ClarkBar didn't mention this but I happenedIn post 23, Blopp wrote:What happened to make the RVS go so quickly in your other game?In post 21, ClarkBar wrote:Hmm. Well this is only my second game, and my first one was out of RVS and humming along pretty quickly. So... not sure if there are any other good strategies to break the ice a little.
Yes.
We've both played one on site game, in the previous game he mistakenly took me a scum me in an ELo, with 3 total people remaining and lost the game for town.In post 58, TheThirteenthJT wrote:My vote stays on you. It's almost as if you "know" this is true. Someone else join the Clark wagon.
As a matter of courtesy, it would be nice if somebody replaces in to give them the benefit of the doubt, we have more than a week to make a safe kill. Lucky seems to be attempting to end the day early, which I don't believe is pro town. Whether its scummy or a bad play is a different kettle of fish.In post 74, ClarkBar wrote: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?In post 72, LuckyLuciano wrote: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.
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?
1. I never said it made them townIn post 85, LuckyLuciano wrote:Replacing into a slot doesn't make it town.In post 83, JamSV wrote:As a matter of courtesy, it would be nice if somebody replaces in to give them the benefit of the doubt,
Why is a longer day phase inherently better than a short one?In post 83, JamSV wrote:we have more than a week to make a safe kill.
This is a false dichotomy.In post 83, JamSV wrote:Whether its scummy or a bad play is a different kettle of fish.
Leaning on Lucky, mostly for his post, and partly because he's an English lit student who doesn't quote context to make a quote more accurate.
UNVOTE: UnluckyLuciano
That you have too much time on your hands. Also that you don't have an actual grasp on how statistics work, is what I'd imagine your trend would say. There are tons of factors you aren't taking into account when you're going based off of solely post countIn post 93, LuckyLuciano wrote: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?In post 89, JamSV wrote:A dichotomy would be correct, but not a false dichotomy.
I have 2 bags. Both bags look very similar. Inside both bags are balls. You pick out some balls form the first bag and decide 70% are green and the rest are red. You conclude the second bag had 30% red and 70% green. I'm not saying your statistical data won't work. Regardless of the accuracy of your data and your process of getting it there will be times it overlaps. However it simply is never going to be a valid point.In post 98, LuckyLuciano wrote: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
As someone studying Statistics for a degree, I really do wish we could just go with what you say, however, you will never be able to convince people you're right just be barking on about a data set you have.In post 99, JamSV wrote:I have 2 bags. Both bags look very similar. Inside both bags are balls. You pick out some balls form the first bag and decide 70% are green and the rest are red. You conclude the second bag had 30% red and 70% green. I'm not saying your statistical data won't work. Regardless of the accuracy of your data and your process of getting it there will be times it overlaps. However it simply is never going to be a valid point.In post 98, LuckyLuciano wrote: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
In post 93, LuckyLuciano wrote: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?In post 89, JamSV wrote:A dichotomy would be correct, but not a false dichotomy.
I don't want to have to explain this. A False Dichotomy means out of my given options there are alternatives I purposely missed. I explained how that wasn't true, I explained how and why the options I gave were accurate. You didn't address an option missed out. You didn't point out a flaw in my logic. What you did was quoted the fact you have a data set, of which relates post count to alignment, not one which relates post quality to alignment, and not one which relates post content to alignment. I'll repeat stuff I've already said just so you understand it. During this game there are 2 alignments, scum or town. With a generic anti-town action, there are 3 possibilities: Scum, a bad play on behalf of town, or a town PR trying not to come across as a PR. This isn't a generic anti-town action. In this case I explained why the last case isn't valid, but as a quick rundown Town PRs want as much time to make the correct night play. This leaves 2 possible options. Scum, or a bad town play. A scenario, presented with 2 options, where no valid alternatives exist. A dichotomy, not a false dichotomy. (PS Town PR wanted to end a day abruptly and early would come under bad town play, assumed thats common sense).In post 101, LuckyLuciano wrote:You are entitled to keep throwing games as town. You do you boo.
It's not a usual tone don't worry, do you know when you just get that sudden flow of information and ideas? I'm rather all or nothing in terms of input unfortunately.In post 107, Raya36 wrote:Also I think Jam is town. For reasoning and tone
This is just curiosity, I'm not suspicious but, would I be right to assume if you're quiet with reads you're likely suspicious of somebody but want more concrete evidence? - Just to be safe for later on in the gameIn post 108, Raya36 wrote:1. I think I'm somewhere in the middle. Anything I think is important enough to say I will post about. I like to comment any major thoughts i have on posts. Sometimes I will keep a read secret to get more reactions etc out of someone but that's not common for me. And often I'll have reads I don't comment on because they're on the weaker side but that's probably true for everyone. I'm definitely more on the straightforward side though.In post 37, TheThirteenthJT wrote: 1. Are you a straightforward player or like to do a lot of private analysis?
2. How upset would you be if you are lynched Day 1 from a scale of 1-10? 10 being highly upset.
2. 3? I want to play obviously but I wouldn't be very upset D1 mostly because I'm not that invested yet.
So then. Let us do some nitpicking, it's all issues with the process. Experience is NAI. Preferance of play is NAI. Lurker interpretations are NAI. Lying is hard to identify as lying rather than a mistake, similarly, also NAI. However, refusing to answer a question, while NAI, it certainly doesn't look great for town. Address this please, or respond to Blopp. Its difficult to identify a lier so the closest thing one can do is to vote for a hypocrite.In post 32, 72offsuit wrote:Nah, ill abstain from answering . The RQS tool is incompatible with myself. My alignment cannot be verified via RQS.In post 29, Blopp wrote:1. This is my first forum game but I have played mafia (or werewolf) a few times at parties live (or IRL as the cool kids say it).In post 22, 72offsuit wrote:I'm so glad you asked!In post 21, ClarkBar wrote:Hmm. Well this is only my second game, and my first one was out of RVS and humming along pretty quickly. So... not sure if there are any other good strategies to break the ice a little.
There is a fantastic scumhunting tool called RQS (that's Random Question Stage to the uninitiated).
I do not proclaim to have devised this foolproof tool.
1. What is your experience in mafia outside of mafiascum?
2. Do you prefer playing as town or scum?
3. What do you think of lynching lurkers?
4. What do you think of lynching liars?
2. I haven't played enough to say if I have a preference yet but town was fun when I played with my friends. One of my friends has a really bad poker face so it was fairly easy to see that she was lying to us. I had an "Aha!" moment.
3. I would say not good. Sometimes someone is shy but innocent. I think I'd rather try to hear their thought process first.
4. I'd say good?
What about you @72offsuit?
While its on my mind Lucky, can you tell us more about your previous site? What I'm mainly interested in knowing is game size, and role allocation, ie, 9 players, 2 scum 7 town, 11 players, 3 scum 8 town, etc etc.In post 77, LuckyLuciano wrote: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.In post 74, ClarkBar wrote: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.In post 72, LuckyLuciano wrote: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.
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 notposting in the game you're inI 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?
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 inIn post 75, ClarkBar wrote: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?In post 73, LuckyLuciano wrote:I've never been a typical D1 elimination target, so I couldn't tell you.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.
I want to partake in this also.In post 37, TheThirteenthJT wrote:1. Extensive play close to 10 yrs ago. Third game here.In post 22, 72offsuit wrote:I'm so glad you asked!In post 21, ClarkBar wrote:Hmm. Well this is only my second game, and my first one was out of RVS and humming along pretty quickly. So... not sure if there are any other good strategies to break the ice a little.
There is a fantastic scumhunting tool called RQS (that's Random Question Stage to the uninitiated).
I do not proclaim to have devised this foolproof tool.
1. What is your experience in mafia outside of mafiascum?
2. Do you prefer playing as town or scum?
3. What do you think of lynching lurkers?
4. What do you think of lynching liars?
2. Mafia.
3. You know my answer here. Not really but might be changing my opinion on this. Depends on circumstances.
4. A bit of weird question. Context is important.
Now let me add two more.
1. Are you a straightforward player or like to do a lot of private analysis?
2. How upset would you be if you are lynched Day 1 from a scale of 1-10? 10 being highly upset.
By the way Clark may I ask for your opinion on 72 and Lucky? Its okay if you're unsure, its still early in Day 1In post 121, ClarkBar wrote:I wonder if it'll be like last game and the bulk of the players are replaced.
He's more than welcome to state he prefers a shorter day, as are you, doesn't change the fact its in town's benefit to spend time prevent an accidental town kill. If you can explain how a shorter day with a higher chance of an accidental town kill is better. Inform me. If its simply personal preference and how he supposedly plays. You won't convince me otherwise, but I won't take it further, nor will I be impressed / relieved.In post 124, 72offsuit wrote:NAI post. I don;t really see the !scumAgenda here. Its not like he is pushing for a quickhammer.In post 89, JamSV wrote:1. I never said it made them townIn post 85, LuckyLuciano wrote:Replacing into a slot doesn't make it town.In post 83, JamSV wrote:As a matter of courtesy, it would be nice if somebody replaces in to give them the benefit of the doubt,
Why is a longer day phase inherently better than a short one?In post 83, JamSV wrote:we have more than a week to make a safe kill.
This is a false dichotomy.In post 83, JamSV wrote:Whether its scummy or a bad play is a different kettle of fish.
2. Helps prevention of a town elimination
3. No it isn't but I like your attempt at discrediting. There isn't town incentive to end a day early. The longer the day the less chance of killing of a town, similarly, if a Cop, you want time to work out who to investigate, Doctor's want time to learn who to heal, Trackers to track, Jailkeepers to Jail, Friendly Neighbour to Neighbour, Masons to get extra stuff worked out amongst the two of them. Ending the day early allows the following:The list can go on but they're the most important to take into account.
- Town elimination
- Shorter discussion and the prevention of discussion
- Free time for Scum under suspicion to work out excuses
- Less time for Scum to be found
To disallow a day phase to be brought out sufficiently, it is inherently anti-town. If somebody purposely does something anti-town there are two options:
They are scum
OR
They are town and it's a bad play.
We have arrived at the simple conclusion I got to with more detailed explanation than you simply dismissing it as a false dichotomy. A dichotomy would be correct, but not a false dichotomy.
PS I also find it bad practice to quote an answer to the question you're going to ask...Leaning on Lucky, mostly for his post, and partly because he's an English lit student who doesn't quote context to make a quote more accurate.
LL always states he prefers shorter day ones.
I've come round to his line of thinking too.
Not to ruin the surprise but it was aimed at 72In post 128, Homura wrote:I know this is referring to Raya, but I feel called out myself.In post 116, JamSV wrote:It is all well and good to try to be the cool 500IQ anime protagonist, Detective Conan level scumhunter. However, what is much cooler, much more respectable, would be to actually help town. A mysterious, secretive, low impact town member might aswell not be town but have an entirely neutral role.
This is more of an unrelated note, but I think my recent play has been a lot more reticent partly due to the image I wanted to project on this account and partly because of the stifling impact the pandemic had on me mentally. Like to start being more proactive like my earlier games.
[post=]23[/post]In post 131, Homura wrote:In post 97, Homura wrote:72, what's your reasoning behind your vote on Blopp?
Currently after a replacement for Echovision not a prod. Was already said. There's a filter by author option at the bottom of the page.
Well then, Mr Sherlock, you've successfully "baited" me into asking it. So do explain what it would not mean, now that I have been "baited". Does it make me a scum lean? A scum read? A town lean? A town read? Do be creative with your explanation. I'm not as smart as Watson unfortunately. It seems (is) as if, you don't have an explanation or a strand of logic to deal with my queries, and have gone into 5D chess level tactics claiming I was "baited", when in fact you were just being hypocritical.In post 142, 72offsuit wrote:I deliberately didn;t answer to bait someone into asking this. I was always going to answer them.
As more and more time passes, and the more a person doesn't answer questions, the more scum indicative it becomes. You gain nothing from not answering however you'll eventually lose town credibility if you keep refusing to answer questions.In post 144, 72offsuit wrote:Slightly +town for asking.In post 143, JamSV wrote:Well then, Mr Sherlock, you've successfully "baited" me into asking it. So do explain what it would not mean, now that I have been "baited". Does it make me a scum lean? A scum read? A town lean? A town read? Do be creative with your explanation. I'm not as smart as Watson unfortunately. It seems (is) as if, you don't have an explanation or a strand of logic to deal with my queries, and have gone into 5D chess level tactics claiming I was "baited", when in fact you were just being hypocritical.In post 142, 72offsuit wrote:I deliberately didn;t answer to bait someone into asking this. I was always going to answer them.
I'm not always going to get a perfectly alignment-indicative answer, but its always worth a try.
What does !scumMe gain from not answering?
The minimum amount of day phases, the game can go on for is 3 day phases, in which case two town would have been accidentally killed, and two town during the night phase, this is the simplest and most common way to get to an ELo situation. You're certainly correct that during an ELo, players look back on earlier day phases in order to make their decisions. However, that is precisely why the day phase should be prolonged. We can all agree, we can't all play perfectly and optimally, especially considering this is a newbie game. The longer the game goes on the higher chance somebody will slip, or make a mistake with logic somewhere along the lines. Working from nothing, also allows a snowball effect to occur. If pressure is applied to somebody repetitively, even if it starts of slowly, as more people start to pressure said person, the more information we can work out from them, for example, we would be able to get a better grasp of their play style, what they consider to be the most scummy and least scummy things to do, etc etc. With a longer day you also have an effect on Lurking. If Day 1, were to always end within 3 days, it would be much harder to call out a lurker, we'll have less time to see if its genuine, prod dodging, or if they're scummy or not.In post 145, LuckyLuciano wrote: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 eliminationsday 1based 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 intowhyplayers take the stances that they do.
A quickhammer can be seen as NAI as it could just be a really bad misunderstanding leading to a bad play. Which is why I believe a quickhammer without an explanation is scum indicative, but one with (on its own) is NAI.In post 150, LuckyLuciano wrote:@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?
NoIn post 159, LuckyLuciano wrote: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?
72's case on Blopp: Agreeing with Lucky. 26In post 188, 72offsuit wrote:In post 184, TheThirteenthJT wrote:Valid point but obviously he had multiple leans. Do you feel they were forced 72? Like he felt pressured to answer so he did?In post 140, 72offsuit wrote:It's page 3. What are you expecting?In post 68, TheThirteenthJT wrote:Is he your only scumlean or do you have more?In post 67, Raya36 wrote: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
Yes. Names 2 and a half scumleans in 69 feels like a blurted out response.
By 181 Raya has 4 townleans/reads, which feels like way too many from a town PoV at this stage of the game.
The Homura townread is the sort of read I make as scum on my scumbuddy. "Similar thoughts to myself" --> its the sort of statement, which you cant really test the veracity of.
Dumps me in as a null, still doesnt explain how my actions further scum agenda, or why someone of a scum mindset makes aforementioned plays.
If genuinely believes that my RQS is active lurking filler, then why am I not a scumread?
If I was to take a stab at the game solve, I would say Raya + Homura purely off that reads list.
Nothing really, its simply putting it out there. If you were going to scum read Raya in the future for her interaction with Homura, the same can somewhat be said for you, not as efficient a point as a it would be when used on you compared to Raya, but it is still important to keep in the back of our minds should that scenario occur. While I do appreciate that you added a tiny bit more explanation to your Blopp case, 163 I dislike.In post 200, 72offsuit wrote:Something went wrong there with the quote.
@ Jam: What point are you trying to make?
Honestly I'm not sure how to answer this. I don't feel like she did position herself.In post 153, LuckyLuciano wrote:What's everyone's thoughts on how Homura positioned herself while JamSV and I were arguing last night?
It's simply something I wanted to point out so its in the back of people's minds for some scenarios which may occur. I admitted they'd have different levels of efficiency. I also agree it isn't comparing apples to apples, its comparing an apple to a grape. It doesn't affect my reading of you don't worry.In post 207, 72offsuit wrote:You aren;t comparing apples to apples here. You are comparing apples to planes.In post 204, JamSV wrote:Nothing really, its simply putting it out there. If you were going to scum read Raya in the future for her interaction with Homura, the same can somewhat be said for you, not as efficient a point as a it would be when used on you compared to Raya, but it is still important to keep in the back of our minds should that scenario occur. While I do appreciate that you added a tiny bit more explanation to your Blopp case, 163 I dislike.In post 200, 72offsuit wrote:Something went wrong there with the quote.
@ Jam: What point are you trying to make?
I scumread Raya, and working off that assumption, think Homura seems the most likely partner at this stage based off that readslist
I believe Raya's rationale for townreading Homura (mind-melding) is a scum tendency
I have a similar read on blopa's entrance into the game as LL. I haven;t posted a reads list.
I still don;t get what point you are trying to make here in your comparison.
Unfortunately there's very little you can do if someone is being evasive. If being evasive continues for an extended period that's when you can start saying with some confidence that its scummy.In post 212, Raya36 wrote:72 has seemed evasive. But I'm not sure what to make of thatIn post 197, LicketyQuickety wrote:Why aks that? Never heard or seen that it is or should be Scummy to ask a question in the middle of a readslist. Like, it's totally something I can see Scum asking to try and look like they are Scum hunting, but not something I can really see Town asking that thinking, "Hmm, seems pretty out of the ordinary you ask a question mid RL. I bet if I ask them why they did that they couldn't come up with an answer if they are Scum." Yeah, not really seeing that coming from Town. Unless 72 has a gob of experience, but even then there are way better things to talk about than something that doesn't really seem Scummy inherently. 72's follow up doesn't really look good either.In post 191, Raya36 wrote:How so?In post 187, LicketyQuickety wrote:Isn't it Scummy for 72 to ask that?In post 185, Raya36 wrote:I like to ask questions on players I'm unsure of. Sometimes I stick it in my readslist. My readslists are mostly just reference for myself. Could you answer please?In post 183, 72offsuit wrote:Why are you asking me for a read on lucky in the middle of your reads list?
Raya I'm pretty sure Lucky follows a trail of thought like this: Day 1 is useless, its okay to lose 2 town, as N1 can give us a lot of information to make the loss worth it.In post 214, Raya36 wrote: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.In post 199, TheThirteenthJT wrote:I will respond to your readlist post next. I NEED to respond to this first. Is case on Blopp was from what 2 pages worth of posts? Wouldn't that have to be reachy? Do I agree it's a good case? Weird yes but not really screaming confirmed scum for me and thus my vote is not on Blopp. For an elimation to be made 5 players have to agree it's a good enough case to do so. If an elimation were to occur based on that it would be so telling for the rest of the game. Making a case on a player might not get info on the player ryou are pushing but can give Intel on other players in the wagon. Why did they join the wagon? Did they explain themselves well. If it was bad reasoning, what purpose did they have joining that wagon? Miselimnatiin or bad play? So much can be told by these situations.In post 182, Raya36 wrote: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.In post 178, TheThirteenthJT wrote:Isn't most Day 1 early cases reachy? I really hate this argumentIn post 106, Raya36 wrote:My vote is "on" Blopp I just don't want him at L-1In post 70, TheThirteenthJT wrote:Where's your vote then?In post 69, Raya36 wrote:Lucky and blopp. Maybe Clark but I'm unsure
This is a bad case and very reachy.In post 63, LuckyLuciano wrote: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.
I'll do this in my next post.In post 71, TheThirteenthJT wrote:Also can you all look back at my two questions (rqs) I asked. I really want to know the answer for the first one.
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.In post 72, LuckyLuciano wrote:In post 68, TheThirteenthJT wrote:Is he your only scumlean or do you have more?In post 67, Raya36 wrote: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"I scumlean Lucky for possibly wanting a quick hammer on my other scumlean."In post 69, Raya36 wrote:Lucky and blopp. Maybe Clark but I'm unsure
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.
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.
Also I see you join The Luciano wagon after I printed you to vote and someone else joined before you. I don't like this. I could argue myself that your case on him is reachy but again my case is reachy here no? Finally your case is more repreat what was already aid to give you a reason to join the wagon. While not Al we always scum indicative it's a good start.
Once I catch up my read here I will chiose where my vote goes but you are definitely setting off alarms.
Overall it has provided discussion to a slow early game and thus has actually been a very beneficial wagon.
Slightly, I just don't think going based off of something aloof like evasiveness is good for the game state currently, so I was telling her to let it be for the moment.In post 222, 72offsuit wrote:You seem to be agreeing with Raya here. Is that correct?
I don't understand why it would cause her to remove her avatar. Okay, people don't like pressure, this can cause some people to give up on games, and occasionally to stop playing mafia, but I don't see how it could / would cause somebody to remove their avatar. I think its a bit far fetched to be honest unless there's something I'm forgetting completely.In post 242, TheThirteenthJT wrote:I went back to analyze the Blopp flake and it's so bizarre. I can see newbie players leaving for a bit and returning to see 4 votes on then as a bit overwhelming but I felt the pressure up to the point they removed their avatar was not that high. I've seen (and done so myself) people drilled early game as newbies which would cause enough frustration for a rage quit. This early wagon was rather tame. But at the same time why return at all to remove your avatar? Clearly no intention of returning and thus rage quit possibility over just not returning/forgetting about the site.
So here's the final scenario I have in my head. Blopp comes back because they remember they are in a mafia game, see 4 votes on them, says screw this, removes avatar and leaves forever.
See this is why I think we should wait for a replacement for her overall, I think we should give the replacement the benefit of doubt for a while after they replace in, give them a few posts to understand their town, and the intonations and such of that new player will help us work out which one it was.In post 246, 72offsuit wrote:The avatar removal just feels like an account deactivation. Seems like she decided forum mafia wasnt her cup of tea.
Question is, what it due to !scumher having to explain her way out of a hole, or just disliking the game overall.
I wouldn't think it was scum indicative, I'd just think its a troll trying to ruin a game, which could be done from town too really, showing up claiming Scum Doctor or something then leaving to cause a mislynch. I wasn't saying to dismiss what blopp did entirely, but just for the moment so we can get a read on the new player's intonations and such.In post 248, TheThirteenthJT wrote:In the mean time I suggest looking at the interactions around this. Raya and Homura and have struck out the most for me.In post 247, JamSV wrote:See this is why I think we should wait for a replacement for her overall, I think we should give the replacement the benefit of doubt for a while after they replace in, give them a few posts to understand their town, and the intonations and such of that new player will help us work out which one it was.In post 246, 72offsuit wrote:The avatar removal just feels like an account deactivation. Seems like she decided forum mafia wasnt her cup of tea.
Question is, what it due to !scumher having to explain her way out of a hole, or just disliking the game overall.
Also hypothetical question. If someone comes into the game and says they are scum and leaves. Does it matter what the replacement says? Do we give them the benefit of the doubt. I know you don't think the flake is scum indicative, I am starting to feel it's to closest thing possible a scum tell. At this point when the replacement comes in and catches up, gives us summaries of what they think, I would suggest putting them on L-1 with intent.
For one I, good guess with my name, you're correct. I'm not going to move my vote regardless of what happens until the replacement happens, just out of courtesy for the replacement. You're kind of correct, however I think Lucky would go for a lynch on Blopp regardless, if he was scum Blopp would be town, that I am certain about, but not necessarily the other way around. I don't necessarily think that he guns for a misvote either, I think Lucky doesn't mind killing off town Day 1, and that if he hits a scum by accident its just an added benefit. I don't like it as a play style, nor do I think its a good way to play, I don't think willingness to end a day early is pro town in any way either. Long story short, if my vote were to move, it'll be after the replacement, or we'd need a big twist / event to occur.In post 254, TheThirteenthJT wrote:I do have a question for you James since I have you here. Wouldn't you be holding off on voting Luciano as well until Blopps replacement is in? Your vote on them currently is on the assumption that they are going for a misvote but wouldn't that only be possible if we knew Blopp was 100 percent town? I could ask the same I guess to the other two. At this point I feel one of the scum is on that wagon and so far I find you James the most townlike.
You can feel free to call me James or Jam I don't mind. Also it's not anti town. At the moment, we don't have many active people partaking in the game. Even if we get an active replacement for Blopp a lot of us will still be inactive. I want to keep it on the pool of one of our more active contributors that's all.In post 256, TheThirteenthJT wrote:Ok the reason why I am asking is because I don't think we should be sitting tight until the replacement. I find that antItown. It could be a day or two or just an hour for them to come in and in the meantime our clock is ticking. I feel that until they come in then to explore other options in tHe meantime. It'll also help this game from feeling stale.In post 255, JamSV wrote:For one I, good guess with my name, you're correct. I'm not going to move my vote regardless of what happens until the replacement happens, just out of courtesy for the replacement. You're kind of correct, however I think Lucky would go for a lynch on Blopp regardless, if he was scum Blopp would be town, that I am certain about, but not necessarily the other way around. I don't necessarily think that he guns for a misvote either, I think Lucky doesn't mind killing off town Day 1, and that if he hits a scum by accident its just an added benefit. I don't like it as a play style, nor do I think its a good way to play, I don't think willingness to end a day early is pro town in any way either. Long story short, if my vote were to move, it'll be after the replacement, or we'd need a big twist / event to occur.In post 254, TheThirteenthJT wrote:I do have a question for you James since I have you here. Wouldn't you be holding off on voting Luciano as well until Blopps replacement is in? Your vote on them currently is on the assumption that they are going for a misvote but wouldn't that only be possible if we knew Blopp was 100 percent town? I could ask the same I guess to the other two. At this point I feel one of the scum is on that wagon and so far I find you James the most townlike.
Also kept reading your name as Jamesv
Sorry but why does this post sound so defeated? Okay, removing a town PR would be a huge issue, however, it isn't liked you claimed an open town PR and didn't get counter claimed. I don't really want for you to claim, but I don't see a way for us to conftown you otherwise, I may be completely wrong on this but I have no idea when we don't even know what set up we're in.In post 288, LuckyLuciano wrote: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.
Sorry there was a typo in there, to understand their tone* is what I meant to say. If you don't get posts / responses from a lurker, and they get replaced, you should use the new persons intonations and opinions to work out if the lurking had scum intent or not. Of course, its fine to still be suspicious of the replacement due to their predecessor, but I think as a matter of courtesy and a matter of efficiency we hold back on the lurking suspicions for a little while.In post 300, 72offsuit wrote:Can you elaborate on the line as bolded above?:In post 247, JamSV wrote:See this is why I think we should wait for a replacement for her overall, I think we should give the replacement the benefit of doubt for a while after they replace in,In post 246, 72offsuit wrote:The avatar removal just feels like an account deactivation. Seems like she decided forum mafia wasnt her cup of tea.
Question is, what it due to !scumher having to explain her way out of a hole, or just disliking the game overall.give them a few posts to understand their town, and the intonations and such of that new player will help us work out which one it was.
Out of Raya and Homura, I think it'd be RayaIn post 307, 72offsuit wrote:I would bet the farm there is AT LEAST one scum within Homura/Jam/RayaIn post 279, Nahdia wrote:
No I don't. If the game ended up being out of them 2 to find the last scum I think it'd be Raya, aka, I think she's scummier than Homura.In post 310, 72offsuit wrote:So you agree Raya and Homura are scummy, and yet you are happy to be on LL's wagon with them?In post 309, JamSV wrote:Out of Raya and Homura, I think it'd be RayaIn post 307, 72offsuit wrote:I would bet the farm there is AT LEAST one scum within Homura/Jam/RayaIn post 279, Nahdia wrote:
NGL, as a brit, I completely forgot about the 4th of July being a thing. That actually explains so much about why the games I'm in are dead quietIn post 327, LicketyQuickety wrote:7 pages since I entered the game at 3 days. It's been 3 days over 4th of July weekend and we doubled our post count. Pretty sure that's a win for me.
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.
Yes, don't let Blair know but I think you were the best player in Newbie 2013.In post 342, Battle Mage wrote:is that a compliment? <3In post 341, JamSV wrote: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.
I don't want to scare you, but I'm on a rich vein of scumhunting form at the moment!
I more meant with good odds, ie, do you think its actually likely?In post 388, LicketyQuickety wrote:I gave my mason solve for LL already. If not with 72 I think it's a fools errand to try and speculate more than that.In post 387, JamSV wrote:By the way, does anybody think with good odds LL is a mason? If not then we can narrow down the game a bunch.
This is going to sound really petty but I find it so annoying, when you make a brief post, with 2 points, where 1 is taken into account, but the other one is completely ignored so the person can try to make a point, and their point is whether the 2nd point exists or not. The answer to your question is literally in the same one you were referring to. Read.In post 421, 72offsuit wrote:I don't see how PR speculation helps town at all.
Its just a matter of do you believe !TownPR-LL claims in that spot or not within the current gamestate. Nothing about the claim seemed fake to me.
Regardless of whatever openwolfing is and whether or not I'm doing it, claiming to be a town PR when being instantly put at E-1 is a big big big red flag. You also just did a 72 and ignored the fact how I explained you aren't town.In post 437, LuckyLuciano wrote: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.
In the nicest way possible, he just apologised at the end of that last post, you should at the very least have the courtesy not to slag him off now he's getting a replacement.In post 453, LicketyQuickety wrote:No, I don't. My problem is with people who play like you who don't really care about their Town game so they do dumb shit like this so they can pull the same sort of thing as Scum. That's something I despise. It has nothing to do with you personally. It has to do with the fact you would rather play in a way that is more manipulative than straightforward. I don't really care if that is a playstyle or not, it generally makes you a bad person. There are MANY different ways to play this game while still being straightforward and not doing dumb ass shit to up your Scum game.In post 451, LuckyLuciano wrote:because he has an obsession with me
I don't like to be referred to as a wagoner considering I feel I had the only relatively realistic case against him. Regardless, I might aswell kick off with my interpretation of what just occurred.In post 455, TheThirteenthJT wrote:Hmm what to do with this slot. I don't want to wait for replacement of we aren't going to give them a fair chance. Personally for me I'd say to almost disregard LL plays for whomever replaces in but I know that's not really possible. I want everyone in this wagon to give their opinions on what just happened.
I want to hear from Lick how accurate this is, that Lick would've pushed for a Lucky hammer regardless.In post 451, LuckyLuciano wrote: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.
Personally I don't think it would be great practice to town read / town lean simply because of similar reads, as the game progresses, it certainly does become more of a tell, but at the moment I don't think it's all that valid, but I do understand why he would town read them.In post 451, LuckyLuciano wrote: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.
My primary reasons for voting never changed, but it was true I didn't trust the TPR claim at all.In post 451, LuckyLuciano wrote: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."
I feel like it was an obvious conclusion to arrive at, but I explained it because I didn't want to make a baseless claim that his claim was false.In post 451, LuckyLuciano wrote:and that's why JamSV's play is so disgustingly bad, because he's doing the legworkfor the mafia.
I agree with (1) but can't comment much on (2), a previous game I didn't partake in. As for Homura I disagree with Lucky on reasoning, obviously, I don't view 72 or Lucky as likely to be town, so I see the push as more positive than negative, but I do hope he isn't correct and that Lick purposefully ruins games for town as town, but it would explain 453, there was absolutely no need for a personal attack on Lucky in 453, I really don't like it.In post 451, LuckyLuciano wrote: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 officially don't intend on moving my vote in order to have a healthy game.In post 517, Porkens wrote:Hey hey hey!
Good evening moons, I’m porkens. I like tololhammer, memegambit, and fall scumteams day 1. My perfect date includes lying on the floor, playing Super Nintendo, and eating chips.
Fun fact: I skimmed this slot and was BLOWN AWAY to get a town PM.
Ill read if I have to but I’ll give a cookie to anyone who catches me up on the game state!!
