Initial read complete. I've got a better idea of why Hapah in particular is bugging me now, but I haven't done
LurkerTracker analysis yet, and that can take a couple hours.
Hapah, do you mind also responding to doll from here:
(PPE: Are my posts difficult to follow? I often just copy-paste out the bits that I want to address in longer posts but that could make it hard to look at the context around the original. If it's a hassle I can try to work in the links to the originals, if nothing else.)
I always just quote the posts I am replying to and then copy+paste the 'quote header' with the post details, as it were. It depends how you're working what works for you, I guess.
You posts aren't difficult to follow for me. The only time I miss having links is when I'm previewing my own post and I might want to look for a bit more of context for my own post to analyze, and that's about it.
Your lurking is different to other players, because you're promising more but also saying that you can't provide at that time. 4maskwolf is active lurking. Gentlefish could stand to be more active. You seem to be trying to look more active than you are, but your engagement appears limited by external factors. However, because you promise activity (and either do or do not deliver on it) you set yourself up for more attention, so it's inevitable that you'll be called out on it.
I don't recall promising anything of the sort; I make my one real post a day and that's about it.
It's just things like this:
[spoiler]Wouldn't like another week, personally. If things stay as they are night will fall on Wednesday and day won't break until Thursday at the earliest (and with it two more extensions should we need it). There are plenty more days to go.
I'm piecing together a post in another tab as a I find the time, I'll get it out sometime this evening (next 4 hours or so).
Yeah, if you're not having fun then ask for a replacement. Games are meant to be enjoyed, after all!
I've had a rather large change IRL today and don't know that I'll get a post out this evening, though I bet I can manage one in the morning.
Which
draw attention to how active you are, rather than actual inactivity, which I'm commenting on. You're not doing anything
scummy by it, but you're doing yourself no favors by promising something (you don't actually get anything out of a post which says 'I'll be active later' and it even encourages people to move against you because it's easier to see you as more 'active' without actually changing the amount of content you create - it is better (looks townier) to have a few posts with the same amount of content as a large number of posts, most of which are devoid of meaning; it's easier to keep the discussion on point, too, since most responses to you will be directly related to your most recent post if you cut out the 'fluff' of promising evening activity while you are at work etc.). This is my advice on a stronger playstyle with regards to how you appear when posting in this manner; you can see in the classic scumchat of Wild West Mafia how Jim comments on the use of holding off on posting until it actually suits you to do so; this might not be for you but to my mind it works so I'll carry through with it. (for reference, while Jim is scum in that game he comments specifically that he would still wait as town regardless)
The reason to vote 4maskwolf is that he responded to pressure by making a non-case. That means that he has no interest in finding scum. He has an interest in staying alive, which is why he shot that bait-filled post at me (to force me to overextend myself and fall flat when I tried to lynch him) but doing this demonstrated that he is engaged with the game (since he responded to pressure without a vote) and that his engagement does not involve a desire to find out more (about scum). This means that he is scum, as opposed to merely inactive.
Something missing here?
You've quoted the summary of the core of my case. Do you agree with it? If not, why not? If so, why aren't you voting 4maskwolf?
-Because it strikes me as odd for individuals to make their case to specific players; normally people make their case and let the chips fall where they may IIRC. You've done this twice now; it could just be a playstyle that I'm not accustomed to
I mean, doing that is great and all if all you want is to brag in deadchat or after the thread that 'I totally picked scum I'm such a great player lol' but if you want to actually lynch someone you've got to move the town, and different players in different situations are moved by quite different things. I'm treating roo as nearly confirmed town, and roo seems to think of me quite well, so all I need to move their vote is a decent idea and for them not to be doing anything much with it. On the contrary, to move hector's vote all I needed was the strongest case available to the town - to move johiah's I might need to bully him tangential to the game, to move you I might need to engage with your thoughts as you present them and speak on those topics on which you remain unconvinced, to move TheBiggerFish I might even need to get the rest of the town to be saying certain things. Mafia is quantized, and the basic unit (the vote) is actually rather large. This kind of contemporary, quantum mafia is why 4maskwolf and webadict talk about me like I'm a kawaii Bobby Fischer, but it's really just
applying the principles that everybody knows they are supposed to use - if they want to win. (you can see this, again, in Jim's Wild West Mafia, where he effectively controls the lynch the whole game through - by picking what players are able to vote by selecting [as scum] who will die each night and keeping around a group he can control).
roo: It basically comes down to the exchange below, which funnily enough came from an RVS question. For reference, he's the back-and-forth. I've bolded the bits that are interesting to me.
Hapah
It's Day2. A scum player was lynched D1. A single player claims cop D2. Are they the cop? When would it be acceptable to lynch them? Do you pay any attention to their reports?
I think you almost have to believe him at that point, in a semiclosed game like this. I mean, that would be a bold going on foolish scumclaim: I looked at the role possibilities and two out of the three have an actual cop, right? If you fakeclaim cop as scum D2 and the real cop claims, one of you is gonna get lynched day 2 no question. And good luck talking your way out of that when you claimed Cop and the real one flips. I guess a vanilla townie could claim Cop, but I don't see what they could gain out of it (and it seems like an anti-town move).
Well lucky I'm not scum then because you'd have been fucked.
In games where scum are not blocked, they are statistically likely to be correct in assuming there is no cop (there is literally a better than 50% chance that either they find the cop or there was no cop).
Clearing a mafscum is auto-loss for the town.
Also, the cop will never flip in this game. Mafia 100% have a role-cop. That means that after N1, mafia can kill the player they inspected last night. If that lets mafia close out the victory, then that's what they'll do.
That said, it was a good answer, and it told me a lot.
(Edit here to insert link to original post: here)
I've been chewing on this all morning and can't come to the same conclusion no matter how I bend it. The bits the confuse me are bolded for emphasis, can you comment? It's a bit into the weeds but I am genuinely interested.
Re "Moving your vote is a towntell" - Oh yeah, I vaguely remember NQT starting that up. Interesting that it's still holding up after all this time.
1) Ignoring the Jailkeeper, mafia have a 5/9 chance of either detecting the cop if he is here via kill or inspect (and so not claiming in such a way), or being in a game without a cop if a town player is lynched first thing. This is what I was referring to (I incorrectly thought this was 11/21 at that time).
2) Ignoring the Jailkeeper, a lone mafia rolecop has a 11/21 chance of either detecting the cop if he is here via kill or inspect (and so not claiming in such a way), or being in a game without a cop if the vanilla scum player is lynched first thing. This is substantially better than his likely chance of success in winning the game after a Day1 scumlynch.
3) Taking the Jailkeeper into account increases scum's chances in this regard (since they by definition can bail if he interferes so he can't have a negative influence on optimal scum play with regards to this early D2 fake-claim), so he adjusts the numbers in their favor (since detecting the Jailkeeper lowers the chance that there is a cop in the setup, as it were). I'm too lazy to run the numbers since he makes it complex and I'd need to do a lot of special cases but basically his being in the list isn't bad for scum with regards to this strategy.
Mafia who have inspected a player successfully can just kill that player, and so be sure that they are not outing the cop. By repeating this each night (killing the previous inspect result) mafia can know what will flip before they kill it. This will, however, reduce their total knowledge of players roles. If they need to do this in order to keep a fake cop alive, though, they will do it since getting a justifiable fake cop to lylo can easily close out the game for the scum.
The underlying logic of why moving your vote is a towntell is pretty obvious and solid, so it's not that surprising. It's nice to be able to point it out with such a documented history, though.
This exchange feels odd to me for the simple fact that folks don't generally make the firms sort of responses you see in the initial reply ("you'd be fucked if you did that", with supporting details) if they haven't done the odds themselves. However, the question (which doll asked themselves) explicitly states that a scum was lynched D1, but the responses do the math like there are two scum. The initial response after I FOS doll does the math like there are two scum again; my thinking is that Doll might have mucked up the math the first time because to them there are still two scum: doll and their scumbuddy.
I honestly can't comment on whether or not my claim that I got the 'wrong' number (which was, as it stands, the right number - for the initial situation described and on which that post was commenting) was actually true because I can't remember if I had actually been thinking of the
other case at that time. I do know that the thing which made me comment on my 'wrong maths' was that I had gotten conjugated the live scum and the dead townie as empty points and treated them as only one non-target during my working out - in the later post. This whole chain of reasoning is curious to me (as a useless, academic thing - the whole ordeal seems rather pointless for you to be going through), because your premise is based on my
intentionally asking about something which I did the odds on as being a great opportunity to exploit - for me as scum. Asking about this raised awareness, particular among the key 4maskwolf/Webadict/Hapah demographic that I was relying upon to sure up my technical analysis throughout the thread (i.e. to catch me if I ever fuck up my math).
I (and 4maskwolf) do a lot of math in my mafia. You can see this very heavily in Day 3 of P25, where I do nothing but math for quite a while (and then go inactive) - and 4maskwolf joins in (incidentally, if you check scumchat, they realize that my lockstep plan would win the game for town - because town had such an overwhelming mechanical advantage. That sort of autoloss for scum is only really going to occur here if we start hitting guilty inspects while mislynches are floating around [the classic, scum 1 claims cop when the cop has a guilty on scum 2 being the most likely case] or the scum completely miss the cop and his activity).
The other bit, for me at least, is that doll seems a little....arrogant is the word I'm going to use, though I don't know the right one? Already lining up lynches for the next day without evaluating the results of the first one, or the results of the night actions. It's not a lot to go on (hell, I'm not evening voting on it), but it's curious enough to me (and in my eyes we're lynching someone for less). That's all for now!
Arrogant works. Webadict called it confident. The simple fact is that I knew that nobody could push a lynch on me today, and they didn't - because it would cost the town too much to be wrong and nobody has any overwhelming reason to think that they would be right (see: Webadict's commentary on this).
As soon as you decide who you are lynching on any given day, you can either stop using that lynch as a threat or stop tightening your grip on your actual target. If I wasn't lining other players up to be lynched tomorrow, I couldn't threaten both them
and 4maskwolf today.
[/quote][/spoiler]
You said:
bluh bluh
Quote
The following error or errors occurred while posting this message:
The message exceeds the maximum allowed length (40000 characters).
Split into three posts instead I guess.
Yup, not reading that tonight, lol. Will take a stab at it tomorrow.
It's tomorrow, and I just read the entire thread in the past few hours, surely the one post isn't too much to ask of you.
Author
Topic: Beginner's Mafia LXI - [7/9] - Game Over (Read 73058 times)