|
Hello, I would like to play so I can make a bunch of incorrect alignment calls in a traditional mafia game
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2016 18:21
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 21:15 |
|
|
Never voting Hats ever
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2016 02:15
|
|
|
Confirming.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2016 13:44
|
|
|
MG2 posted:What do you think of the evidence I brought to the table w/r/t Ecco and merk being a scumteam I don't get it. Is the justification here simply that they were once scum together in another game? I don't see anything else similar at this point although I agree their votes are bad, esp since imgay appears to be effort posting so far this game.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2016 20:48
|
|
|
EccoRaven posted:I have the flu It seems to me that the change in posting style is just a new thing that's going on this game. It's good, I like it, but I certainly don't read it as a scumtell. With his usual posting style, it's a super obvious change, too; I don't think that a scum player, in general, would change his posting style so dramatically. Right now, I think MG2's got the one post that stands out to me the most on D1. It seems like he took the merk/ecco thing seriously, but the "supporting evidence" game, after looking through, bears no resemblance to this one other than that merk and ecco were both in it. Unless they claim  CONFIRMED TOWN MASONS again...yeah, I'm just not seeing it. It feels disingenuous to bring it up without explaining why there are any similarities between these two games.##vote MG2
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2016 18:11
|
|
|
MG2 posted:They were scum together in that game ...And what about that makes you think that they are scum together in this game? I explained, in the post you quoted, why that is a really weird conclusion to draw.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2016 18:27
|
|
|
I don't think this is as good a vote, but it's better than nothing D1. ##vote merk
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2016 02:58
|
|
|
W/r/t Magnus:Max posted:What did you learn from your fake case that you claim you pushed to learn things. Did you ever get around to making those rereads that you said you would?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2016 12:18
|
|
|
I'm in the process of reading the last couple pages between Ecco and BK, and I don't think Magnus's latest angle on Ecco has any legs at all - I've read them as being open about their thought process during this entire back-and-forth. I'm not as sure about BK; I'm still not grasping where he's coming from with this case. Someone else that I'm starting to take a look at based on something that somebody said earlier in the thread is imgay; there's not much in the filter there except for defense and justification for his merk vote. I'd be curious to hear his thoughts on the last couple pages. Ecco, I didn't get the same reads on Quandary as you did. I reread his posts in opposition to JoseV's push for the imgay policy lynch and those felt very genuine to me especially in light of imgay...not posting like typical imgay. One last weird one - Hats jokevoted merk early and his only justification for the vote was "well, imgay's case sounds good". He's also been super disconnected all game long. It's definitely different than how he played in soldiers, but the way it's being played is really sketchy. The question of whether Hats would alter his scumplay over the course of one game is left as an exercise to the reader, but the "if I were scum" posts in his filter read as self-aware enough to me to make it at least plausible. Anyway, on to the main thrust of the post: At this point I'm generally assuming that Magnus's promised reads are not actually going to materialize. Max, you made a good characterization earlier that it feels a little like Chic's play in soldiers - I've asked questions about Mag's D1 content three times now and three times I've gotten (or, in the third case, JoseV eventually got after pressing again) evasive answers/delays. I voted him yesterday because I wasn't getting any answers about what I thought was a nonsense case and nothing's changed today, except for his reason for voting Ecco. If this wasn't a semi-open setup I'd think he was a lyncher; as it stands I think he's scum trying to buy as many reprieves as possible. ##vote MG2 Fair warning to the rest of the thread, that's -2 and we have like a day left before deadline, so...
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2016 01:24
|
|
|
Here's the way I see it: we're at MYLO, which means if we screw this up we lose. There is nothing to be lost, as far as I can tell, by waiting another day and seeing if we can get any information out of night stuff. Maybe we get lucky and get a track on a nightkill or a cop investigation we can use, depending on which setup we're in. I don't want to risk the game on a coin toss, and if we defer this decision to tomorrow we get more data to work with. ##Vote: No Lynch
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2016 13:47
|
|
|
Max posted:I'd rather we not no Lynch. That has the possibility of killing the power role that would help us and then, oops, we're still up poo poo creek. I'm going to freely assume the scum will be nightkilling tonight, so realistically we have the same chance of losing the PR one way or another. The only difference is that we don't risk losing the game today.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2016 14:23
|
|
|
Max posted:My fear is that one of the people claiming vig is actually a godfather, and a cop investigation would give us nothing, if that's the setup we have. Right, and that's fine, but let me present some other situations for you. If it's setup 3, then we have the chance of getting a track on the scum doing the nightkill, and then all of a sudden we have a whole new set of data to work off of. Or we're in setup 4, and the cop investigates someone else who turns up scum. I mean, there are a lot of scenarios here in which we are better off tomorrow than we are today and none where we're in a worse place, and saying that there's no benefit to waiting doesn't make sense to me.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2016 14:35
|
|
|
Max posted:Finally, I don't think we'll learn anything from no-lunching. In fact, I think we stand to lose even more since it's possible a power role will be targeted / I am still concerned this is a gambit to bait the cop investigation because we may be in a godfather/cop setup. I addressed this already; what's the gambit if our hypothetical cop investigates someone else? Say they hit a scum - then we can use that player's posts to help untangle this. With a godfather in play, I understand not trusting investigation results on Quandary or SSV, but what about everyone else? If it's a tracker setup, same logic applies; maybe they find the nightkill, and we have more info based on that. There's no explicitly antitracker role in setup 3, so there's just straight up upside in that case. The only drawback is that it takes one less vote to vote somebody out, so people need to not be stupid and put votes on people early tomorrow. I'm not sure where you're getting the targeting a power role thing, unless you think that we're in setup 3 and scum already rolecopped the tracker. That is a huge leap to make, especially considering how many people are in this game right now - last night, if I'm mathing this right, they would have had a 1 in 7 chance to rolecop the tracker; if they had done so before last night, the tracker would be the obvious nightkill choice on night 2 or 3 when vanilla townies died. I mathed stuff out in the accompanying chart to show PR kill odds given all the scenarios I could think of.  I consider those numbers to constitute "acceptable risk" compared to a possible loss today if we vote the wrong dude. Other than that, of course the scum are going to try to kill the PR tonight; that's going to happen regardless of whether we vote someone out or not today. It seems like you're saying that there's some further inherent risk to waiting that's not present if we vote someone today, and I'm just not seeing that - these numbers are completely independent of what we do today.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2016 19:45
|
|
|
maf edit: I think I screwed up my math, it should be a 1 in 6, not a 1 in 7 chance, since scum wouldn't have rolecopped and killed Ecco last night. revised odds are...32.25% I think, give or take?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2016 19:53
|
|
|
Max posted:And if the cop/tracker gets nothing while we sail into permanent LYLO territory, what does that get us? We still have the same situation with Quandary / SSV as we do today. Right, but we're in permanent MYLO territory right now. If we don't get anything, we don't get anything, the PR doesn't claim, and we have to make the same choice tomorrow that you're advocating making today. The chance at more information, in my eyes, is worth it. Say we get the vote right today and we go to tomorrow - would you still be opposed to a no-cuddle? When, in your mind, do we use the opportunity that MYLO gives us for more info? I think we should take the MYLO opportunity now because it gives us the best chance of not having our power roles die.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2016 20:12
|
|
|
Max posted:If it's a tracker though, lol, good luck at finding anything actionable. Wouldn't it be a 1 in 3 chance, essentially, that they hit someone taking a night action? (or 1 in 6, if the rolecop claimed vig / scum WIFOM's using the nightkill with their fakeclaimed vig dude). Regardless, I think this is a bit of an exaggeration. Max posted:Maybe this is a nicer question to ask: We no lunch. Imagine that tomorrow dawns. A VT is killed and the tracker/cop come up with nothing, which brings us back to the question of Quandary/SSV (I do not envision a world where scum kill the town in that pairing.) Who would you vote for? I agree that scum will probably try and force us into making that choice, but your hypothetical still doesn't put us in a worse place than we are now. As it stands, I'm not sure because I don't trust BottleKnight (who's stated he'd vote SSV) or you (this much investment in avoiding no lynch is really, really weird to me especially because our worst possible result is "we still have to make the exact same decision". Max posted:Even better, imagine the tracker/cop is killed in the middle of the night. Who do you vote for come the next day? Would it be against the spirit of mafia to have everyone "claim results" before tonight (i.e. "If I were the tracker, I would have tracked ____ N1, ____ N2, and ____ N3; my results would be ____. If I were the cop...(similar)"), thereby giving us something to work off of if the PR is killed tonight? Is there a downside to that? Max posted:That's just going to introduce more insanity, honestly. Chance of cop/framer intersection, given blind choices, is something like 1/5*1/4 = 5% (I think the scum would have 4 possible frame targets and the cop would have 5 possible investigation targets. Check my math, I've already screwed numbers up once today).
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2016 20:46
|
|
|
Max posted:I'm sorry, I wasn't asking for people to claim their results now. I imagine if the cop / tracker had something good, they would have told us at this point. I'm saying, as a regular old player in this game, who would you vote for at this moment, since it's entirely possible we will find ourselves in the same situation tomorrow if there's a no lunch. Probably SSV. I don't believe it's coincidence how hard Quandary tried to push Jose for two days before Jose got vigged, and quite honestly SSV was a complete nonfactor for two days other than sheeping an opinion on MG2 and hammering on day 2. I also don't trust your posts. I would also also still really strongly prefer a no lynch today because this vote can always be made tomorrow, possibly with more data. Writing this post made me realize that we're only on day 3, not day 4. This game has felt longer than it is. I don't think that affects my math post except cosmetically, though - the numbers of scum / town were still the same last night. Max posted:Chaos lord, you realize that with a framer, a cop coming in and going "I found scum) still won't be a slam dunk, right? I screwed up the numbers and actually there's a 20% chance of the framer framing the same target as the cop so you have part of a point. That said why are you discounting the possibility of a tracker result in this post? There is nothing in the game that can obfuscate a tracker result.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2016 21:16
|
|
|
Max posted:I don't think I've every seen any actionable information come from a tracker. There's a first time for everything, but I doubt it. But in this situation, if we are in setup 3, the tracker is functionally the same as a cop, with no chance for obfuscation. Anyone performing a night action tonight that's not the tracker is scum, period (ie a flat binary check, exactly like a cop). Your discounting of that scenario is just willfully ignoring the numbers.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2016 21:36
|
|
|
Alright, let me outline this as best I can, using English instead of numbers, because I haven't been communicating this well enough I guess? If we lunch today we have a blind 50% shot at losing (discounting analysis). If we lunch tomorrow with no PR results, we have the same chance. However, the chance of getting a result is nonzero, and the chance of the result being accurate is greater than it not being correct, meaning our chance at voting correctly tomorrow goes up in the aggregate. The chances of the power role being killed tonight are the same regardless of what we do today, so the only downside I see is that we have to yell at each other for another 48 hours. SSV, to your point, that's not necessarily true - I can't math it on a phone, but the scum would have an interest in finding or killing the tracker as fast as possible. Even if the rolecop gets caught, doubling the chances of catching the tracker tonight equates to the other scum being untrackable for the night kill. So, don't discount that.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2016 22:11
|
|
|
I'm here, but I think you know where I stand.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2016 01:51
|
|
|
Where'd Hats go? Still reading?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2016 02:18
|
|
|
I'm not convinced Max was framed, but I'm more confident in BK. His posts have been kinda out there all game. The slapfight with Ecco D2 was just plain bizarre, and I'm inclined to believe the investigation result. I am also more confident in a BottleKnight vote today, than I am of either Quandary or SSV at this time (as others have said, the fakeclaiming vig is probably the godfather). I think it's more likely to result in us not losing the game.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2016 21:12
|
|
|
Yeah this is ridiculous. You don't have to read the setup, you just had to be paying attention more than not at all yesterday. Framer was brought up then, it's not even a new concept to today. If I'm wrong you can all criticize me later but I don't think I am. BK's been disconnected all game and this is just the latest example. ##vote: BottleKnight
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2016 01:37
|
|
|
##vote Quandary
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2016 01:51
|
|
|
:hammer:
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2016 01:51
|
|
|
Good game, everyone. I really enjoyed my first scum game!  Thanks a lot for putting this one together, CPig.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2016 02:01
|
|
|
EccoRaven posted:max should stick to organizing legions and leave mafia to the experts!! I really tried to look Smart Townie with all those numbers and if I hadnt screwed up all the math it would have looked a lot better :\
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2016 02:51
|
|
|
that said, I really do think my (self-perceived) meta of "slightly suspicious and very misguided town" served me well.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2016 02:52
|
|
|
Max posted:I think after all the games I'm in are finished I'm going to go back into retirement. Max, I enjoyed playing in both this game and the soldiers game with you!
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2016 03:07
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 21:15 |
|
|
Quandary posted:Mafia is more fun when it's relatively power role lite. I like it because it lets me focus more on casing and argument. That said, role heavy games are fun too, just in a different way.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2016 11:43
|
|