Support NeoGAF

[batsnacks]

CAN I HAVE YOUR ATTENTION PLEASE

Fireblend IS REPLACING Catvoca EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY

THE PLAYER ROSTER IS BEING UPDATED

 

[Sophia]

I like to think I'm not parroting and contributing my own opinions and perspectives, but when you enter a discussion late (see some of the players who didn't post until page 2) you've missed the initial querying and have to basically say "I'm here and pro-peek! Now what?"

As for the coasting, I'm not alone in that regard. YNNNY has already done the work in post 270, but you haven't contributed much either. Your explanation to YNNNY's vote in 285 is similar to what I would've said: peeking is a new foreign concept that I haven't seen before, and wanted to know more about it. It's not foolproof, but it's worth the risk.

The case against Hyper has merit, but that is his style. Not sure why he talked about databases though.

I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but your contributions have seemed a bit weak. I joined up on page 2 (100ppp) and had no issues jumping straight into the conversation.

VOTE: cabot

For Bar Mafia.

Wait, Kawl was part of it too.

VOTE: Kawl_USC

Joke (?) vote on cabot and Kawl.

I didn't see the posts above. Okay if everyone peeks that's better, and I can see how it gives scum no additional info besides obfuscating the actual cop's results.

I would think we'd spread out our peek targets to multiple people, so that would lower the odds should we peek scum, but I agree it's not a foolproof plan.

I guess it's a question of what's more important. One confirmed town or a smaller cop pool for scum to choose from?

Peeking stuff. These are easy contributions too.

The only issue I see is if someone peeks scum, which disqualifies them as the cop (to scum). Assuming we don't all peek the same person, that's 3-4 potential cop targets removed.

But... would the cop not tell us if he hits scum N1?

I'll give you credit that bringing this up has merit, but it's still about the peeking.

You just don't appear to be scumhunting at all. That doesn't give me confidence.

CAN I HAVE YOUR ATTENTION PLEASE

Fireblend IS REPLACING Catvoca EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY

THE PLAYER ROSTER IS BEING UPDATED

HI FIREBLEND. :>

 

[cabot]

We'll never forget you, catvoca.

Hey guys, who wants to play a word game

A___ys _e __n_h__n_g F__e__e_n_

 

[Fireblend]

CAN I HAVE YOUR ATTENTION PLEASE

Fireblend IS REPLACING Catvoca EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY

THE PLAYER ROSTER IS BEING UPDATED

Hello! Yes I'm here. I have not been keeping up with this game at all, but I have been told I have to post 10 times every 24 hours or this funky wristwatch will inject lethal poison into my body. I'm catching up with the thread as we speak. Cheers

- XxXFir3bl3ndSSJ7XxX

 

[Ty4on]

Even going through Kawl's analysis of Hyperactivity was difficult, but I generally agree that he's not looking great.

His silence through most of today is alarming too, hoping he chimes in before day end.

What do you think of Kawl?

I skipped over the part where you mentioned calling out Kawl for blending. I can see that, he's by no means locked town, it just seems like a big change to suddenly lead discussion.

 

[Sophia]

Hey guys, who wants to play a word game

A___ys _e __n_h__n_g F__e__e_n_

HMMM..... this is tough. Let me consult my flowchart on what to do here.

Oh.

Hello! Yes I'm here. I have not been keeping up with this game at all, but I have been told I have to post 10 times every 24 hours or this funky wristwatch will inject lethal poison into my body. I'm catching up with the thread as we speak. Cheers

- XxXFir3bl3ndSSJ7XxX

Take your time. Replacements are good because they bring in fresh reads. Jokes aside, I don't think anyone is going to lynch you right away. =P

 

[cabot]

What do you think of Kawl?

I skipped over the part where you mentioned calling out Kawl for blending. I can see that, he's by no means locked town, it just seems like a big change to suddenly lead discussion.

I didn't call him out for blending, I said I had a neutral read. Which really is a null read, not that I read him as neutral.

I probably lean more town than scum just now, but either way he's been valuable enough to survive this day phase.

 

[Kawl_USC]

What do you think of Kawl?

I skipped over the part where you mentioned calling out Kawl for blending. I can see that, he's by no means locked town, it just seems like a big change to suddenly lead discussion.

Feel free to look at bachelor pad or our experiences in live mafia to see how I typically play town. I don't shy away from being a prominent poster/contributor.

Basing off of heist from so long ago seems a bit of lackluster meta tbh.

 

[Ty4on]

I didn't call him out for blending, I said I had a neutral read. Which really is a null read, not that I read him as neutral.

I probably lean more town than scum just now, but either way he's been valuable enough to survive this day phase.

Calling him out in love boat, sorry for not being clear.

 

[batsnacks]

DAY 1 VOTES:

hyperactivity (1)
kristoffer 23 (46)
kawl_usc 279

cabot (2)
kawl_usc 24 (265)
lone_prodigy 31 (31)
*splinter 37 (51)
kristoffer 46
skyodin 206

yesnononoyes (1)
cabot 27 (217)
sophia 196 (278)
*splinter 241

kristoffer (0)
ty4on 29 (149)

kawl_usc (0)
lone_prodigy 31 (103)
*splinter 51 (241)
terrabyte20xx 77 (276)

ty4on (1)
skyodin 39 (206)
catvoca 259

stanleypalmtree (0)
yesnononoyes 146 (210)

catvoca (0)
yesnononoyes 210 (270)
kawl_usc 267 (279)

lone_prodigy (1)
melonrabbit 214

*splinter (0)
cabot 217 (233)

terrabyte20xx (2)
cabot 233
stanleypalmtree 264

melonrabbit (2)
yesnononoyes 270
ty4on 280

DAY 1 ENDS:

DO NOT POST AFTER DAY END -- :59 OKAY, :00 NOT OKAY

IMPORTANT POSTS:
OP
D1 Start

BE ADVISED Sophia has replaced Kristoffer and Fireblend has replaced Catvoca

 

[cabot]

Calling him out in love boat, sorry for not being clear.

I agree that Heist was a little more restrained, but he was a lot more active in WWE before throwing in the towel, and a bit of live Mafia experience comes in here because he's always the one leading the way as Town in those games.

This just explains my feelings on not being surprised by Kawl taking the lead, just natural that the more games you have under your belt, the more confident you feel in your abilities, and confident Kawl is a proactive Kawl.


My feelings specifically on this game are above.

 

[Terrabyte20xx]

CAN I HAVE YOUR ATTENTION PLEASE

Fireblend IS REPLACING Catvoca EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY

THE PLAYER ROSTER IS BEING UPDATED

Hello! Yes I'm here. I have not been keeping up with this game at all, but I have been told I have to post 10 times every 24 hours or this funky wristwatch will inject lethal poison into my body. I'm catching up with the thread as we speak. Cheers

- XxXFir3bl3ndSSJ7XxX

Glad to see the main season tradition has continued on to the mid-season, welcome Fireblend.

 

[Lone_Prodigy]

I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but your contributions have seemed a bit weak. I joined up on page 2 (100ppp) and had no issues jumping straight into the conversation.

Joke (?) vote on cabot and Kawl.

Peeking stuff. These are easy contributions too.

I'll give you credit that bringing this up has merit, but it's still about the peeking.

You just don't appear to be scumhunting at all. That doesn't give me confidence.

I didn't really see any scumhunting from anyone until the peeking discussion had peaked and dissipated.

I actually had some quotes from Splinter which seemed a bit fishy (his early vote on Kawl, not reading the setup and being unaware of the "C's") but his posts on page 3 were better so I deleted them.

My top scum at the moment are melon, Hyper, and Terra. Nothing groundbreaking, unfortunately.

 

[melonrabbit]

What do you think of Hyper? Doesn't have to be deep if you have some gut feelings.

Hyper does seem to focus on the numbers and game stats side of things and honestly that all is a bit over my head (like how the game is generated and %s) I don't think that it is necessary a tell in of itself but it does stand out and someone I want to continue to watch. Gut feeling is leaning scum but I really need to hear from him more.

I like to think I'm not parroting and contributing my own opinions and perspectives, but when you enter a discussion late (see some of the players who didn't post until page 2) you've missed the initial querying and have to basically say "I'm here and pro-peek! Now what?"

As for the coasting, I'm not alone in that regard. YNNNY has already done the work in post 270, but you haven't contributed much either. Your explanation to YNNNY's vote in 285 is similar to what I would've said: peeking is a new foreign concept that I haven't seen before, and wanted to know more about it. It's not foolproof, but it's worth the risk.

... What ? Your defense to not parroting is to say you would have parroted exactly what I said?

 

[Sophia]

I didn't really see any scumhunting from anyone until the peeking discussion had peaked and dissipated.

I actually had some quotes from Splinter which seemed a bit fishy (his early vote on Kawl, not reading the setup and being unaware of the "C's") but his posts on page 3 were better so I deleted them.

My top scum at the moment are melon, Hyper, and Terra. Nothing groundbreaking, unfortunately.

Hmm.... could I fancy you for a bit and hear what was troubling you about Splinter? He's not someone I'd vote for on Day 1, but he's a hard read for me so I'd like to hear what you were thinking about him.

 

[Fireblend]

Ok so I have mostly caught up. Regarding the peeking convo which seems to have died off, I'm in favor of it. If I was cop, I'd also be in favor of it (mostly because I'm curious to see it put in practice, I also followed Sorian's classificatory game and was curious about it).

No huge reads so far, except that I doubt Ynny would play so erratically if she was scum. I tend to read people playing "non-conservatively" as town or neutrals, because I try to play cautiously when part of a scum team. Then again she's like that most of the time so eh. I also see Sophia is going all in on detective mode, no read from that yet.

I'm gonna

Vote: Lone_Prodigy

because that's what's "in" nowadays it seems. Would you mind giving reasons for your scum reads, L_P?

 

[Ty4on]

I should've been done reading this post ages ago, but:

[...]First, it's not a sure thing we have a doctor (50% less likely than a cop). [...]

It's 1/3 less likely.

10 for doctor, 15 for cop.
10 + 50% = 15
15 - 50% = 7.5
15 - 33% = 10

I agree that Heist was a little more restrained, but he was a lot more active in WWE before throwing in the towel, and a bit of live Mafia experience comes in here because he's always the one leading the way as Town in those games.

This just explains my feelings on not being surprised by Kawl taking the lead, just natural that the more games you have under your belt, the more confident you feel in your abilities, and confident Kawl is a proactive Kawl.


My feelings specifically on this game are above.

I never read and forgot about WWE and Gafia 2.5 >_>

Moot point now that I've been proven wrong, but experienced player doesn't necessarily mean active in my book.

Hyper does seem to focus on the numbers and game stats side of things and honestly that all is a bit over my head (like how the game is generated and %s) I don't think that it is necessary a tell in of itself but it does stand out and someone I want to continue to watch. Gut feeling is leaning scum but I really need to hear from him more.

This is giving me bad vibes. Especially that last line which reminds me of what my scum mates would say about me and each other. It's a good way of looking like you're suspicious of someone, but also giving yourself an excuse for not voting.

 

[Kawl_USC]

I should've been done reading this post ages ago, but:

It's 1/3 less likely.

10 for doctor, 15 for cop.
10 + 50% = 15
15 - 50% = 7.5
15 - 33% = 10

Right sorry. Got switched up from cop being 50% more likely than doctor. Fractions and percentages are tricky, my b dawg.

 

[Ty4on]

Brings up a valid concern on how to give legitimacy to a 1 shot cops check on day 2. Which I like.
Actually read back the context of the thread and that had already been addressed by Ty. So I don't really give him much credit for this.

When I first read this I found it was a bit scummy that he didn't read my post, but got caught in some WIFOM because I didn't skip posts in DP.

Spoiler

Except long posts by my mates...

Second thought though, why is he finding a problem instead of solving it? I could read that as trying to challenge your theory for the sake of challenging it instead of trying to come up with a better strat for town.

 

[Lone_Prodigy]

... What ? Your defense to not parroting is to say you would have parroted exactly what I said?

I try not to parrot, but if it's construed as parroting, then yeah I'll just copy what you said to YNNNY: I had questions about peeking and provided my own perspective.

Hmm.... could I fancy you for a bit and hear what was troubling you about Splinter? He's not someone I'd vote for on Day 1, but he's a hard read for me so I'd like to hear what you were thinking about him.

I just gave an example. Kinda.

If the real cop dies unexpectedly we can look back at his "fake" claims knowing they were actually real. It requires several people to fake claim to provide cover.

It also makes it far easier for scum to track down the real cop, so I'm eyeing Kawl suspiciously for pushing it so strongly.

...eh. I was typing out a vote but remembered he tried the same thing last time we played live.

Suspicious of Kawl, but gives him the benefit of the doubt.

Actually no, Kawl has strayed further into questionable advice territory.

1. If only vanilla towns are encouraged to fake claim, that also helps scum narrow down the non-cop power roles. (I haven't studied bats' library of statistics so I don't know how valid this concern is.

2. A real cop doesn't check their top town read. Fake claiming needs a little more nuance to be convincing.

Bad Kawl, bad.

VOTE: Kawl_USC

But votes him anyway. Trying to curb peeking discussion? Trying to seem less wishy-washy with regards to voting?

2 c's? What?

Confusion about the setup. Yes this isn't a traditional mafia game but it's right there in the OP. Faux ignorance?

 

[Lone_Prodigy]

Ok so I have mostly caught up. Regarding the peeking convo which seems to have died off, I'm in favor of it. If I was cop, I'd also be in favor of it (mostly because I'm curious to see it put in practice, I also followed Sorian's classificatory game and was curious about it).

No huge reads so far, except that I doubt Ynny would play so erratically if she was scum. I tend to read people playing "non-conservatively" as town or neutrals, because I try to play cautiously when part of a scum team. Then again she's like that most of the time so eh. I also see Sophia is going all in on detective mode, no read from that yet.

I'm gonna

Vote: Lone_Prodigy

because that's what's "in" nowadays it seems. Would you mind giving reasons for your scum reads, L_P?

"Scum wouldn't be so timid, let's start off by throwing a vote on someone right away. Take that, timidness!"

Yeah that's not a great look.

But to answer your question:

melonrabbit: Llaying like me, calling me out for it, jumping on someone new when they're brought up
Hyper: Style without substance, wishy-washy about peeking and inserting failsafes everywhere
Terra: Not much style nor substance.

Okay, caught up. Welcome Sophia, glad to have you here.

Kawl said it earlier, and I'm actually inclined to agree with him, we really shouldn't waste the game phase talking about whether we are going to use the fake peek strategy.

All caught up and he posts this.

 

[Hyperactivity]

Ok then, caught up, will now respond to stuff.

 

[batsnacks]

LESS THAN 2 HOURS LEFT IN DAY 1:

hyperactivity (1)
kristoffer 23 (46)
kawl_usc 279

cabot (2)
kawl_usc 24 (265)
lone_prodigy 31 (31)
*splinter 37 (51)
kristoffer 46
skyodin 206

yesnononoyes (1)
cabot 27 (217)
sophia 196 (278)
*splinter 241

kristoffer (0)
ty4on 29 (149)

kawl_usc (0)
lone_prodigy 31 (103)
*splinter 51 (241)
terrabyte20xx 77 (276)

ty4on (1)
skyodin 39 (206)
catvoca 259

stanleypalmtree (0)
yesnononoyes 146 (210)

catvoca (0)
yesnononoyes 210 (270)
kawl_usc 267 (279)

lone_prodigy (2)
melonrabbit 214
fireblend 316

*splinter (0)
cabot 217 (233)

terrabyte20xx (2)
cabot 233
stanleypalmtree 264

melonrabbit (2)
yesnononoyes 270
ty4on 280


DAY 1 ENDS:

DO NOT POST AFTER DAY END -- :59 OKAY, :00 NOT OKAY

IMPORTANT POSTS:
OP
D1 Start

 

[melonrabbit]

This is giving me bad vibes. Especially that last line which reminds me of what my scum mates would say about me and each other. It's a good way of looking like you're suspicious of someone, but also giving yourself an excuse for not voting.

At the moment, Lone is giving me far more pause.

I try not to parrot, but if it's construed as parroting, then yeah I'll just copy what you said to YNNNY: I had questions about peeking and provided my own perspective.

You could. It might be a good time to hear what "your own perspective" is because so far I haven't seen it.

So far you defense is to damn me but than compare us both and say we're playing the same game. Your statements are counterintuitive.

"Scum wouldn't be so timid, let's start off by throwing a vote on someone right away. Take that, timidness!"

Yeah that's not a great look.

But to answer your question:

melonrabbit: Llaying like me, calling me out for it, jumping on someone new when they're brought up
Hyper: Style without substance, wishy-washy about peeking and inserting failsafes everywhere
Terra: Not much style nor substance.



All caught up and he posts this.

I answered Ty4on's question about Hyper much like you did with Splinter just now.

Your hypocrisy is increasing with every post.

 

[Sophia]

Waiting to hear what Hyperactivity has to say before I decide my vote.

 

[Lone_Prodigy]

You called me out for my style of play, and I'm just pointing out that we're playing the same way, so we're equally suspicious.

 

[Hyperactivity]

He says his biggest fear is again concerning the doctor not knowing who to protect and that peeking will somehow muddy this water. First, it's not a sure thing we have a doctor (50% less likely than a cop). Secondly, He then paints a scenario where only 4 people peek and is worried that this will lead to the cop being more likely to die/made useless. However, that same situation also increases the chance of a doctor guessing the same as scum. A successful doctor protect with out a hard claim is very rare any how, but his two protest seem to run kind of counter current to me here. If you consider the implications of this 4 peek hypothetical you might also realize the additional benefits of setting up peeks by the by.

Hadn't realized everyone was supposed to peek, as you had asked for ordinaries to do it earlier.

Ends with a one liner that we most likely only have a one shot cop, which has since been addressed in the addendums to the peeking plan.

Yet you still seem to want to throw shade by mentioning this, even though you noted yourself that this was an addendum

Shows him warming up to the idea after having it clarified again. Name calling the SK here jumps out to me a bit here (only a 50% probability versus the ~70ish% of scum role blocker). I take issue with the last sentence as it's just a fact that everyone peeking increases the odds of hiding the cop as well as any other method while providing more concrete data. (Scum has a good idea that if anyone lists scum as a top town they probably aren't cop unless they see another breadcrumb hidden throughout the day, much like an incorrect peek).

Simple, I didn't understand that everyone in this scenario is supposed to peek, otherwise I wouldn't have even brought up a 4 players peeking scenario earlier

He brings up cop immediately claiming when finding town which I agree with. It is notable for being different from what he calls optimal cop start in an earlier post, but I believe this is in a scenario where everyone is peeking in which case his perceived optimal start is different.
Brings up a valid concern on how to give legitimacy to a 1 shot cops check on day 2. Which I like.
Actually read back the context of the thread and that had already been addressed by Ty. So I don't really give him much credit for this.
But continues to throw shade on peeking by decrying its value in the late game.
Which I don't like. As I feel in the late game if the cop is still alive then great peeking didn't need to come into play. Typically by the time peeking is no longer viable the cop can safely come forward and should do so to provide a cleared town list (minus god father or investigative immune SK)

I brought up my issues with the 1-shot cop claim later and then realized why it worked, that's just another case of me suddenly understanding something.

Throwing shade is not saying "of course that will happen" with regards to the cop getting found near the late game. "Of course that will happen" is sort of meant to tell everyone, HEY, cop will get found near the end anyways

Defends me from a vote. Says that he thinks peeking is beneficial to town (which seems a bit different from his most recent post where he says he thinks he is coming around to it and in fact he will go back and forth a few more times still I believe).

Notes that active people aren't necessarily scum. Just look at these two examples where he took an aggressive stance....and wait a minute both of those were anti town roles.

I read this as a sly post that both defends me, champions peeking, and also throws some subliminal shade at me by linking my behavior and activity with his as two non town roles. That association will remain in people's minds regardless of his defense of me up above.

A. I brought up the two examples of myself because they come to mind pretty quickly. If it helps soothe your worries over everyone suddenly thinking you're scum, I was trying to play for town's benefit in Bar, and actively trying to keep town engaged.

B. Am I supposed to just assume you're town now, and that the reason you've been acting this way is because you are only working for town's benefit? Players trying to control the conversation as scum is NOTHING new.

C. My slam on Terra for that post was because although the question of you being scum or not is there, and it brings up a WIFOM possibility, he has, or had not shown, any real evidence to give reason why he thinks you would be scum. So yes, you may very well be scum, he just doesn't have the proof to act on it. Same thing with me in HP and Bar.

In fact, say for example at Bar, the main reason I actually thought Gorlak was full of shit (even knowing he was right about me not being town) is because his reason was asinine, and everything beyond that was "I FEEL his reactions are scummy", even though at that point he probably would've taken any reaction of mine to be scummy

Same in HP. I leave, making a split second decision where there was something really wrong in Crab's claim and bus him, and come back to see myself lynched over a reason that really didn't make alot of sense.

So yeah, shoot me if I think you think I should just assume you're town. If you've been attempting to control the conversation as scum, you've done a pretty great job so far

This posts doesn't sit right worth me. Trying to organize something like this would inherently mess it up even more wrt his concerns in accidently outing the cop or screwing up when the 1 shot cop was used. Organizing details usually only helps scum and is something scum does in their little scum chat. Town plans should be generally outlined with specifics left unsaid so that scum can't disrupt them effectively.

Again, was confused to how things would work. The idea of organizing it all was brought up as an absurd possibility to counter it, meant to weaken the idea, not be taken seriously.

Also, the last line is the start of these posts where hyper writes in his flip flopping mid posts. These read like a superficial attempt at showing a conflicted townie/transparency into his thought process. I don't buy it and think it's him further refusing to take a hard stance so he can back out of peeking if it seems enough of town will go that way.

Yeah, this is bullshit. Tried to find the easiest to read example.

http://outergafia.com/thread/18/mgs-mafia-name-means-battlefield?filters[]=post_created_by%3Aeq%3A8&page=3

That's MGS MAfia. I was town. Want to read through the posts (pages 3 and 4 will probably help the most), look for that same sort of "I'm putting my entire thought process into the thread sort of style?

And I've done this as scum too. And as a neutral. And every game I've been reasonably active.

I don't even know how you fake a style. Is your idea that I don't actually believe what I'm saying, that I'm secretly exaggerating my wish-washiness?

"That's the beauty of it"
"Well except for maybe this one thing...."
"J/K guys I know in two post before this I said it was pro town and started with that idea here, but I just think the chance of people screwing up with peeks is just too high"
"I'm not sure, is anyone else not sure? Can i manage to back out of this peeking thing without looking scummy? Please, anyone?"

Wow, it's almost like people's feeling and thoughts change, and like I suddenly thought up something, sat on it for a bit, and decided I wasn't so sure

Is back to arguing that he thinks bread crumbs are most effective. Except wait for the next post...



Database, database trapped inside the database...

So says as scum he usually misses breadcrumbs so what can the harm possibly be.

And wait also admits that typically it requires more than just breadcrumbs for cops to be believed/their reads to be pieced together.

So kind of seems to be arguing against himself here with respect to bread crumbs being optimal play.

Yeah, that's exactly what I did, and was doing. No sarcasm there btw. Most GAFIA cops typically survive until reveal, until they get to the late game. I was trying to think of example of cops breadcrumbing, didn't see too many.

I think saying "so what can the harm possibly be" is exaggerating what was intended in that statement. I was saying that I don't think the threat of scum catching onto breadcrumbs is as high as you think, based on total anecdotal evidence. I never meant to use it as some sort of definitive proof that breadcrumbing works, otherwise I wouldn't go on to weaken my point.

Last post as of now, back to throwing shade on both peeking "IF we decide to not go through with it (please town help me not appear scummy)" and on me personally. Insinuates that I would move forward with a suboptimal strategy out of spite. No dice compadre.

The inconsistency in logic and arguments here as well as the continual foot dragging against what I think is a pro town strategy is enough for me.

SorryLordKawlfornotimmediatleyagreeingtoyourstrategybecauseI'mfairlycertainoneofscumortheSK(ifwehaveonenoticeIsaidifthistime,notdiscountingthe50%chancethatwedon'tandalsosomewhatunderestimatingthechancethatwedo)haveprobablydoneagoodjobdisguisinghtemselvesaspeople'stoptownbasedonpreviousexperiencesandbecausethewholepointoftheplanistokeepcopssafeandwemightjustbehelpingscuminthatway.Sorryfornotimmediatleytakingaside,andinsteadwaitingforthechancesomeonecomesbyandbringsupsomethingthatchangesmymindtowardsbeingpro-peeking,eventhoughthat'sexactlyhowIbecamepro-peekingthefirstime.Yourplanisflawless,allthatdisagreearescum.

Spoiler

Sorry Lord Kawl for not immediatley agreeing to your strategy because I'm fairly certain one of scum or the SK (if we have one notice I said if this time, not discounting the 50% chance that we don't and also somewhat underestimating the chance that we do) have probably done a good job disguising themselves as people's top town based on previous experiences and because the whole point of the plan is to keep cops safe and we might just be helping scum in that way. Sorry for not immediately taking a side, and instead waiting for the chance someone comes by and brings up something that changes my mind towards being pro-peeking, even though that's exactly how I became pro-peeking the first time. Your plan is flawless, all that disagree are scum.

Don't like what I see.

Vote: Hyperactivity

Ok.

So Kawl, quick question, if this is such standard fare from other communities, why is it ever not used? Or is it literally in every single game of mafia in every community, and its been unanimously decided to go through with peeking at all times?

 

[Fireblend]

"Scum wouldn't be so timid, let's start off by throwing a vote on someone right away. Take that, timidness!"

Yeah that's not a great look.

I've read this like 4 times and I still not get what you're saying or how it's relevant. It's making my head hurt.

But to answer your question:

melonrabbit: Llaying like me, calling me out for it, jumping on someone new when they're brought up
Hyper: Style without substance, wishy-washy about peeking and inserting failsafes everywhere
Terra: Not much style nor substance.

Thanks for the reads, though. I don't see much of a case for the latter 2, but I'd agree with melon. Does melon have previous game experience? I pretty much skipped last season altogether.

 

[Hyperactivity]

Alrighty then, now for the other accusations people have against me

 

[Ty4on]

Thanks for the reads, though. I don't see much of a case for the latter 2, but I'd agree with melon. Does melon have previous game experience? I pretty much skipped last season altogether.

Danny Phantom was her first game. She got more active near the end of the game.

 

[Sophia]

One thing at a time then.

Hadn't realized everyone was supposed to peek, as you had asked for ordinaries to do it earlier.

I do recall Kawl saying a handful of people.

Can we agree that a handful of people will help provide any cops we have with cover with some interference fake peeks tomorrow?

It would involve at least a handful of players opening the day tomorrow by saying, if I'm cop I checked so and so last night and they are town.

Enough people do this and it makes it so mafia doesn't know who to kill as the cop, but if the cop is flipped so there after we have a definitive person they checked out as clear.

Typically you want vanilla townies to jump on this grenade as they want to be a shield for the cop. It requires said townie to pick basically their top town person. If you pick wrong and say so and so is town but really they are scum, then mafia knows you are lying and won't nk you.

Did he change his stance on this later on or something?

 

[cabot]

I read that post and a whole load of nothing washed over me.

 

[*Splinter]

I read that post and a whole load of nothing washed over me.

Which one? Kawl or Hyper?

 

[Hyperactivity]

One thing at a time then.



I do recall Kawl saying a handful of people.





Did he change his stance on this later on or something?

Yeah, we decided that peeking only really works if EVERYONE does it

 

[Fireblend]

Yeah, we decided that peeking only really works if EVERYONE does it

Only Siths deal in absolutes.

 

[Kawl_USC]

One thing at a time then.



I do recall Kawl saying a handful of people.





Did he change his stance on this later on or something?

Will circle back to hypers post in a second.

And yea, to be honest while at least a handful is necessary for critical mass of the idea to be valid I expected people to drag their feet on the matter. Reception has been far more open than I expected. The more people who do so the better. I set my original goal low not expecting most would be on board. I don't hold that point against hyper or other people. It's some of the inconsistent logic of that post that struck me more so.

 

[Sophia]

Yeah, we decided that peeking only really works if EVERYONE does it

I'm looking for specifics regarding Kawl specifically. Can you link me to the post where he specifically says everyone needs to do it? He said a handful of people peeking at first, and then noted a little bit later that more people strengthens the idea.

Given that I think we've established that more peeks total strengthen the whole idea of peeking, I feel confident people will get on board now. Inless someone can explain how peeks from everyone would be detrimental to town I will see the lack of a peek as scummy.

Or rather I'll say I want it to be all or nothing. And if we decide on all and people back out, clearly that would be scummy.

 

[Hyperactivity]

Even going through Kawl's analysis of Hyperactivity was difficult, but I generally agree that he's not looking great.

His silence through most of today is alarming too, hoping he chimes in before day end.

Silence isn't really alarming

And you barely added anything, just sorta tagged along onto whatever Kawl said

The case against Hyper has merit, but that is his style. Not sure why he talked about databases though.

"Scum wouldn't be so timid, let's start off by throwing a vote on someone right away. Take that, timidness!"

Yeah that's not a great look.

But to answer your question:
Hyper: Style without substance, wishy-washy about peeking and inserting failsafes everywhere
.

???

Mind actually backing what you say up? How am I "style over substance"? Any posts to back it up?

Hyper does seem to focus on the numbers and game stats side of things and honestly that all is a bit over my head (like how the game is generated and %s) I don't think that it is necessary a tell in of itself but it does stand out and someone I want to continue to watch. Gut feeling is leaning scum but I really need to hear from him more.



... What ? Your defense to not parroting is to say you would have parroted exactly what I said?

Yeah, no. For one, there wasn't much to talk about early game, of course we're going to discuss the idea Kawl brought up. And afterwards I was gone

This is giving me bad vibes. Especially that last line which reminds me of what my scum mates would say about me and each other. It's a good way of looking like you're suspicious of someone, but also giving yourself an excuse for not voting.

What Ty4on said here is correct. You actually saying something, or is this just some bs "gut read" you'll never act on

 

[Hyperactivity]

Yes peeks work best if everyone will get on board but I had trouble believing that would be the case given that it's never been brought up. The larger number of peeks the better.

Sofia, looks like this is where it is

 

[cabot]

Which one? Kawl or Hyper?

Hyper.


I don't know what to say really, have you anything to add but mechanics, databases and defending yourself?

 

[Sophia]

Sofia, looks like this is where it is

Yeah but that's not him saying "Everyone needs to peek!", that's just an extension of what he said earlier. That it's stronger if everyone gets on board, but he doesn't expect it.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, where did the idea that everyone was suppose to peek come from?

 

[Sophia]

???

Mind actually backing what you say up? How am I "style over substance"? Any posts to back it up?

.

According to this, we have about a 77.34% chance of having a roleblocker, not even counting the slight possibility of having a town one getting in our way. So yeah, if we have a cop, a straight claim without much to show is pretty terrible, especially without any watchers or trackers

My major concern here is that while statistically, more non-cop cop claims raises the odds the cop doesn't die, should we have a doctor, that doctor wouldn't know where he should aim.

So then, you have a situation where the cop is protected by numbers, but if scum guess right and the doctor wrong, that swings the game a bunch. Because we relied on the pure probability of it all, the scum is much less defended from an actual kill.

And don't forget the scum roleblocker that we probably have. Let's say we have 4 cop claims in total. For one, you've mentioned that you hope ordinaries jump on this, but if scum get lucky and guess right, hoorah, you've outlined a whole bunch of players scum won't look at to be targeted. If those players are prs, they just drew a target on themselves.

So let's say 4 claims in total. Scum just have to kill and block one pair, and then the other. If at any point the real cop is blocked, he would have to give a bs guess to make it not obvious, and if he calls the sk or scum town? This has the nice side effect of making scum think the cop is fake, but it also helps them sift through the fakes more easily

And at the end of this all, our most likely option is that we just have a 1-shot cop

SorryLordKawlfornotimmediatleyagreeingtoyourstrategybecauseI'mfairlycertainoneofscumortheSK(ifwehaveonenoticeIsaidifthistime,notdiscountingthe50%chancethatwedon'tandalsosomewhatunderestimatingthechancethatwedo)haveprobablydoneagoodjobdisguisinghtemselvesaspeople'stoptownbasedonpreviousexperiencesandbecausethewholepointoftheplanistokeepcopssafeandwemightjustbehelpingscuminthatway.Sorryfornotimmediatleytakingaside,andinsteadwaitingforthechancesomeonecomesbyandbringsupsomethingthatchangesmymindtowardsbeingpro-peeking,eventhoughthat'sexactlyhowIbecamepro-peekingthefirstime.Yourplanisflawless,allthatdisagreearescum.

Spoiler

Sorry Lord Kawl for not immediatley agreeing to your strategy because I'm fairly certain one of scum or the SK (if we have one notice I said if this time, not discounting the 50% chance that we don't and also somewhat underestimating the chance that we do) have probably done a good job disguising themselves as people's top town based on previous experiences and because the whole point of the plan is to keep cops safe and we might just be helping scum in that way. Sorry for not immediately taking a side, and instead waiting for the chance someone comes by and brings up something that changes my mind towards being pro-peeking, even though that's exactly how I became pro-peeking the first time. Your plan is flawless, all that disagree are scum.

Mentioned the one post earlier as basically saying a whole lot of nothing, and now there's this sarcastic part of your above post to add onto it. : \

 

[Fireblend]

Yeah but that's not him saying "Everyone needs to peek!", that's just an extension of what he said earlier. That it's stronger if everyone gets on board, but he doesn't expect it.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, where did the idea that everyone was suppose to peek come from?

I think some people quoted that post shortly after, sort of echoing that thought but it got transformed into "everyone has to or it will fail".

 

[Sophia]

I think some people quoted that post shortly after, sort of echoing that thought but it got transformed into "everyone has to or it will fail".

That's the impression I've gotten so far. I was mainly looking back for inconsistencies with Kawl's plan, but I don't seem to have found them? He probably could have been more detailed upfront about the specifics tho, but that's hardly worth mentioning.

 

[*Splinter]

To try and catch up on things quickly:

Disagree with Ty4on's case against melon. He thinks she is scum based on being more cautious than a previous game. I was slightly scum reading her until I realised she is playing exactly as previously (IMO). Lean town on her for now.

Agree with someone's (Catvoca?) case against Ty4on. He's been blender than usual. Not much in it but slight scum read for now. Think Kawl's super-agressive defense of him was even shadier.

Sticking with Kawl, his case against Hyper was extremely inflated. Crazy word count without saying much, I would have gone with "Hyper not keen on peeking, changed mind a bit" but that's just me. Also felt he misrepresented Hyper somewhere but I'd have to go back and find it (was waiting for Hyper's response first. He might have addressed it but I'll be damned if I'm reading two posts of that length today).

Null read on hyper. I don't think his grappling with the Peek conundrum was as damning as Kawl made it out to be, but he hasn't done much else either. Could go either way.

Generally been agreeing with Cabot, still think he's town.

My stance on Ynnny softened but I don't remember why, will do some re-reading.

Uhh that's everything I remember reading about. Lone Prodigy has some stuff on me but seems to have answered himself? Good work.

 

[Ty4on]

To try and catch up on things quickly:

Disagree with Ty4on's case against melon. He thinks she is scum based on being more cautious than a previous game. I was slightly scum reading her until I realised she is playing exactly as previously (IMO). Lean town on her for now.

Why?

 

[*Splinter]

Why?

Why what? Why town? Perceived consistency with last game, nothing more

 

[Sophia]

Sticking with Kawl, his case against Hyper was extremely inflated. Crazy word count without saying much, I would have gone with "Hyper not keen on peeking, changed mind a bit" but that's just me. Also felt he misrepresented Hyper somewhere but I'd have to go back and find it (was waiting for Hyper's response first. He might have addressed it but I'll be damned if I'm reading two posts of that length today).

I mean, it doesn't really seem that inflated. Kawl's approach to it was lengthy because he went post by post, but I don't think it was that bad.

Also, seriously, you're not gonna read either one? : \

 

[Ty4on]

Why what? Why town? Perceived consistency with last game, nothing more

Just that? No examples?

 

[Sophia]

Seriously everyone, make note of that. We have two very lengthy posts late in the day phase, one an accusation of someone being scum, the other a defense.... and Splinter has admitted that he's apparently not going to read either one? (That, or he's talking about Hyperactivity's two defenses. Either way...)

What kind of crazy logic is that? C'mon. :\