Newbie 892 - The Future of Magic. Game Over! Mafia Win

[Yosarian2]

Hello, everyone.

Vote:dimaba

because she hasn't posted yet.

Tracker: I'd be careful joking about stuff like roleclaims if I were you. I can tell you were just kidding around as part of the random vote stage, but even joking about "someone roleclaiming doctor" can end badly.

[Yosarian2]

I'd be careful joking about stuff like roleclaims if I were you. I can tell you were just kidding around as part of the random vote stage, but even joking about "someone roleclaiming doctor" can end badly.

How can it end badly? Sorry if this is a dumb question.

Well, people can react to a comment like that in ways that might tip the scum off that they are, or are not, the doctor. The scum always are trying to figure out who the town power roles are (if they exist) so they can kill them off quickly.

If someone is a doctor, they'll tend to react differently to a doc claim then a non-doctor would (since if person A is doctor, and person B claims doctor, person A knows person B is lying).

Even just joking about a doctor, or anything like that, can give hints, either hints from the person making the joke, or hints based on how other people react to a joke.

[Yosarian2]

Anyway, since the RVS is starting to end I'll

unvote

.

Why?

[Yosarian2]

@ the lurker discussion:

It's very important that the town never let anyone lurk, ever. Towns that let people lurk, lose, either to lurkerscum or because a lurker-town gets to endgame, has no idea what's going on, and usually makes a bad decision.

Now, if someone just flakes out and vanishes, a few votes for pressure is fine, but yeah, it's generally better to let them be replaced unless you're suspicious of them for some other reason. But if someone actually lurks, while posting often enough so as to not get replaced, then town has to deal with it.

[Yosarian2]

Simulpost. So, yeah, I have that to add.

So, yeah, I disagree with you. Lynching lurkers = doubleplusgood

[Yosarian2]

Lynching lurkers at the beginning of the game = notsogood

Meh. It's never to early too start pressuring them, though.

[Yosarian2]

Lynching lurkers at the beginning of the game = notsogood

Meh. It's never to early too start pressuring them, though.

I think the distinction between pressuring and lynching needs to be made clear, though.

Eh, yes and no. People feel the most pressured when they think they might actually get lynched.

[Yosarian2]

@Yos: I unvoted since my vote wasn't serious. That is all.

Let me back up a little.

There really isn't a "random voting stage".

Random votes can be useful, to add pressure, create information, and get the game moving, but they're mostly pointless if you then remove it at some arbitrary point in time.

[Yosarian2]

Hey Yos2, while you are here, why don't you say who you think is scum?

If I had a suspect, I'd certainly say so.

I'm trying to get a feel for everyone at the moment.

[Yosarian2]

Unvote

Vote:LordChronos

He's been posting, but hasn't really commented on anything yet.

[Yosarian2]

@Ray,
Rayfrost-making jokes about who is scumbuddies with Mod, you tried very well i might add to befriend me early on in the game possibly so if you get caught the next suspect is me, trying to get bandwagon voting going on tracker, you seem anxious of everyones scum opinions without putting forward too much of an opinion yourself

Dimaba-backing rayfrost right away unconditionally

tracker-cause tracker did put forward the lynching lurkers, even if tracker was saying it off the bat

does that help

Hmm. So, you suspect Rayfrost for "starting a bandwagon" on Tracker, you suspect Dimaba for following Rayfrost in voting for Tracker, but at the same time, you also suspect tracker?

If you suspect tracker, then why do you feel it's scummy for other people to suspect tracker?

[Yosarian2]

The only kind of lurking that is considered scummy is

active lurking

, which is the posting of stuff that is not helpful for scumhunting instead of aiding in scumhunting.

No. All lurking is always a scumtell, and should always be treated as a scumtell. Period.

My point is, I never NOT called it a last resort. I made a relatively vague statement and got more specific when I started being attacked for it. I said I liked it, but then if you notice I said there was a glaring problem with it, which was following that policy and relying on it to find scum can and will lead to a mislynch.

There's nothing wrong with voting for a lurker, or even with advocating lynching lurkers (lynching lurkers is still awesome and should be done more often). But I'm not really happy with the way you seem to be backtracking here.

If you think lurkers should be lynched, then say so. If you thought so but now have changed your mind, then say that. What it looks like you are doing now is denying your earlier position because you're drawing fire for it, and that seems scummy to me.

[Yosarian2]

@ Yos2 - I find that lurking is a minor scumtell relative to the ones that I find on active players, would you agree?

No, not at all. That's exactally the problem; if you treat lurking like a "minor scumtell", then active players tend to always look worse then lurkers, and that rewards scum who lurk.

I also think active lurking is something that is easier to see than inactivity, since a person could've been hospitalized and thus be able to come on, but we wouldn't be able to tell due to them not being on...

Hey, if someone is V/LA, or if they're replaced, or if they're gone for a few days and come back and say they were in a hospital, then I'm obviously not going to lynch them for that. Short of that, though, I'm always going to treat lurking as a scumtell.

[Yosarian2]

Yeah, Cdub has definatly not said much. He did say that he's currently V/LA, though, so I'm willing to give him a little more slack. If the lack of content continues, then we'll have to deal with it.

[Yosarian2]

I'm not irked so much by his lurking, but by his reason-less vote.

(shrug) I don't generally mind if someone votes without giving a reason right away. It's not like his vote puts Doctor in any danger at the moment. We'll see what he has to say about his vote when he gets back.

[Yosarian2]

OYos2 is an experienced player who very early suggested lynching "lurker's" early is always good, but this was quickly refuted by rayfrost.

No, that's simply not true. The town absolulty has to deal with lurkers, which often means lynching them.

Plus, I'm always in favor of lynching lurkers. Heck, I modded a theme game called "lynch all lurkers" a few months back.

This is a long running discussion. There was just recently a thread in MD about the subject you might find informative, here it is

viewtopic.php?t=12848&start=0

[Yosarian2]

I want to know how being in support of LaL is scummy. In my opinion it's a damn null tell and shouldn't even figure in to whether you think someone's scum or not.

Well, of course it is; actually, aggressively going after lurkers has to be considered a town tell, if anything, since it's pretty much inherently more pro-town then not going after lurkers. I don't think that's why people are suspicious of you, though.

[Yosarian2]

Yeah, I agree with both of you about cdub. dub's first thing he did when he got back was to over-react to having 1 lurker vote on him. And Chronos has a point; if dub thought I was attacking him, when I was actually going out of my way to defend him, then he wasn't paying attention to the thread; also, if you attack someone because they're attacking you, that's scummy anyway.

Unvote: LordChronos

Vote:Cdub

[Yosarian2]

if you attack someone because they're attacking you, that's scummy anyway.

Can you elaborate on this for me please? I use it as part of my playstyle to get a reaction and otherwise glean information for later. Reasoning is if it's scum attacking me, I can drop them in the hot seat and if it's Town then the argument will eventually blow itself out.

It's usually refered to as an OMGUS vote (which stands for "Oh My God you Suck", basically voting someone just because they're voting you without any real reason.)

Basically, if you're town, you should not vote for someone just because they're voting you. No matter if they're voting you or not, your main priority should be to find and lynch scum, so you be using your vote to go after someone who you think is most likely to be scum, not just because they're voting you.

On the other hand, scum don't really care who gets lynched, so long as it's not them or their buddy, so there's no reason a scum wouldn't want to go after someone who's attacking them, in the hopes of getting them to back off, making them nervous, confusing the issue, or making them seem untrustworthy to the rest of the town.

It's not a very strong scum tell, because it's not a very unusual mistake (a lot of people will get mad you're voting them, no matter what). But I do think it is a scum tell; it's something a scum is more likely to do then a town, because they have more reason to.

(Also, if someone is attacking you and you do think they're scum, if you have a good reason to suspect them, then you should vote them. The OMGUS stuff only applies if you vote them mostly because you don't like that they voted you.)

[Yosarian2]

Yosarian has also displayed a degree of vote hopping, however he provides an amount of reason for most of his votes.

"Vote hopping"? I've only voted for 2 people so far this game.

Also, pro-town people should be willing to move their votes frequently.

[Yosarian2]

EBWOP: Before someone corrects me, I wasn't including the random vote in that "2 votes" thing.

In any case, it dosn't matter; pro-town people should vote early and aggressively.

[Yosarian2]

Techncally, it was The Tracker who hammered, but since the Doctor didn't realize that the Tracker had already hammered, it comes out the same, motivation wise.

Tracker and Doctor: Why did you hammer? I agree that Cdub was scummy, but that seemed really sudden to me. Was there a reason you didn't try to get a claim first? It's just lucky he wasn't a power role.

[Yosarian2]

Ah, I believe you are correct, tracker, my mistake.

I would like to hear who both you and Doctor are suspicious of right now.

[Yosarian2]

Generally, I believe that it is kind of pointless to get into a why was the nightkill made discussion. It is very much a WIFOM situation.

Eh. It shouldn't be ignored completely; often, scum do kill a person because they think he was a significant threat to them. But it's tricky, and there is a lot of WIFOM involved; people who bring up nightkills sometimes get attacked on the theory that it was an elaborate scum frame-up job.

[Yosarian2]

I just thought of something. Are we in LyLo tomorrow if we mislynch today? With 5 people left tomorrow morning, only 3 of them town, would we be in LyLo?

Yes. If we mislynch two more times here, at any point in the game, town loses. (Only exception is if scum fail to kill twice, which is unlikely).

[Yosarian2]

@Yosarian

You wanted to know who Doctor and Tracker are suspicious of, and I second this. But I would also like you to answer that question as well.

Well, one person I'm a bit worried about right now is dimba. For one thing, I feel like he hasn't really expressed suspicion on anyone or taken a stand on anything; at one point, he had a vote on Tracker, but then he unvoted, and he hasn't really attacked anyone since (he's made some posts today questioning the doctor, but I'm not really clear if he still suspects the doctor or not). He also never really took any kind of stand on the cdub wagon before cdub got lynched. Dimba seems to me like he might be a scum who's just trying to "fly under the radar" and not get noticed.

Vote:Dimba

[Yosarian2]

I took a stands all through day 1, on who to lynch and on wether or not it is smart to lynch lurkers, and only missed the last two pages where cdubs was grilled and lynched.

You took stands through day 1 on who we should lynch? Where?

Discussion on general strategy points like "When to lynch lurkers" is fine, but other then the vote you had on Tracker, I never saw any point where you expressed who it was that you wanted to lynch, and very little on who you thought we shouldn't lynch for that matter, and you dropped the Tracker vote for fairly murky reasons as soon as it looked like it might go somewhere, specifically saying that part of the reason for it was that you didn't want tracker to be at lynch -2. For the most part, most of your posts were made up of vauge, noncommittal comments on people.

[Yosarian2]

I stuck with Tracker for most of Day 1 and all that time I said I thought he should be the one to lynch eventually. That didn't change when I withdrew my vote, as I said I just didn't want to lynch yet because I wasn't certain enough.

That's not the vibe I got from the post where you unvoted:

I am also going to unvote. I have said earlier that the original scumtells on Tracker (LaL-policy and non-participation) have become less valid and in my last post I also mentioned that my later reason for suspicion (agressive response without answering question) has also become less valid. Tracker is at L-2 I think it's better if I withdraw my vote for now.

It dosn't really sound like you thought he should be lynched "eventually" there or whatever.

Basically, my problem with your play is this; your first post, where you agree with RayFrost's argumetns against Tracker, also suggest Tracker might have been rolefishing, and vote Tracker, was fine, that looks like scumhunting. The problem is that I really don't see any other post you've made all game that looks like you've been going after people you think are scum or really trying to figure out who the scum are.

After I dropped my tracker vote, it took two pages to lynch cdubs. I didn't post on those pages, so there was hardly a chance for me to express new opinions, was there?

Well, fair enough, it was very sudden.

[Yosarian2]

@lordchronos you seem to be one of the more active posters, and I wonder what you think the scummiest thing you have seen so far has been and from who?(not counting my own screwup I realize thats probably No.1)

@yos I'd like to ask you the same thing.

Right now, the scummiest thing I see isn't so much what certain people have done, it's what people are not doing, if that makes any sense.

[Yosarian2]

On a side note; one thing we want to be sure of today is that if a person is put to lynch -1, that they be given a chance to claim if they wish to do so before they are lynched. We don't want to repeat what happened yesterday, or we might lose a pro-town power role without even knowing it.

[Yosarian2]

Sorry I haven't been posting as much recently; i'm kind of on vacation at the moment.

Anyway, as I said before, we don't want anyone to hammer anyone until they have a chance to claim, if they choose to do so.

[Yosarian2]

Dimaba is second on my suspicion list, but as I've said chronos is my most suspicious and moving my vote I feel is unnessecary.

Ok, could you explain again why you're suspicious of Chronos?

As far as powerrole goes, I could understand why he would want to keep it on the downlow. If he is a PR, I'm iffy on if he should claim that, while it could save his life, it might be lost in the Night if we dont have a doctor, or if the doctor dosn't belive him.

Wait, what?

People don't necessaraly have to claim; if you think you can not claim and not be lynched, or if you don't think claiming is going to help. But if you're going to claim, you should never lie if you're pro-town.

Also, remember that the lynch is the town's tool, the nightkill is the scum's. If you are going to get lynched if you don't claim, and you think your claim is likely to help, then you should claim; it's better to avoid getting lynched and get nightkilled instead; that way, there's a chance the town might lynch a scum instead that day, plus the scum are going to kill some pro-town person every night anyway unless there is a doc and he gets really lucky.

Basically, if you're town, there are cases where not claiming is a reasonable move. Lying about your role, though, is (almost) universally a bad idea.

[Yosarian2]

Then if I can't survive without claiming but can survive with a simple townie claim, the town would still get a chance to lynch scum and I'd have a chance to get some useful information.

Problem 1 with that: A townie claim should never, ever help you survive. If you would be lynched if you refuse to claim, you should also be lynched with a townie claim; lying and claiming townie should do you absolutly no good here.

Problem 2: If you claim townie, and then realize you're going to be lynched, and then try to say "No I was really the cop", you're probably not going to be believed and will get lynched unnecessarally.

Problem 3: If you do claim townie and then somehow survive, then when at some point in the future you want to claim cop, you're again going to prove yourself a liar, and will not be believed.

It's really not worth it. IF you're going to claim, you need to claim truthfully. I've seen many cases of pro-town people trying to make a fake claim, and it usually ends very badly for the town.

I'm not going to say it's NEVER ok for a pro-town person it lie, but it's almost always the wrong move.

[Yosarian2]

Anyway, if people don't like the Dimba wagon, that's fine, but then I need to hear from you who it is you would like to lynch today and why. Doctor is the only person who's made a case against someone else recently.

[Yosarian2]

Claiming townie = a reasonable chance to escape lynch, while refusing to claim will draw discussion to you etc. and IMO make a lynch more likely.

In that case, that would be bad play on the part of the town. There's no good reason for pro-town people to look more favorably on someone who claims townie then on someone who has not claimed; in fact, all claiming townie really does is tell the town that that person is a "safe lynch".

I'm actually of the opinion that a vanilla townie should never claim at all in most games, but a lot of people disagree with me on that one.

Doctor is the only person who's made a case against someone else recently.

Does that mean that you don't consider my attack on easjo a valid case? Or is it too long ago for you to be considered recently?

Sorry; I was specifically talking about the people who weren't voting you, but weren't really putting any other suspects up on the block either, so I wasn't counting you there.

I will mention that, no matter if you're scum or town, just quietly sitting back and letting you be lynched while not supporting the wagon on you but not suggesting any alternate bandwagons either seems scummy to me, and there are several people who seem to be doing that right now.

[Yosarian2]

Hmm. Ok, with 2 scum out of 5, it looks like we are in lynch or lose now.

https://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?ti ... ch_Or_Lose

That means a couple of things. First of all, if we lynch wrong today, we lose. If we no-lynch today, we also lose.

And, worse then that, if one pro-town person votes for another, then the two scum can vote for that person as well for a quicklynch and then it's game over. So everyone needs to be really careful with their votes today; don't vote until you're sure you're voting for the scum. On the other hand, the only way a scum is going to be lynched today is if all 3 pro-town people vote for him, so you will have to vote today.

Anyway, I just wanted to make all that clear, so no one can claim they didn't know what was going on.

[Yosarian2]

Hmm. This is a bizarre situation, and I'm not sure what's going on here with Ray. Ray, are you counterclaiming cop here? If he is, he's going about it in kind of a weird way, that's for sure.

In any case, easjo68 is lying, and therefore is scum. I am the real doctor.

vote:easjo682

That was why I reacted like I did to that odd little bit of joking between Tracker and Doctor about the doctor role back in the start of the game, was because I am the doctor, and I really didn't want people talking about the doctor role like that.

I actually protected Ray both night 1 and night 2.

Anyway, whatever's going on with Ray and Doctor here, my impulse would be to figure it out tomorrow, and since we're in lynch or lose here, to lynch easjo682 today, who (from my point of view, at least) has to be scum, so we can at least make it to endgame.

I'm actually wondering if the scum decided at some point last night that there weren't any power roles in the game, and so they decided it'd be safe to fakeclaim.

[Yosarian2]

Hmm. That's an interesting theory, Ray. Kind of an odd reaction, though; I'm really wondering here if you're scum trying to discredit a town cop.

In any case, since I'm a doctor and easjo682 must be scum here, and no one's counterclaimed the cop claim, there's only a few possibilities. If there is a scum roleblocker, then that means there has to be both a cop and a doc, so Doctor would have to be telling the truth.

Basically, if we lynch eas0682 and he flips scum roleblocker, then Doctor becomes a 100% confirmed town, at least from my point of view.

[Yosarian2]

i dont see how that would prove doctor 100% town?

Because if there is a scum roleblocker, then there has to be either no power roles, or both a cop and a doc. I know there is at least a doctor, since I am the doctor; so, if we lynch you and you flip scum roleblocker, then I'll know that there has to be a cop as well, which would mean The Doctor is telling the truth.

In any case, the two of you who are town, it's up to you guys. Today we're either lynching me or easjo. You need to go back, look at the game, and figure out which one of us you think is more likely to be scum. If you pick right, I probably get nightkilled tonight, but town is going to be in good shape tomorrow. If you lynch the wrong guy today, town loses.

[Yosarian2]

Since easjo has to be scum, there are only two possibilities here.

If Doctor is telling the truth, then LordChronos must be town, so the scum group then has to be (easjo + Ray). In this case, there must be a scum roleblocker.

If Doctor is lying, then the scum group is (easjo+Doctor). In this case, there must be two mafia goons.

Either way, Chronos is 100% confirmed town right now.

Personally, I'm leaning towards the first; I think a easjo+Ray scum group makes the most sense here, especally with the way Ray has been taking easjo's side against me for no apparent reason here. Still, I'd rather lynch easjo today instead of Ray; like I said before, if easjo flips scum roleblocker, it confirms Doctor as town, which means Doctor is confirmed and town wins.

[Yosarian2]

Woohoo, yos2 is cranking up the appeal to fear!

And when, exactally, did I do that?

All I did was correctly point out that we are in lynch or lose right now, and town has to lynch correctly today or town loses.

[Yosarian2]

with Yos other than when he voted for me it became obvious once he kept going with 'when easjo flips roleblocker" like he knew there was a roleblocker in the game...

There would have to be a roleblocker, if The Doctor was telling the truth, and it was pretty clear that he was.

The funny thing was, that very argument that I was making would have 100% lost the game for us if I had been lynched instead of you, since I was the scum roleblocker, and me being lynched would have proved that both Doctor and Chaos were town based on the very logic I had just used.

Anyway, yeah, Ray is right. We got completely blindsided by the role claims. (If you look at the quicktopic, there's a part of it, quite ironic in retrospect, where I talk about how we wouldn't need to either mess around with fake claims or bus. ) Ray actually guessed right and thought that the cop was "either Doctor or Chaos". Probably the biggest mistake we made as a scum team this game was to not try harder to find the town power roles earlier in the game.

This game was a lot of fun. Everyone played really well. That counterclaim I made of easjo was kind of a desperation maneuver at that point; if I didn't do that, I think we would have lost, town had nearly enough information to figure everything out if easjo hadn't been counterclaimed. We got lucky there that we at least killed one of the cop's innocents; if both investigated innocents had still been alive, that might have been the game.

[Yosarian2]

The problem with the lylo play (lylo is never easy, btw) was you guys went against your gut feelings.

Often enough, your gut will do you better in lylo than your brain.

Honestly, plan B there would have been to have to bus you on that day, and then go head to head with easjo in endgame. (either a 3 man endgame, or I might have roleblocked and not killed in order to make it a 4 man endgame.) I think even if you had been lynched there, we still probably would have won, partly because you were doing such a good job of distancing there.

[Yosarian2]

Anyone have any problems with my modding?

Oh, you did fine.

You probably wont find a more unprofessional looking mod on MS than myself. I like to get involved and edit peoples posts at the start of the game with my own messages and make jokes and stuff.

Well, you were careful to not let anything you did influence the game, it looked like, and that's the important thing.

[Yosarian2]

Yos was as scummy as hell during the first day.

You always think I'm scummy.

But then again, yeah, my playstyle this game was pretty direct and straightforward scum play. I would have played differently if I had opponents who had known my meta.

[Yosarian2]

Actually, I can tell you exactly where I played differently then I would have has town.

On day 2, I very well might have voted dimba just like I did for those reasons; but when dimba defended himself so well, I would have unvoted, if I had been town. Instead, I just left my vote there and talked about unrelated things until the clock ran out and dimba was lynched at deadline for lack of any better options.

[Yosarian2]

Yos was as scummy as hell during the first day.

You always think I'm scummy.

But then again, yeah, my playstyle this game was pretty direct and straightforward scum play. I would have played differently if I had opponents who had known my meta.

New rule! If Yos made it passed day one, he was so scummy that the scum didnt want to kill him. Or he's so protown that he's scum. Im right, you know.

...um, didn't you just learn that that's not correct?

I actually make it to endgame all the time as town. More often then I should, probably.