Learning from Hansel and Gretel (Should you breadcrumb?)

[Tammy]

I breadcrumbed when I feel like it. Usually if I do breadcrumb I've been able to turn it into a joke/video clip/argument etc, but I've never tried to force it and sometimes don't breadcrumb at all.

Though one of my favorite crumbs was when I drew a bodyguard type role at my homesite, in my opening post I linked a video to Prince's "I Would Die 4 U" video. I thought it was super obvious and people would know my role before I ended up claiming, but noone caught it.

(I post a lot of videos though, so maybe that's why noone noticed?)

[MrTrow]

Could you explain how crumbing a rolename doesn't reveal your actual role?

Crumbing 'Harry Potter' is far different than crumbing 'Cop'.
Unless rolenames are exactly parallel and highly predictable (mod-side) then this shouldn't be a problem.

See myself in Blackest Night Mafia. Crumbing role-name had no indication on role.

Fair point. (though 'harry potter' is not always a credible claim/crumb and in games where it isn't, it wouldn't be as obvious as the tactic discussed demands it to be)
However my other issues all remain in this case:
what if
- the actual 'harry potter' notices the crumb, wouldn't you expect this to backfire: getting either you or the real 'strong-power townie you were trying to protect' lynched, maybe even both
- any townie notices the crumb and 'harry potter' dies by other means: i would lynch this 'not harry potter' for posting

intent to fake-claim

- any scum seeing through the ruse (as it was 'too obvious') identifying the real 'harry potter' by analyzing the reactions to the crumb(having to put effort to hide #1), followed by playing #2

[Shadowmod]

The point wasn't ever about "fake crumbing" but only about crumbing Harry Potter when you are in fact Harry Potter, even though Harry Potter happens to be a mere VT.

[MrTrow]

Given how 'not role specific' was nothing more than an (admittedly very) 'nice to have'

And ideally nothing that suggests a specific role, but rather the role name or whatever.

i find he 'wasn't ever about' somewhat hard to believe.
But sure in that case:
- role unrelated seemingly powerful role-name
- weak role
- game doesn't explicitly state the roles and names being unrelated (otherwise scum will see through the play)
the chances you take an actual powerrole with you should the gambit to claim the night-kill backfire would be greatly reduced
the chances of a backfire actually happening still aren't zero though:
- the second game balance becomes a factor, or you actually have to claim there still is 'intent to at the very least imply you are something you are not'(a powerrole) -> expect to become a late-game lynch
- the possibility 'the doctor(or watcher) falls for it' -> you just got the top scumhunter killed

So it would be slightly less dangerous in that very specific case, but i would still not be in favor of this(or any really) town-misdirection play

[Shadowmod]

Maybe you should understand first: It's not misdirecting. All you are crumbing is your role name. As gambits are concerned, this is as harmless as it gets.
Also: Gambit playing in general is vastly underrated because of the ample supply of players who make badly thought out, silly or plain idiotic gambits...

[kuribo]

Read my ISO from POTUS mafia to learn how to properly breadcrumb:

http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.ph ... 2#p5519002
http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.ph ... 3#p5520743
http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.ph ... 6#p5523516
http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.ph ... 3#p5538653
http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.ph ... 5#p5538685

[MrTrow]

Maybe you should understand first: It's not misdirecting.

Yes it is.
The entire play is
"convince scum of something that isn't true(you are a powerrole), in order to draw the nightkill"

All you are crumbing is your role name.

The method doesn't change the fact, you are actively trying to
convince someone of something that isn't true (without flat out lying about it)

As gambits are concerned, this is as harmless as it gets.

-if successful: nk-damage reduced to vanilla townie
-if failed: probable lynch of the vanilla townie pulling the gambit(in a still not completely wasted day) and making the work of doctor and watcher-like roles slightly harder.
indeed as far as gambits are concerned this is pretty much as harmless as it gets IF we take the 'not explicitly counterclaimable as requirement, not just a (very) nice to have.

Also: Gambit playing in general is vastly underrated because of the ample supply of players who make badly thought out, silly or plain idiotic gambits...

Again no arguments here:
- the vast majority of gambits are bad
- great gambits are great

apart from maybe the 'underrated' part, the reason there are so many terrible gambits, is because they are greatly overrated by the ones using them.
I have already shown why i consider it unlikely you actually considered the possibility of a counter-claim-backfire
did you consider you might draw the doc or watcher instead of the nk?
did you consider how such a play may damage your VT claim later in the game should it come to that?
did you consider how you would crumb resulting in 'scum will notice, but town will not slip up over it'?
did you consider how you would crumb resulting in 'scum will notice, but scum will not see they were SUPPOSED to notice'?

[Shadowmod]

did you consider you might draw the doc or watcher instead of the nk?

Yes. And if I managed to draw both a doc/watcher and a kill, it's even better gain for town.

did you consider how such a play may damage your VT claim later in the game should it come to that?

Yes. And: Not at all. Since role names were absolutely meaningless, it would do nothing to prove my vanilla or town status, of course, but it would also not cause any direct mismatch.

did you consider how you would crumb resulting in 'scum will notice, but town will not slip up over it'?

Why would town slip over a role name crumb if each role name is unique? There's nothing to CC or to slip up over.

did you consider how you would crumb resulting in 'scum will notice, but scum will not see they were SUPPOSED to notice'?

Scum is just as susceptible to WIFOM as town. Generally the side with the information advantage has the upper hand in WIFOM. Regarding my own role, I have the advantage. And if scum get stuck in WIFOM arguments, that's also already a win, because it means they need to put time and effort into figuring something out where there is really nothing to figure out.

[MrTrow]

1. whether or not,
having the watcher to out a doc/scum dipole is actually better than a vt-nightkill is debatable (i see possibilities here), but what i was going for was

instead of the nk

.
There is a scumhunter out there who is a threat to the scumteam (the kind of player, though without the role) a gambit like yours is supposed to protect.
The doctor notices your crumb, scum does not: you just got the biggest threat to the scumteam killed.

2. if rolenames are absolutely meaningless, how would your play even work? (other than implying they are not, which is exactly the point i was going for)

3. i'll rephrase: you want scum to think you are a PR, but town (who as the uninformed faction, might even be more carefully reading your post) not to catch this attempt at sharing information(even if it is implied rather than explicitly stated) which isn't true and your attempts to talk your way out of this being no different than the attempts by scum to talk their way out of a lie(even if implied rather than explicitly stated). HOW?

4. if scum reach the conclusion, they were SUPPOSED to notice, they will reach the conclusion you are VT, putting not only those PR's you were trying to protect in more danger, but also giving them ammo for getting you lynched as in nr2.
Yes there may be a sweetspot where they get caught in wifoming whether or not you are a PR (which is 'the crumb was only slightly too easy for them to spot') making the range of 'this gambit isn't a total loss' slightly bigger.
Doesn't make the question: HOW do you intend to leave a crumb scum will notice, that doesn't scream "NOTICE ME, NOTICE ME"? (If the latter is your goal you might as well just fake-claim)

[pirate mollie]

what is a dipole?

[MrTrow]

(practically) confirmed (at least) one of 2 specific players is scum.

In this case:
just practically, as it requires the watcher to be believed and the assumption (which only scum knows to be correct, but can otherwise be reasonably guessed if the game is small enough)
(so strictly speaking this case isn't even a dipole)

the watcher knows 2 players targeted the same player (because of a toned-down fakeclaim(and presumably no-one else died), but that is a different discussion) and as such knows these 2 are the scum performing the kill and the doctor that prevented it.
but not which is which. (it may require the watcher to come forward and die(thus being confirmed as speaking the truth), for this to actually hit 'dipole' status) but that's the general idea

see also counterclaims in open setups (or small and balanced enough to be close to open, a no gimmick(assumption) up to 12 player game will not have 2 cops for example)
at least 1 of the 2 is lying, therefore at least 1 of the 2 is scum.
or the lack of a hammer in lylo (though this is though process of elimination, it is still mutually assured scum and thus a dipole)

[Shadowmod]

You have no idea how real people think, I guess... Or you are the kind of person who is outthinking himself in the most horrible ways every game, I don't know. Maybe both.
Plus, playing the odds, hardly any game actually ha a watcher, not every game even has a doctor, but scum are guaranteed to be in every single game. And not just one of them but more like 3+ (maybe only 2 in some micros). Only one of them needs to notice... Anyway, this discussion has long become too boring. Next example: The right crumb at the right time (plus some luck in the role lottery to back it up) can single-handedly win you a game as scum: http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 23&t=17877

[Zachrulez]

Never really bothered with bread crumbing, anything you post that gives away your role increases your chances of being nightkilled if you're a role of any value... so...

Also the other problem with bread crumbing to make your results known if you die is that the players analyzing you need to know what to look for and how do you do that without wearing a sign?

Also if you decide to full claim as an information role, make everyone react to you before you give the town the information you have. Nothing better than to force scum to react to damning evidence before they know who the damning evidence is on. Even if it's not damning evidence it's actually a lot harder for scum to counterclaim when they don't know what you're going to claim. If you counter a guilty afterall, what if you do it with the wrong scum?

[MrTrow]

@shadowmod:
i'll read that game once i have spare time some day soon(is in my todo list).
though the 'here is an example of why crumbing is a good move AS SCUM' doesn't help the fake-crumbing-as-town might be useful case i thought we were discussing

As for how i've never been in a situation where i can't outthink myself (sober) means i must be a fake person.
yet that very way of thinking is the only way to actually get trapped in wifom. (alternative(or rather the actual origin): the second you recognize it is WIFOM, you should recognize it is pointless to try and out-reason it)

as for (everything within) the odds argument.
true they are unlikely to show up both, that dipole wasn't my argument it was yours. but indeed the chance of a scum picking it up is bigger than the chance of an affected town PR picking it up.
The odds of scum seeing right through it (because of how incredibly hard it is to make a crumb bound to be noticed, without making it look like it is intended to be so) are also 'not in your favor'
The odds of a random townie noticing it, which may cause lategame-issues(which may require some overthinking if you would try to do so prior to actually pulling this) are higher than scum actually falling for this.
It is great, 'i have a gut feeling this guy hasn't been completely honest, this game' fuel.

And i may overthink basically everything(i am well aware that i do, but try fixing it) but not even looking at these possibilities (or even consider the possibility of failure) is the reason most gambits suck.

But indeed i think we have taken this topic, far enough off-topic as it is

[MrTrow]

@Zackrulez: yay a post on the actual topic(probably mostly my fault as well).
1. completely agree

2. if you can pull it off, worth it, but yeah the role-flip should be what makes it possible to find the crumbs(pre flip practically unfindable), cop crumbs are likely located early in the day, where hider crumbs are likely located later in the day anything more pretty much matches the 'sign-issue' hence why i usually default to 1. on this (i see the benefits, i just don't see how to pull it off)

3. if possible, i agree:
- role-claim(maybe even that partial)
- leave cc gap (potentially being very clear of last credible shot at cc)
- full-claim
might lead to interesting results.
That being said, if your claim is not voluntary (L-1 claims), no town would probably let you get away with it (and i think they are right in doing so)