she has to have seen them. Seems panicky to just dip out like that.

[LuckyLuciano]

@Clark, you have a completed game. Homura has many completed games.

If you want to move the game from RVS, why are you defending Blopp instead of seeing what comes of this?

Also, do not go out of your way to explain the reasoning of others. You are not a God who can read minds, none of us are. Let them explain themselves.

[LuckyLuciano]

JT, Clark's memeing about the game that just finished where JamSV hammered Clark at LYLO and they were both town.

[LuckyLuciano]

EBWOP: JT, Clark's memeing about the game that just finished where JamSV hammered Clark at ELO/KILO and they were both town.[/quote]

[LuckyLuciano]

Perhaps it is a coincidence, but since being wagoned, Blopp has removed their profile pic. That means they have been onsite and decided not to post. So now we have her ignoring the initial wagon that I started with 72o, despite posting after it began and ignoring my case. In addition, we have her logging on to remove her profile pic and still not posting. Feels a lot like giving up to me.

[LuckyLuciano]

Are you actually unironically denying that I may have a point?

[LuckyLuciano]

UNVOTE:
I don't want a quick hammer. L-2 is plenty for pressure. Scumlean on Lucky for not removing his vote. Could be hoping for that quickhammer

Is he your only scumlean or do you have more?

Lucky and blopp. Maybe Clark but I'm unsure

"I scumlean Lucky for possibly wanting a quick hammer on my other scumlean."

For the record, I'm expecting Blopp not to post again until the slot is replaced, and if the slot claims VT I will be pushing for the slot to be eliminated.

[LuckyLuciano]

1. Are you a straightforward player or like to do a lot of private analysis?

Depends. I'm typically pretty open with my thought process. Sometimes I keep my thoughts private to observe, but tend to quickly make them public once I've gauged how players have reacted with the information they had available.

2. How upset would you be if you are lynched Day 1 from a scale of 1-10? 10 being highly upset.

I've never been a typical D1 elimination target, so I couldn't tell you.

[LuckyLuciano]

For the record, I'm expecting Blopp not to post again until the slot is replaced, and if the slot claims VT I will be pushing for the slot to be eliminated.

So I am going to address this after all. As Jam may recall, I can be somewhat of lush and tonight is no exception, but I'll try and keep my thoughts clear.

I do find activity on this site by a player which does not occur in the thread(s) in which they are playing to be scum-indicative. In other words, if you're here doing stuff (on Mafiascum) but not

posting in the game you're in

I find that suspicious. I hate to keep referencing my last game, but it's my only frame of reference. In my last game there was a player whose activity/behavior outside of our game thread was distinctly different than it was inside it. I voted for that player, the wagon got to L-1, and then the player was replaced. That slot ended up being scum.

Which brings up my next point, and I am just thinking out loud here. I think Lucky is correct in pushing this "angle". I think I disagree that a replacement be lynched unless they claim a PR. How can a replacement answer for another player who has barely posted? What information can be gleaned from that Lynch provided it doesn't turn up scum? Just a wagon exam?

I know: "here goes Clarkbar defending Blopp again". I disagree that I ever did, and I'm not doing so now. I like the wagon well enough, I just wonder about the virtue of that last bit regarding lynching a replacement unless there's a PR claim. Since Lucky has made that the condition of a successful claim, couldn't any replacement (even town perhaps) make a PR claim? Thus forcing possible counter-claims?

If you think the target of a wagon is scum, it doesn't matter that it's not fair to their replacement that they have to defend another player's actions. If scum fake claims TPR and gets CC'd, we still win the trade. Scum trading 1-for-1 is a losing trade for them.

I've never been a typical D1 elimination target, so I couldn't tell you.

How would you characterize a "typical D1 elimination target"? What makes you different? Would you consider that difference a conscious choice or just your natural style?

Players who push the game forward and generate AI content don't die D1. There's also the fact that I come from a site where the metagame was literally to cop / track me N1, and mafia would NK me N1 if I was town. As in, over the course of ~10 years I was targeted for the kill N1 in

over 40%

of my town games, and in roughly half the games I survived N1 as town I was the target of a mafia framer, so in a way I guess I was off the table for D1 lynches because it was assumed that my slot would resolve itself eventually anyway.

[LuckyLuciano]

I got a shitty replacement keyboard from target this morning while I wait for a real one to come in from Amazon.

[LuckyLuciano]

It depends heavily on context. I'm onsite often playing in multiple games. Sometimes I post in all of them actively. Sometimes I'm focused on one game because it's in a critical state. Sometimes I'm just taking a step back from a particular game to let the thread breathe and see what directions other players are looking to take the game in.

I think dipping the moment a non-RVS wagon starts up on you, despite posting after the wagon started (in other words, knowing that the wagon is there), is sketchy. I'm also confused as to how people don't read the deletion of her profile pic as conceding. She deliberately logged on to delete her profile pic. Not to post, not to lurk, but to

delete

her pic. She didn't replace it, she

deleted

it and left again. That seems to be as close as you can get to closing your account on this site. Does newbie town effectively delete their account when called scum?

[LuckyLuciano]

As a matter of courtesy, it would be nice if somebody replaces in to give them the benefit of the doubt,

Replacing into a slot doesn't make it town.

we have more than a week to make a safe kill.

Why is a longer day phase inherently better than a short one?

Whether its scummy or a bad play is a different kettle of fish.

This is a false dichotomy.

[LuckyLuciano]

It depends heavily on context. I'm onsite often playing in multiple games. Sometimes I post in all of them actively. Sometimes I'm focused on one game because it's in a critical state. Sometimes I'm just taking a step back from a particular game to let the thread breathe and see what directions other players are looking to take the game in.

I think dipping the moment a non-RVS wagon starts up on you, despite posting after the wagon started (in other words, knowing that the wagon is there), is sketchy. I'm also confused as to how people don't read the deletion of her profile pic as conceding. She deliberately logged on to delete her profile pic. Not to post, not to lurk, but to

delete

her pic. She didn't replace it, she

deleted

it and left again. That seems to be as close as you can get to closing your account on this site. Does newbie town effectively delete their account when called scum?

But why did you assume that it was scum!Blopp essentially ragequitting after the game has progressed two pages over... literally any other explanation?

Like, speaking as someone who's played and spectated in Newbie games for almost a year — I've never seen newbscum just flat-out throw because they were caught. They might lurk out of the game or forget the site exists, but you're making an absurd leap of logic to assume that the removal of their avatar was because they were caught scum making a concession. You're missing me with how you correlated that.

Why does a player log back into the site, delete their avatar, and log off? We're working off theories here, give me an alternative theory. If you are going to dismiss my theory, provide one of your own. If you don't think this is a topic worth talking about, pick something that is worth talking about and bring it to the forefront.

[LuckyLuciano]

I've never seen newbscum just flat-out throw because they were caught.

Also, certainly you've never seen newbtown flat-out throw because they were caught. By being town, it's logically impossible for them to be caught. Not having seen something happen doesn't mean that it hasn't or can't happen.

[LuckyLuciano]

A dichotomy would be correct, but not a false dichotomy.

It is a false dichotomy my friend. I took over 200 games on my old site and ran a statistical analysis on town winrate in terms of D1 post count per player. The result was a strong, statistically significant trend. Want to take a guess what the trend said?

[LuckyLuciano]

I don't have one. Just think you're reading too much into something that could have a non-game-related reason for occurring.

Thank you for your contribution to the game. Come back when you want to push the game forward.

[LuckyLuciano]

You seem to have missed the sample size, and the statistical significance of the results. Gonna be real buddy, you don't have my respect as long as you lose to players like Mikul, who has NK'd me N1 in 7 consecutive games when he's been mafia because he cannot beat town!Lucky as scum. For the record, I correctly solved that game almost immediately after D2 started. Go ask your mod how accurate the PMs were. <3

[LuckyLuciano]

You are entitled to keep throwing games as town. You do you boo.

[LuckyLuciano]

Says the pot to the kettle.

lol

[LuckyLuciano]

JamSV, I'm not going to derail the game with stats. I'll give you some info and if you want to put in the legwork of verifying it, you can.

There has been 62 completed newbie games on this site with this current setup matrix. Within those games, there is not a statistical difference in town eliminations and mafia eliminations

day 1

based on post count. In other words, deviations in post count cannot reliably predict which faction will be lynched day 1. Posting more or posting less has no statistically significant effect. In games where mafia is eliminated day 1, town has won 17/18 times. In the single game representing a mafia win after a D1 mafia elimination, a town player was on V/LA during ELo and did not place a vote before EoD, resulting in a no elimination. If you eliminate mafia day 1 as town, you win. It's a flaw with the setup that has been known practically since its inception. Mafia mechanically loses if one of them is eliminated D1.

Now let's look at games where town is eliminated day 1. Note, there was one game with a no elimination day 1, which is not accounted for in these numbers. In the games where town is eliminated D1, the average D1 post count in mafia wins is 19.7% higher than the average post count in town wins. That is to say, posting more or posting less does not increase or decrease your chances of eliminating mafia on D1, so while you win the game if you eliminate mafia D1, posting more doesn't yield any different results than posting less in this case. However, in the instances which you eliminate town D1, town wins more often when they have less posts D1. Now you can go ahead and graph everything out to determine if this is actually predictive or if its coincidental, but I'm not going to waste thread space going over it. If you want to save yourself time and actually trust other people for once (Hint: This is how you win mafia games), you can take my word that you can determine the winning faction in games where town is eliminated D1 in this setup accurately enough using D1 post count alone to make a money gambling on game outcomes.

My personal theory as to why this correlation exists has been given before:

My theory as to why this is true is two-fold, (1) Players are reluctant to change their reads because they don't want to be wrong. However, given that DP1 is the point in the game with simultaneously the least amount of information and the statistical highest chance of a mis[elimination], reads are most likely to be wrong DP1. Extending the DP artificially prompts players to make more and more reads in a dayphase where they shouldn't have that many. (2) Players look back on earlier DPs at [E]LO to solve the game. The more valuable and genuine information available, the more likely town solves the game at [E]LO. Cross-applying the latter analysis of (1), we see that artificially extended DP1s prompt town players to give less valuable and less genuine reads because they are trying hard to make something out of the nothingness that is DP1.

You can choose to reject this information if you want, but I insist you focus on behavior that is actually alignment indicative. Somebody telling you that you are wrong is not alignment indicative. You need to look more into

why

players take the stances that they do.

[LuckyLuciano]

Spoiler:

Lucky and blopp. Maybe Clark but I'm unsure

Where's your vote then?

My vote is "on" Blopp I just don't want him at L-1

Perhaps it is a coincidence, but since being wagoned, Blopp has removed their profile pic. That means they have been onsite and decided not to post. So now we have her ignoring the initial wagon that I started with 72o, despite posting after it began and ignoring my case. In addition, we have her logging on to remove her profile pic and still not posting. Feels a lot like giving up to me.

This is a bad case and very reachy.

Also can you all look back at my two questions (rqs) I asked. I really want to know the answer for the first one.

I'll do this in my next post.

UNVOTE:
I don't want a quick hammer. L-2 is plenty for pressure. Scumlean on Lucky for not removing his vote. Could be hoping for that quickhammer

Is he your only scumlean or do you have more?

Lucky and blopp. Maybe Clark but I'm unsure

"I scumlean Lucky for possibly wanting a quick hammer on my other scumlean."

For the record, I'm expecting Blopp not to post again until the slot is replaced, and if the slot claims VT I will be pushing for the slot to be eliminated.

Just because I scumlean him doesnt mean I'm right (I never take associations into account D1. I often have multiple scumread that don't work together). And its perfectly viable to be concerned about someone not removing their vote at L-1 when Blopp hasn't even talked yet.

Actually since I can't vote Blopp right now VOTE: Lucky. I think this is more likely anyway. Your stats case also was reachy and the whole basis of your scumread isn't concrete. I would accept your case if and only if it was supporting evidence of a much stronger and more viable case.

If one of Blopp or I is eliminated, and flips town, do you intend to eliminate the other player tomorrow?

[LuckyLuciano]

@JamSV, why did you put Blopp at L-1 and proceed to tell players to feel free to hammer and state that you see quickhammers as NAI?

[LuckyLuciano]

UNVOTE:
I don't want a quick hammer. L-2 is plenty for pressure. Scumlean on Lucky for not removing his vote. Could be hoping for that quickhammer

LAMIST. Scumlean on Lucky for not removing his vote... lol. Feels like a forced post.

-0.5 Gangrenous Limb

Have I told you that I still hate when you assign scumpoints like this?

[LuckyLuciano]

What's everyone's thoughts on how Homura positioned herself while JamSV and I were arguing last night?

[LuckyLuciano]

You entirely missed the point of everything I posted, but again, let's move on to things that are actually AI. You will understand more when you have more experience and can start recognizing patterns.

[LuckyLuciano]

Between when the case was actually made against Blopp and when you replaced, Homura and JT had not posted, plus we have the replacement on the way. Why did you think Homura and JT would not express intent Also you just finished a game where a player replaced in and quickhammered town. You weren't worried of that happening again?

[LuckyLuciano]

Mmk. Can I get your thoughts on 153?

[LuckyLuciano]

Most cases D1 are reachy but Lucky's case on Blopp is beyond reachy. I mean look at the case I just posted and tell me how that's a good case. And another concern is usually reachy D1 cases are used to create more discussion (mainly from the player being cased) so we can later get better reads and make better cases. But in this case Blopp isn't here to talk and Lucky keeps pushing her. Lucky isn't playing to get more info. Lucky is playing to get a lynch.

I elaborated in terms of a case to generate discussion, but the points of the case were still >Rand reasons to vote Blopp today. Her site flake, with special consideration played to how she site flaked - in that she essentially deactivated her account -, is further increasing the chance that she flips mafia fair >Random. To assume that I haven't gotten more info on the slots throughout the day is to assume that I haven't been observing how players position themselves around the topic.

I agree with this but it would be much more beneficial to push a player that's active. You would get much more info from that. And also I don't like how Lucky seems to have 0 interest in Blopp being replaced. He just wants Blopp lynched and doesn't appear to care about whether or not Blopp actually is scum or care about getting more info that could help make that decision.

Who said I'm not interested in a replacement? I said that a replacement still has to defend Blopp's actions and isn't pardoned simply for replacing into a game, and that if they claim VT I'm going to continue voting them. You keep saying I wanted a quick hammer because I didn't unvote. Why would I unvote someone I think is scum? Why does it feel like you are 100% convinced that Blopp is town despite her being one of your scum reads? It feels like you have been arguing that you are allowed to scum read her but I'm not allowed to scum read her more strongly. If someone hammers her and she flips town

that gives info too

. Stop playing like a novice, you're an SE.

[LuckyLuciano]

Raya, your positioning WRT Blopp is odd. I was okay with the sheep vote in 39 because you seemed genuinely interested in the case. Somewhere down the line the same case you found worth pushing you have decided is worth scumreading for having been pushed. 45 is odd in retrospect. You say that you won't move your vote from Blopp to Clark because you want to hear from Blopp, but you also concede that we're not going to get info out of Blopp's responses anymore because Clark addressed my case for her (47). If Blopp has had an out provided to her already, what's the point of keeping your vote on her?

67 is also really weird. Why is there a scumlean on me for not removing my vote on someone that I scumread and not a scumlean on the player who replaced in, put Blopp at E-1, and invited a quickhammer? It feels like Raya's setting up to push me later for this and doesn't feel at all like a genuine read. In 106 you call a 2-line post that I prefaced with "Perhaps it is a coincidence" in 63, "Bad and reachy." Why did you consider my speculation a case at the time? What sort of content did you expect 63 posts into the game that would push the game forward while not being, to some degree, "bad and reachy"? Further, in 67, you scumleaned me for not unvoting but said nothing about 63. Further, you keep calling my push reachy. What about being reachy is scummy? Do you believe that my goal D1 as town is to find an elimination target that has an >Random chance of being scum? Even if my stance on Blopp is reachy, do you not believe that it represents scum equity in the Blopp slot that is >Random? You yourself have continually scumread Blopp

the entire game

while simultaneously pushing me for scumreading her. Why do

you

scumread her? Your initial vote on the slot was a sheep vote, which you yourself admitted was only cast to "see where this goes." Blopp never responded, therefore it never went anywhere, yet you progressed into constantly calling her slot scummy while illustrating none of that progression publicly. And despite you insisting that I'm pushing a mislynch, you hold that you think her slot is scummy.

Why did you ask 72o if his thoughts of Blopp had changed at all in 148 when Blopp has been MIA since his initial vote? Why would his thoughts have changed, and why did you have a special interest in hearing his thoughts on the Blopp slot rather than others, like the slot you have been pushing: me? Your stance on Blopp honestly feels like you tried to distance early and are not awkwardly trying to defend her (anyone else hear the distant revving of a chainsaw) while maintaining your early, unexplained scumread on her to appear consistent. In 181 you have decided that the

only

reason Blopp is scummy is lack of content. This seems to be a deterioration in your read on her since your earlier scumlean on her 67. What reason did you have to scumlean Blopp in 67, and why did it disappear by 181. She hadn't been gone for long enough for lack of content to be a reason to scumlean her, and it was early enough in the game that other slots had just as little or less content. So please, educate me on your thought process here.

Let's move on to 182. You say that my case is scummy because I'm pushing a spot that isn't around to respond, but my case is premised on

why

that slot isn't around to respond. Do you believe it is possible that I believe in my reads? If so, why is my push scummy? Do you stop pushing a scumread because they leave the game or choose not to respond? Later on your argument against me more clearly becomes that you believe I'm pushing a miskick (218). How do you differentiate town pushing town from scum pushing town? What about my push on Blopp indicates that it is a push I would make as scum but wouldn't make as town? If you are still holding Blopp as scummy, how can my push so obviously be a miskick? I can only clearly be pushing a miskick if I'm pushing an obvtown slot, no? Please explain to me how you know I'm pushing a miskick on a slot you scumread.

On to 228. The first thing you do is appeal to authority with Homura. That's laughable because I have more experience than Homura, so if you are using experience as a reason to accept or deny my push, you should be taking my side. Moreover, it's not that I haven't considered other possibilities for Blopp flaking. It's that among all possible explanations, I believe that the explanations leading to scum!Blopp hold more equity than those leading to town!Blopp. I think the deletion of her avatar answers back

many, if not all

of the NAI explanations for her flaking, and when left with only scumAI and townAI explanations for a newbie dipping after getting immediate pressure from multiple players in response to a post they made, my experience leads me to believe that there are far more prevalent scumAI explanations than townAI. Further, you say in the same post that you don't find Blopp's behavior particularly AI. Again, explain to me your earlier scumread on Blopp if her behavior suddenly isn't AI.

A particular line I feel warrants a response,

So basically what you're saying in that second line is unless Blopp slot is a power role you won't consider anything the replacement has to say and won't reconsider your read.

Yeah. That's pretty much what I'm saying. The goal D1 is always to find a slot that has a >Rand chance of being scum and voting there. The goal D1 is not to solve the game. If a slot with high scum equity claims VT, you eliminate them. You don't go searching through slots with lesser scum equity and get more claims, either outing a TPR or further limiting the pool of TPR for scum to choose from for their NK. It's called best practical play.

I'm not 100% convinced Blopp is town. I just don't trust your case on her and I don't believe it to be a good case with good intentions. The more I believe you're pushing for a mislynch the more I believe Blopp is town though. And yes Blopp flipping town does give info but why should I push for a flip on Blopp when I'm sure you're scum pushing for a mislynch on Blopp.

Either you think I'm scum pushing for a miskick or you don't. If you are so convinced that I'm scum pushing for a miskick, why would you say that you are not 100% convinced Blopp is town. Even if it is a true statement, what compelled you to throw it out there. It feels a lot like building a safety net for Blopp being kicked, either today, or tomorrow if I were to be kicked today. At some point that slot

will

flip, and when it does you need to have already saved face, and this is part of you trying to do that.

Also, anyone who doesn't read this as scum is a joke of a player,

If you're so happy with flipping town and you're actually town why not let us flip you. We'll get more info from that than Blopp's flip.

[LuckyLuciano]

Keep in mind the reason that LL wants Blopp out of the game is the exact reason I wanted Gorge Bailey out of the the game but in that game LL unvotes GB because they don't want to end the day that early.

It's not at all the same. I unvoted GB because I thought he was town and preferred to kick Marashu, and I wanted more AI content from a particular replacement slot. In other words, there were better leads to follow at the time, in this game Blopp is the best lead. Guess what, Marashu and that replacement slot were both mafia. Somehow town managed to get perfect gamed after I got sick and had to replace out.

[LuckyLuciano]

And why has no one really said a single word about my case on 72/LL?

Is your case essentially that 72o asked Raya why they asked for a read of me?

[LuckyLuciano]

Whether my read on GB changed over time or I deliberately voted a TR as town (I don't know why I even have to offer this as an option with you), does that have any implication on this game?

[LuckyLuciano]

Then what's your case, because I'm not finding it.

[LuckyLuciano]

So you are assuming that I deliberately voted a TR as town, rather than my read on GB changed over time (lol), and you are advocating a policy lynch because of that?

[LuckyLuciano]

What is your case? I don't see a case from you on me anywhere.

[LuckyLuciano]

So that's why nobody has addressed your case, it's a joke. 72o wasn't in the game you are citing. You are citing a game where you had a 300 post TvT 1v1 that I replaced into

after

the 1v1 as proof that I don't like short D1s because I unvoted an obvtown slot (which was not yet obvtown when I had voted them) because you threatened to quickhammer them in favor of eliminating a mafia slot instead, and using the time it takes to move a wagon to prod info out of the other mafia slot.

[LuckyLuciano]

They really don't, but okay, keep preaching that until you decide to actually play the game instead of continuing to try and snipe me in games so you can keep fascinating over your belief that I'm somebody that I'm not and finding new and unique reasons to vote me because of your hatred for that person.

[LuckyLuciano]

Re: Oh, 72o being in that game. I actually forgot he was in the game. Fair enough. Nonetheless, I still don't take my unvoting a slot I thought was town because I was certain another slot was mafia - and I was right - after you had a

three hundred post TvT 1v1

as proof that I don't prefer shorter D1s.

[LuckyLuciano]

If I'm not mistaking, that's 4 votes. I have a TPR. Let's move on.

[LuckyLuciano]

So you are advocating eliminating a claimed power role day 1 when, in claiming, my slot because self-resolving as the game goes on anyway?

[LuckyLuciano]

EBWOP: So you are advocating eliminating a claimed power role day 1 when, in claiming, my slot becomes self-resolving as the game goes on anyway?

[LuckyLuciano]

Sure, keep saying that.

[LuckyLuciano]

I'm not going to argue with you. Random nonsensical 1v1s are what you masturbate to. If the rest of the players in the game agree on eliminating a claimed TPR D1, so be it.

[LuckyLuciano]

I'm not masons with 72o. I am not giving any more info about my role claim just to help mafia solve the setup. My slots self-resolves at this point. Either it becomes blatantly obvious I'm lying as the game goes on, or I'm telling the truth.

[LuckyLuciano]

Battle Mage replaces Blopp.

See this is an issue now, I don't like playing with Battle Mage, I feel like he's too important as asset for town as scum and town, which is just a huge pain.

And I don't like playing with Quick. Nobody gets to be happy this game. Gotta send my WOTC lists to the mod before the game starts from now on I guess.

[LuckyLuciano]

@Raya, thank you for the time it took to respond to that wallpost. I'm about to turn in for the evening, so a more thorough reading of your response and a subsequent response from myself is going to have to wait until tomorrow. From a quick skim though, it's worth noting that while this account is my current main, it is not my first mafiascum account. I have ~40 newbie games played on this site since 2015.

[LuckyLuciano]

I can dig the "scum 101" thing. How do you square that with how Raya has been playing? She has been virtually solely focused on LL, and has given generous town-reads. That doesn't sound to me like a player who is fence-sitting or simply waiting for things to fall into place.

Being solely focused on one player and giving generous town-reads is pretty common scumplay. You town-read people because townies like to be town-read and then they support you on your miskick and you get to be all confused about how you were wrong and reevaluate later.

[LuckyLuciano]

Can't tell if JamSV is openwolfing with his setup spec or if he just really doesn't understand how much harm he does to the town with open setup spec.

[LuckyLuciano]

It's okay JamSV, I'm writing a wall post and then I'm going to suggest you eliminate my slot so you can get your head out of your ass and play the game.

[LuckyLuciano]

Just wait Quick, you are going to love what I post. A game with both you and Looker in it is bound to be a joke.

[LuckyLuciano]

It has less to do with JamSV, and more to do with the fact that the only two players on the site whom I avoid playing with - and they both know I avoid playing with them - chose to replace into the game, knowing that I am in it. @JamSV, sorry, but seriously... step up you game.

[LuckyLuciano]

72o is about as town as it gets.

[LuckyLuciano]

I'm almost done with my wallpost. The short version is that I know I'm town, so I know that his perspective's matching mine WRT Blopp and Raya means he's likely got a townie starting point with his read to the game. I know that's not useful to you, but I'm also going to advocate you eliminate my slot, at which point you should see that 72o's obvtown. He didn't just sheep me either, he gave independent original thoughts that shared my perspective of the game.

[LuckyLuciano]

I am going to give my thoughts and bounce. Let's start with the bomb I have to drop. I retract my TPR claim. I'm going to wager that my slot ends up getting eliminated today, so go ahead and do it before the replacement comes in and has to unfairly defend a fake claim they didn't make. After miskicking my slot town is down to 5v2, so they have 1 more free miskick before having to eliminate 2 mafia in order to win. My goal here is to give an elimination pool of 3 players, and hopefully get both scum correct so that town can just sheep this post after they know my slot is town and win the game. This is probably going to be lower effort than it should be, because aside from 72o and Thirteen, this town really doesn't deserve to win. I'm only doing this because it's unfair not to obvtown a little bit before replacing out and possibly putting someone into the position of defending a fake claim they didn't make. With that said, I'm going to give my reads as a list but instead of explaining them individually I'm going to just give a wall analysis of the gamestate and how individual players fit in at the end.

Lucky

72o

Thirteen

Looker

Quick

JamSV

Clark

BM

Raya

I fake claimed because once Quick replaced in I realized he was going to hard push my slot continually throughout the game because he has an obsession with me, and wanted to either delay my elimination today and soak up a mafia NK or RB in setup A, or get eliminated anyway and make mafia obvscum in their efforts to push a claimed TPR. I'm pretty sure I've done the latter well enough.

72o and Thirteen have shared a lot of my thoughts this game. I've held back on openly quoting either of them and agreeing with them because this game has been very straightforward up until bad!town sheeped Raya's counterpush from the Blopp slot onto me. They both have very town mindsets that can be easily traced in their ISOs. 72o has been seeing the game exactly as I have WRT Blopp / Raya. They also treated a TPR claim on a town-read exactly as one should. If people wanted to push my slot for the blanket TPR claim then their play should have continued along the lines of "Lucky's still scummy for the reasons that he was scummy before, therefore he's still scummy now." Instead, the push warped into, "TPR always needs to full claim." Think about this from both perspectives. Mafia has no reason to believe I'm lying about my claim, so they know that I'm not going to get eliminated if I full claim. What they want to know is the setup. Once one TPR full claims, mafia knows what setup we're in. That's Raya's angle, and that's why JamSV's play is so disgustingly bad, because he's doing the legwork

for the mafia

. One they know the setup, they know whether or not the TPR is a safe kill, or in case of column A if they should roleblock the TPR.

I'm willing to put JamSV as town despite his active effort to help mafia win by sorting the setup for them and pushing a TPR claim because (1) I think his desire to eliminate my slot is largely confbiased from a disdain he has towards me from our earlier discussions. Mafia is more open to the idea that people angle for specific reasons and are less able to fake a confbias tunnel. (2) He wants to make up for throwing the last game and is trying to solve the game himself in order to make up for it. He's got a stats background and is the sort of player who finds it more comfortable to understand the bare mechanics of the game than player behavior. It makes sense for a player with his background to want to solve using the matrix rather than by developing their capacity to read behavior and motivation.

The Homura (Looker) and Quick slots I have less to go on, but their positioning relative to gamestate lets them be town. If NK's or investigations intervene with the PoE I provide and you find yourselves with an extra elimination, re-evaluate these slots first. I questioned Homura's positioning WRT my earlier argument with JamSV, but that was more to generate discussion on new topics than to throw shade at Homura. I feel that Homura's positioning is completely normal for someone who (1) doesn't understand the stats argument and, (2) is still salty at being universally townread all game only to have me redirect a wagon from town!me to scum!her, indicating the first point in 3 day phases she received a single scum read, and getting her eliminated literally minutes before the day phase expired in our past game together. I deduce that she's still salty based on one of the comments she made this game. Also, don't hold Quick pushing the three most town players in the game (72o, Thirteen, and myself) against him. That's literally his MO, self-destructing the town as town.

I'm still sold on the BM slot being scum. Sorry BM, you've been dealt a bad hand. People can deny newbie tells as legitimate, but they still work. The only reason he's not a solid

red

is because of the possibilities of angles Raya has taken. I feel that Raya has to act the way she has if Blopp is scum, because she can't win the game alone once Blopp is eliminated. I didn't immediately switch from Blopp to Raya when posting my analysis on her slot because I was giving her the benefit of the doubt, but her continued pushing in bad faith, her constant attempts to buddy half the player list, and some of 72o's points on her slot have convinced me she's 100% scum. If Blopp (BM) is scum, Raya is

always

scum. The only case where Raya is scum and blopp (BM) is not is one where Raya took an incredibly aggressive position of hard defending town!Blopp while chainsaw pushing me in hopes of chain eliminating which ever one of us doesn't get eliminated D1. In that case, Clark is positioned with the highest partner equity for Raya. I decide this because of their early interactions with Raya and their latest ISO of Raya where Raya magically becomes town at the end of it. I think it's more likely that Clark is just new and still learning than that they are scumbuddies with Raya. I think newbie scum might be more likely to join their scumbuddy in pushing me. Maybe Clark should be higher up on the list of townies, I think he's only this low because in the small case where Raya is playing super aggressively and wasn't forced to by a newbie partner getting caught and bailing, she'd need a scumbuddy that's not Blopp (BM). Anyway, it's pretty much always Blopp (BM) / Raya.

@Everyone, JT is right in 442 and 443. I actually didn't realize that I was still in queue when I received a role pm for this game and probably should have declined it, but decided to play anyway when I was dealing with some prolonged annoyances IRL and I let that seep into my discourse this game. I'd like to apologize to anyone I've personally attacked this game, especially the newbies. There's no need for bitterness in mafia, especially in newbie games.

@Mod, I'm out.

[LuckyLuciano]

It's almost like newbie tells work. For the record, I replaced out not because I was being pressured but because both Quick and Looker replaced in.

[LuckyLuciano]

If we eliminated scum for scum slipping instead of pushing town for catching scum, town won this game.

[LuckyLuciano]

If we eliminated scum for scum slipping instead of pushing town for catching scum, town won this game.

Yep, i got screwed over for townreading your slot/porekns correctly, and for correctly VOTING SCUM BM IN LYLO

TTJT's case was like 90% because i was against a town player's lynch. That's what really annoyed me this game.

Yeah, being correct is seen as scummy when town players are unable to see why you are correct. "They were right and I was wrong, and I'm not okay with that, so they are scum!"

[LuckyLuciano]

I don't say that to slight anyone btw, but to point out where some of the new players went wrong for future games.

[LuckyLuciano]

Raya's push onto me was... not something I expected out of an SE slot. If a newbie made that push I wouldn't have scumread them.

Pedit: I didn't read the game to thoroughly after replacing out, but certainly everyone ignored my reads list I gave upon replacing out. I gave a PoE of {BM -> Raya -> Clark} with the condition that Clark is only scum if BM is town and Raya is scum, if not look to {Looker, Quick}. I also hard defended you. But even in death I was ignored. Oh well. It's probably my fault for being abrasive early on. A big part about being mafia is getting people to like you. Being good at reading people is one of the least important skills in this game.

[LuckyLuciano]

EBWOP: about playing mafia

[LuckyLuciano]

That's pretty decent thinking

However, to a real doctor, you're still confirmed town, so their reaction may differ to what you were hoping for

I agree that this is a really interesting line of thinking. I also agree that it wasn't

fully

thought out, but every great gambit player I've ever encountered started off making plays like this.

[LuckyLuciano]

I don't mean you, I mean the playerlist at large. You were obvtown to me because Blopp was obvscum for committing a plethora of newbie tells and scum doesn't hard bus scum D1 in this setup.

Also, I want to give hella props to Porkens. My slot wasn't a fair one to have to replace into, and I think they did a phenomenal job with the hand they were dealt. Nothing but respect for them.

[LuckyLuciano]

Don't pay attention to your record in mafia, Clark. It's pretty pointless. Mafia is a team game. Looking at records is an individualistic mindset. Just focus on the processes of correctly identifying scum as and being townread as mafia. If the results don't pan out, it's okay, as long as the process is correct. This game should be a clear example of how being correct in mafia doesn't actually have that large of an impact on who wins and who loses. There's so many other factors out of any one player's control.

[LuckyLuciano]

Because mafia is a team game? Connect the dots.

[LuckyLuciano]

There were no factually inaccuracies in the Blopp case. There were just players who refused to believe that others may be more accurate than them on the Blopp read, or that others may be proposing a better framework for playing this particular setup.

[LuckyLuciano]

There were no factually inaccuracies in the Blopp case. There were just players who refused to believe that others may be more accurate than them on the Blopp read, or that others may be proposing a better framework for playing this particular setup.

There were demonstrable factual inaccuracies about the Blopp case, pertaining to timing of posts. It really hurt the case because it looked like you were lying to paint a newbie in a bad light. It's not to say your tells were right or wrong, but the way they were presented was too easy to breakdown.

Quote it. This is a straight lie.

[LuckyLuciano]

Quote it, it's a straight lie.