[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/ext/alfredoramos/seometadata/event/listener.php on line 114: Undefined array key 12748923 [phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/ext/alfredoramos/seometadata/event/listener.php on line 114: Trying to access array offset on value of type null Micro 1010: Divide and Conquer: Round 2 - Game Over! - Mafiascum.net
Post
Post #142 (isolation #2) » Mon May 10, 2021 8:39 pm
Postby Vanderscamp »
In post 22, NorwegianboyEE wrote:Ok, i'm on a keyboard finally.
So my first nuanced thought is that it would be weird for Bingle to put himself in the 3P hood as scum when he was put in it as town in the last game and saw how bad it went for Skitter. I feel like Bingle would see himself as a much better player than me or N_M so for him to put himself in there seems really bold. N_M however, might feasibly do it for the memes.
But whatever i think we should eliminate in the 6P hood. Because then we can win in day 1 just like the last time Divide and Conquered was hosted.
I still maintain that it's marginally better to kill into the small pool first, but more important is just to vote the person we think is most likely scum.
But it's imo definitely wrong to want to prefer killing into the big pool, we will win just as easily by killing the scummiest player in the big pool and being right on D4 as we will on D1.
Post
Post #143 (isolation #3) » Mon May 10, 2021 8:43 pm
Postby Vanderscamp »
In post 39, Lukewarm wrote:My gut reaction to this set up, is that it makes more sense to eliminate from the 3 person neighborhood, unless someone from the 6 person neighborhood really stands out as a scum read.
We did the math last game on killing into the different pools and there was something like a 4% increase in win rate by going small pool first, practically I think it is even better because it ensures one mafia dead at some point in the game, which I think is a lot more valuable than the zero value that an assumption of random killing attributes to it.
But last game the scummiest person was the scum in the big pool and we just killed them D1 for an easy game.
In post 78, Lukewarm wrote:I am curious why some people are suggesting to vote from the 6 person neighborhood instead? Is it just for the chance at a Day 1 endgame win? Or am I missing some other benefit to voting there.
In the previous generation of the game that ran on this site (Which i was in),
scum argued for the very same and it was the one in the 6p hood doing it. We eventually eliminated him and we won the game on D1 because everyone towned it up in the game hard while he couldn't keep up, but even though he was scum, what he said was correct.
I'd say it was more that he scummed it up pretty hard!
Post
Post #145 (isolation #5) » Mon May 10, 2021 8:53 pm
Postby Vanderscamp »
In post 87, NorwegianboyEE wrote:Tinfoil theory, Bingle knows i absolutely hate N_M's guts and therefore put is in the same hood so we would destroy each other.
How serious is this comment?
Is it actually a well-known thing that you hate him?
Post
Post #147 (isolation #7) » Mon May 10, 2021 9:04 pm
Postby Vanderscamp »
In post 102, Lukewarm wrote:I have reconsidered, and I think I am on now leaning towards voting from within the 6 player neighborhood now.
I think I have come to the conclusion that shooting in the 6p neighborhood is better even if we miss Day 1
There is just a much higher reward for hunting within the 6p Mafia
In post 120, Lukewarm wrote:I think that the mafia put Norwee+N_M in the 3 person group because they knew it would lead to conflict, and put a lot of noise in the thread. And that strategy appears to be paying off, because they are doing exactly that. But that still leaves the question of whether you did it, and the 2 town players are falling for it, or if one of them did it as scum, and is egging on the other.
I am a little surprised at the amount of posts coming form Not_Mafia, in my expereince with him he has been a lot more sparse. In our last game he made 63 posts spread out over 30 days, and then in this game he is at 29 posts in like 6 hours, and that was also a game that had both Norwee and Not_Mafia in it...
So I am a bit suspicious that this is that "one of them did it as scum, and is egging on the other"
So of the three of you, I think it might actually be Not_Mafia... but he is such a hard person to read, by design, and it seems like his reputation has resulted in him almost having a site wide immunity from Day 1 eliminations.
So I am kind of glad we are not voting in the 3 player neighborhood today.
I really dislike the last line (and not just because I dislike the notion of refusing to vote into the 3p pool)
I also think n_m is the scummiest person in the small pool so far for a pretty similar reason, I'm pretty sure he's posted more times so far this game than in the entire game we just played together, and if I thought he was tabled from contention today I would be very far from kind of glad about it.
In post 102, Lukewarm wrote:I have reconsidered, and I think I am on now leaning towards voting from within the 6 player neighborhood now.
I think I have come to the conclusion that shooting in the 6p neighborhood is better even if we miss Day 1
There is just a much higher reward for hunting within the 6p Mafia
If we vote wrong the mafia kill likely lands in the group of 6, making it easier to figure out
I actually agree that getting out the 3-person hood mafia today makes the game harder than miseliming in the 6 person hood
Going to try to not respond to every single one of these but this stance is absurd
Why?
Because miskilling D1 almost always does not make the game easier than killing correctly.
I think the point you are trying to make is that killing into the big pool first, missing, and getting another NK in there makes solving that pool easier, but I don't think that is close to worth the value of not having to solve the small pool first.
The small pool scum is NOT someone we can just freely guarantee being able to kill if we kill aggressively into the big pool and do badly.
In post 39, Lukewarm wrote:My gut reaction to this set up, is that it makes more sense to eliminate from the 3 person neighborhood, unless someone from the 6 person neighborhood really stands out as a scum read.
We did the math last game on killing into the different pools and there was something like a 4% increase in win rate by going small pool first, practically I think it is even better because it ensures one mafia dead at some point in the game, which I think is a lot more valuable than the zero value that an assumption of random killing attributes to it.
But last game the scummiest person was the scum in the big pool and we just killed them D1 for an easy game.
So I looked back at the last game.
It is interesting that you site back that the math was done in the last game, without acknowledging that Bingle was the one that did the math, and that he was town that game, and that he also concluded that it was still better to shoot in the 6P pool.
I have been informed by a monkey that I should treat Bingle's mechanical talk as gospel, regardless of his alignment, but here I can clearly see that ConfirmedTown Bingle made the case that shooting from the 6P pool first is the better strategy.
IIRC Bingle did some initial math which was very wrong, I went back and corrected the math and we both agreed that the correct numbers were something along the lines of 41% town win rate vs 45% town win rate by killing into big pool first and little pool first respectively.
From a math standpoint it's definitely better to kill into the small pool first, bingle and some other people made some arguments about why killing into the big pool first was better that I don't agree with since I think they mostly make assumptions about things being good that are actually neutral.
I don't mind killing into the big pool first if the scummiest person in the game is there but I will advocate very strongly for not avoiding killing into the small pool today just because it is the small pool.
In post 147, Vanderscamp wrote:I also think n_m is the scummiest person in the small pool so far for a pretty similar reason, I'm pretty sure he's posted more times so far this game than in the entire game we just played together, and if I thought he was tabled from contention today I would be very far from kind of glad about it.
In post 147, Vanderscamp wrote:
I really dislike the last line (and not just because I dislike the notion of refusing to vote into the 3p pool)
I also think n_m is the scummiest person in the small pool so far for a pretty similar reason, I'm pretty sure he's posted more times so far this game than in the entire game we just played together, and if I thought he was tabled from contention today I would be very far from kind of glad about it.
can you be explicit/clarify for me your thought process here:
are you saying that you think Lukewarm is scum with N_M, and is cheekily using the "vote in the 6pool" logic to distance from his buddy while claiming he's glad he doesn't actually have to vote there? Do you really think that's a likely comment to come from scum!Lukewarm paired with scum!N_M - I think scum are usually pretty self-conscious about talking about their buddy, I generally don't think they're likely to say "I'm glad I don't have to vote there today". If he's going to distance from his buddy, why would he not take a more strong stance? what scum agenda did his post actually serve here?
I find the alternate explanation - that town!Lukewarm feels N_M is a hard slot to effectively sort and is somewhat relieved he doesn't have to correctly evaluate him today - to be a lot more natural and likely. It kinda feels to me like you found a convenient reason to shade Lukewarm ("he says he's 'kind of glad' he might not vote his scumread, that doesn't sound like a townie thing to say!!") rather than you're actually thinking about how and whether his posts indicate his alignment. Not to mention the odds of a NM/Lukewarm team are generally low in a vacuum, so tying them together in this way is always going to be specious reasoning.
My scum read on lukewarm isn't dependent on n_m's alignment, I read it as scummy regardless of whether or not n_m is scum.
I think if anything it's less likely that they are together from what lukewarm said, because I agree it would be fairly obvious, but I don't feel as strongly about the associative reads from that.
Post
Post #227 (isolation #15) » Tue May 11, 2021 1:34 pm
Postby Vanderscamp »
In post 161, GuiltyLion wrote:as an addendum to the above, I could vibe with your sentiment more if you are saying the comment from Lukewarm is scummy in the town!N_M world. But given that you're voting NM and claimed him as your strongest scumread, I don't see how that comment from Lukewarm pings you as partner-y. I would think it's better evidence for potential T-S alignment than shared S-S alignment.
Me independently reading n_m as scummy won't make me change my reads on other players in the thread because of that, it's very possible I'm wrong on n_m.
In post 61, GuiltyLion wrote:oh lmao you're right, I read that the setup was Mountainous and assumed that meant no NKs for some reason
fully disregard that point then
@N_M do you think this is a staged towntell or genuine?
I know you're not asking me but I think this is fairly likely to be genuine, but also possible to be coming from a scum who genuinely didn't realize this.
In post 198, NorwegianboyEE wrote:Oh and "not really townie" is a fancy shorthand way of saying that literally nothing you’ve said is something i think you couldn’t say as scum.
oh smhsmh u shouldve just said that.
lmk if u want me to vote myself
In post 207, NorwegianboyEE wrote:I’m extremely bad at reading Dunnstral. If you can explain how he thinks and plays as scum, and why he wouldn’t be bold like that, feel free to enlighten me.
Dunn likes to low effort as both alignments ime. Calling out a partner as sus while voting one of the other people in the pool is something that is going to inevitably look bad and without the context of the last game it isn't a safe assumption we'll solve in the 6p first.
Is Dunn capable of being bold like that? Sure. Would Dunn actually draw late game attention to himself for a throwaway RVS vote? I don't think so, when he very much prefers to take the back seat and passively manipulate the thread.
I don't like or understand this.
Why do you think Dunn is being bold?
Because I don't think a throwaway RVS vote is being bold in any way, and I haven't seen anything from him that contradicts him taking the back seat and passively manipulating.
Additionally, he wasn't directly calling n_m sus, he was just speculating on why he was in the pool. It might have been indirect but even if it was, it's not like a super bold statement to make.
In post 190, NorwegianboyEE wrote:Vanderscamp's ISO doesn't lend itself well to being allied with N_M imo. Ping me if you disagree.
I disagree with this, I called out in 160 some weird reasoning he's using to scumread both Lukewarm and N_M, and I suspect it may be that scum!Vanderscamp with scum!N_M trying to paint a false associative between town!Lukewarm and his buddy.
p-edit: @nEE I don't really see why he couldn't post that as scum, even if he knew it was true already. It could be a question to make him look uninformed, and it's also entirely possible N_M didn't mention you at all in pregame scum chat.
Probably clarified this already but my reasoning for scumreading lukewarm and n_m are not the same.
In post 190, NorwegianboyEE wrote:Vanderscamp's ISO doesn't lend itself well to being allied with N_M imo. Ping me if you disagree.
I disagree with this, I called out in 160 some weird reasoning he's using to scumread both Lukewarm and N_M, and I suspect it may be that scum!Vanderscamp with scum!N_M trying to paint a false associative between town!Lukewarm and his buddy.
p-edit: @nEE I don't really see why he couldn't post that as scum, even if he knew it was true already. It could be a question to make him look uninformed, and it's also entirely possible N_M didn't mention you at all in pregame scum chat.
In post 219, Bingle wrote:In general, it means "This post is something I find noteworthy in a way I'm not entirely sure I want to share yet but would like other people to pay attention to." but thinking about this further I don't actually see a drawback to bringing this up.
Your argument for N_M not being partnered with Scamp applies equally well to yourself, but you phrased it in a way to avoid that entirely which leaves me inclined to think you might yourself be aligned with scamp and looking to passively clear him.
I don't like this either since it's pretty easily explained by nor being town and not thinking about the perspective about me being scum with him.
Post
Post #234 (isolation #22) » Tue May 11, 2021 1:58 pm
Postby Vanderscamp »
In post 223, Dunnstral wrote:The reason I say that is because if we correctly eliminate in the 3 person pool today, the next 2 nightkills are going to be the other 2 in that pool
If we eliminate in the 6p pool today, and start from the 3p pool tomorrow, I think we have better odds, including if they take the 3p pool down to 2
The important thing is that if we lynch correctly into the 3p pool, we have an extra kill we can use and about a 56% chance of winning from there.
If we miskill into the big pool first and then start aiming for the small pool first we get three shots into essentially a pool of three and a pool of what will be either three or four, but needing to find two scum, which is definitely not better.
I can math it out, but hopefully it's clear?
Post
Post #235 (isolation #23) » Tue May 11, 2021 2:02 pm
Postby Vanderscamp »
I think bingle is now more scummy than n_m for the stuff I quoted.
I like a lot what Norwegian is saying.
I also think nor_GL is a scum team that absolutely does not exist because of what nor is saying about GL, I don't think nor would be calling GL confirmed town from what GL said if they were scum together.
In post 191, NorwegianboyEE wrote:VOTE: Marcistar
This feels the most likely to be scum cumulatively when looking at both worlds.
i agree
explain please.. what makes me most likely
Why do you agree?
am i meant to explain why im most likely scum..? bro idk how to do that
i guess... just because i am... is that a fine answer?
In post 224, Vanderscamp wrote:I don't mind killing into the big pool first if the scummiest person in the game is there but I will advocate very strongly for not avoiding killing into the small pool today just because it is the small pool.
So i'm the scummiest person here? aww damn hurts hard bro
I'd like a little more detail about why you think that's the case.
In post 191, NorwegianboyEE wrote:VOTE: Marcistar
This feels the most likely to be scum cumulatively when looking at both worlds.
i agree
explain please.. what makes me most likely
Why do you agree?
wait, I missed this first go around, did you actually take 191 as a serious comment? Like are you saying you genuinely believe marcistar 'agrees' she's the most likely to be scum, moment before asking Norwee what he meant?
I wasn't sure, the answer I got makes me think it was more likely serious but still not sure.
In post 240, Lukewarm wrote:Marci the people in this lobby seem to take everything people say seriously. Not allowed to joke about being scummy in here
Spoiler:
Or they will elim you
nah i dont mind being sused, where i usually play im always sus no matter what i do so i just vibe with it
In post 239, Vanderscamp wrote:I'd like a little more detail about why you think that's the case.
Yes, I'll answer I'm scum because i've been joking around and not pushing for anything in particular. There's nothing really worthwhile for me to push, so me not really making any pushes at all is really sus. As well, one of the people who've seen my game as scum is saying i'm sus, so I am, since other people can pick up on my personality as scum way better than I can. I've been told before from where I play offsite that as scum, i'm very inactive and usually just think of short term, so that'll probably show up as well
In post 241, GuiltyLion wrote:wait, I missed this first go around, did you actually take 191 as a serious comment? Like are you saying you genuinely believe marcistar 'agrees' she's the most likely to be scum, moment before asking Norwee what he meant?
tbh he seems serious, so i just looked at myself from a tiny bit of a different pov i guess.
I'm guessing this is partially serious and partially a joke?
I'd be pretty interested to know how you would read yourself in this spot.
In post 6, Dunnstral wrote:NM being in the group of 3 is an anomoly. Is it because the deep scum is in the pool of 6 and NM is the other scum, or because they want to miselim NM in the smaller group?
VOTE: Bingle
This has serious reasoning on 1/3 of the small pool and a vote on a different 1/3 of the small pool.
If N_M flips scum, Dunn looks weird for having posted it and there's nothing to gain from having posted it. There's really nothing more that can be elaborated on there. Either you agree with the thought or you don't.
I very much disagree, I'm pretty neutral on the post but I actively dislike your analysis of it.
Dunn is not being bold here or giving serious reasoning, he is giving empty speculation without ever actually coming to a conclusion about it. I think this kind of analysis is super easy for scum to give because it sounds gamesolvey, but it doesn't actually take a stance or anything or advance the game. And the motivation to post it as scum is to sound like you are game solving when you actually aren't.
I don't think it's bold and I don't think it's serious reasoning, and what you said earlier about him calling one person scum in the pool and voting another person from the pool is not correct.
Post
Post #327 (isolation #32) » Wed May 12, 2021 8:34 pm
Postby Vanderscamp »
In post 270, Lukewarm wrote:So they thing I was thinking about, is that imo, the scum team would have put the scum they felt could comfortable dodge a day 1 elim into the 6p neighborhood, because that is an instant lose condition. This is Marci's first game outside of the Newbie cue, and there are 3 people in this game that just saw her scum game. It just seems like a needlessly dangerous choice to put scum!marci into the 6P team.
Norwee and Bingle both have played in this set up before, and would be aware of that danger, and both started the game by pushing for a vote in the 6P pool. Not_Mafia on the other hand, came in pushing for the Day 1 elim to be in the 3P pool, so there is a chance that he thought the better Day 1 elim dodger should go in the 3P pool if he expected town to start there. But then he just agreed with the growing suspicion on Marci.
The validity of this probably depends on how well Marci did as scum in that game, if Marci did worse than average or at least was not confident this is likely a good reason to townread Marci.
Thoughts from people who played in the scumMarci game?
Post
Post #328 (isolation #33) » Wed May 12, 2021 8:40 pm
Postby Vanderscamp »
In post 293, NorwegianboyEE wrote:Can everyone in the 6p hood share their read on Marcistar too? Because N_M and Bingle’s reads on her are 50/50 contaminated from my POV.
Outside of what lukewarm said, scummy, I don't like the fact that she is very willing to comment on anything to do with her but basically nothing about anyone else or the rest of the game.
Post
Post #331 (isolation #35) » Wed May 12, 2021 8:58 pm
Postby Vanderscamp »
You mean the stuff about Marci, right?
I feel like it's pretty likely that if lukewarm joined this game to encourage Marci to step out of the newbie queue (which I have no reason at all to doubt) then he's probably going to be buddying up with her as any combination of alignments. Was going to say it didn't feel like a S/S interaction from them before I remembered that isn't possible anyway.
I have a mild scum read on the defensiveness of the first paragraph of 317.
In post 270, Lukewarm wrote:So they thing I was thinking about, is that imo, the scum team would have put the scum they felt could comfortable dodge a day 1 elim into the 6p neighborhood, because that is an instant lose condition. This is Marci's first game outside of the Newbie cue, and there are 3 people in this game that just saw her scum game. It just seems like a needlessly dangerous choice to put scum!marci into the 6P team.
Norwee and Bingle both have played in this set up before, and would be aware of that danger, and both started the game by pushing for a vote in the 6P pool. Not_Mafia on the other hand, came in pushing for the Day 1 elim to be in the 3P pool, so there is a chance that he thought the better Day 1 elim dodger should go in the 3P pool if he expected town to start there. But then he just agreed with the growing suspicion on Marci.
The validity of this probably depends on how well Marci did as scum in that game, if Marci did worse than average or at least was not confident this is likely a good reason to townread Marci.
Thoughts from people who played in the scumMarci game?
Personally, I think Marci did a great job, but she does not seem confident in her ability as scum. Like I read through her Mafia Chat post game, and she is constantly apologizing to her partner(s) about not being any good. Calling herself "the worst scum ever" and saying that if they lose it will be all her fault. And there were messages like this throughout the entire game, and her partner(s) constantly assuring her she is doing great.
In conclusion, she is way better then she thinks, but I don't think she would put herself in a position to potentially auto-lose for her team.
Post
Post #341 (isolation #38) » Wed May 12, 2021 9:39 pm
Postby Vanderscamp »
In post 339, Lukewarm wrote:Okay, if we are all going to start town reading Marci, can we talk about how weird it is that Norwee would push her here?
Like he has the added benefit of having seen her play, so there is no "she uses emojis, so I can't trust her" - which is 100% something people have scumread her for lol
Do you think she's obviously different from last game?
Because that's the thing that would make it weird, I also think she sounds scummy so I don't mind it
In post 339, Lukewarm wrote:Okay, if we are all going to start town reading Marci, can we talk about how weird it is that Norwee would push her here?
Like he has the added benefit of having seen her play, so there is no "she uses emojis, so I can't trust her" - which is 100% something people have scumread her for lol
Do you think she's obviously different from last game?
Because that's the thing that would make it weird, I also think she sounds scummy so I don't mind it
Imo, she was a lot more active and asking more questions. I get the feeling that she feels a lot of pressure as scum to "not let her partner down", so tries a lot harder in that role. In our last game, she was TR by almost everyone pretty early in Day 1
Norwee had her as his #1 town read as of post 67, and he kept her as a town read even when he was sitting in the Ghost Chat. And post game said
In post 1111, NorwegianboyEE wrote:Sorry everyone, my reads were awful this game. I usually am not that bad, but Marcistar's style is one that just didn't ping me as scummy at all... Well played to them.
But if Norwegian got totally fooled by her last game, why would it be weird that he is hesitant to townread her again this game?
Post
Post #481 (isolation #43) » Sat May 15, 2021 2:28 pm
Postby Vanderscamp »
Re: the hopkirk/lukewarm case:
I think lukewarm's initial response was not great until page 18 where he stepped it up and responded pretty townily.
I like his confidence that he is right about this, especially stuff like the line about "I'm done arguing this and if I get voted out I get voted out"
I also don't agree with hopkirk that he has not been pushing the game forward this game.
Post
Post #483 (isolation #45) » Sat May 15, 2021 2:30 pm
Postby Vanderscamp »
In post 462, NorwegianboyEE wrote:442 is an interesting post.
I feel like it’s more likely to come from town tbh. But i haven’t liked their other "cases" recently on me/Hopkirk.
I’ll need to give this some more time. UNVOTE:
This is how I feel, I like Luke's latest defence of this stuff while disliking what he said previously
In post 449, Dunnstral wrote:I reread Vanderscamp, not feeling like voting there
why the hell is everyone townreading Vanderscamp this game?? I really can't remember a single post or comment he's made that has made me feel like he's earnestly game solving. I'm going to re-ISO him again after I respond to the posts we've had but I'm also asking myself this: if town!Vander, why am I the only person who has even looked his direction? Who is scum in either pool who's keeping Vander on the table as a potential mis-elimination today?
I don't agree that everyone has been townreading me?...
In post 331, Vanderscamp wrote:I feel like it's pretty likely that if lukewarm joined this game to encourage Marci to step out of the newbie queue (which I have no reason at all to doubt) then he's probably going to be buddying up with her as any combination of alignments.
Was going to say it didn't feel like a S/S interaction from them before I remembered that isn't possible anyway
.
I'm mulling over this comment on reread... I feel it's less likely town would forget who is in which pool and which interactions can or can't be S/S. I've had my fair share of poorly thought out comments/takes this game, but certainly the entire game I've been
constantly
paying attention to interactions cross-pool and keeping in mind potential scum candidates of each pool. I'm skeptical town!Vanders wouldn't really be aware that Marci/Luke can't be scum together 300+ posts into the game.
VOTE: Vanderscamp
I am aware, which is why I mentioned it.
I would be okay with this reason if I had actually forgotten what the pools were and then corrected it in some other post, but this feels like an extremely bad reason to scumread me since I am doing what you're saying I didn't.
I independently read their interactions as not scum together, and then I thought about what the pools were and realized that that didn't matter anyway.
In post 331, Vanderscamp wrote:I feel like it's pretty likely that if lukewarm joined this game to encourage Marci to step out of the newbie queue (which I have no reason at all to doubt) then he's probably going to be buddying up with her as any combination of alignments.
Was going to say it didn't feel like a S/S interaction from them before I remembered that isn't possible anyway
.
I'm mulling over this comment on reread... I feel it's less likely town would forget who is in which pool and which interactions can or can't be S/S. I've had my fair share of poorly thought out comments/takes this game, but certainly the entire game I've been
constantly
paying attention to interactions cross-pool and keeping in mind potential scum candidates of each pool. I'm skeptical town!Vanders wouldn't really be aware that Marci/Luke can't be scum together 300+ posts into the game.
VOTE: Vanderscamp
is this the only point you have on him?
No.
I already called out that 147 combined with 150 looks like fake reasoning to me - he's giving reasons to scumread both N_M and Lukewarm but not paying any attention as to whether those scumreads made sense together.
I didn't feel like his vote on you had any conviction or intent to solve.
The strongest/most meaningful content he's posted has been about Bingle, his questionable reasoning about both the Dunn & Norway slots, but it's rather easy for me to imagine that content being either a) scum!Vanders jumping on a townie making illogical/reachy assertions without justifying why those assertions indicate
scum
alignment or b) scum!Vanders distancing/bussing a buddy!Bingle. He's also just holistically been pretty inactive this game, he hasn't bothered to fight harder against the thread consensus to eliminate in the 6p despite his strongest SR being Bingle, and he hasn't taken a lead or a stake in substantially building nor defusing any wagons.
Given that it's D1 and he's played pretty careful, I don't have any surefire scumtells to nail him on, but the overall profile of his posting and votes this game vibes very much to me like scum treading water and trying to let town eat itself up in the meantime.
This feels extremely disingenuous
I've responded to your case about 147 and 150 already, can you respond to what I said about it?
I independently read both n_m and lukewarm as scummy for different reasons. I marginally agree with your reasoning that they are less likely to be together, but I don't think it's impossible for them to be together, and I'm not going to not read something I think is scummy as scummy because someone else who I read as scummy is having an interaction with them that makes them less likely s/s. I would much rather read someone based on how I'm actually reading them than conditional reads of players I don't know the alignment of that may be wrong anyway. Do you disagree?
Re: bingle it is pretty obvious why the stuff I said about him is actively scummy rather than just null. From what people have said, Bingle is obvious a pretty veteran player and if he has obviously crap takes about posts, I'm not willing to give him the benefit of the doubt about and think that he is potentially just a bad townie who would not know any better since he clearly isn't.
It's also ridiculous to say that I haven't pushed harder against killing into the big pool, I have probably said more than any other player in this game about which pool is better to kill into
In post 22, NorwegianboyEE wrote:Ok, i'm on a keyboard finally.
So my first nuanced thought is that it would be weird for Bingle to put himself in the 3P hood as scum when he was put in it as town in the last game and saw how bad it went for Skitter. I feel like Bingle would see himself as a much better player than me or N_M so for him to put himself in there seems really bold. N_M however, might feasibly do it for the memes.
But whatever i think we should eliminate in the 6P hood. Because then we can win in day 1 just like the last time Divide and Conquered was hosted.
I still maintain that it's marginally better to kill into the small pool first, but more important is just to vote the person we think is most likely scum.
But it's imo definitely wrong to want to prefer killing into the big pool, we will win just as easily by killing the scummiest player in the big pool and being right on D4 as we will on D1.
In post 39, Lukewarm wrote:My gut reaction to this set up, is that it makes more sense to eliminate from the 3 person neighborhood, unless someone from the 6 person neighborhood really stands out as a scum read.
We did the math last game on killing into the different pools and there was something like a 4% increase in win rate by going small pool first, practically I think it is even better because it ensures one mafia dead at some point in the game, which I think is a lot more valuable than the zero value that an assumption of random killing attributes to it.
But last game the scummiest person was the scum in the big pool and we just killed them D1 for an easy game.
In post 39, Lukewarm wrote:My gut reaction to this set up, is that it makes more sense to eliminate from the 3 person neighborhood, unless someone from the 6 person neighborhood really stands out as a scum read.
We did the math last game on killing into the different pools and there was something like a 4% increase in win rate by going small pool first, practically I think it is even better because it ensures one mafia dead at some point in the game, which I think is a lot more valuable than the zero value that an assumption of random killing attributes to it.
But last game the scummiest person was the scum in the big pool and we just killed them D1 for an easy game.
In post 39, Lukewarm wrote:My gut reaction to this set up, is that it makes more sense to eliminate from the 3 person neighborhood, unless someone from the 6 person neighborhood really stands out as a scum read.
We did the math last game on killing into the different pools and there was something like a 4% increase in win rate by going small pool first, practically I think it is even better because it ensures one mafia dead at some point in the game, which I think is a lot more valuable than the zero value that an assumption of random killing attributes to it.
But last game the scummiest person was the scum in the big pool and we just killed them D1 for an easy game.
In post 102, Lukewarm wrote:I have reconsidered, and I think I am on now leaning towards voting from within the 6 player neighborhood now.
I think I have come to the conclusion that shooting in the 6p neighborhood is better even if we miss Day 1
There is just a much higher reward for hunting within the 6p Mafia
If we vote wrong the mafia kill likely lands in the group of 6, making it easier to figure out
I actually agree that getting out the 3-person hood mafia today makes the game harder than miseliming in the 6 person hood
Going to try to not respond to every single one of these but this stance is absurd
Why?
Because miskilling D1 almost always does not make the game easier than killing correctly.
I think the point you are trying to make is that killing into the big pool first, missing, and getting another NK in there makes solving that pool easier, but I don't think that is close to worth the value of not having to solve the small pool first.
The small pool scum is NOT someone we can just freely guarantee being able to kill if we kill aggressively into the big pool and do badly.
In post 39, Lukewarm wrote:My gut reaction to this set up, is that it makes more sense to eliminate from the 3 person neighborhood, unless someone from the 6 person neighborhood really stands out as a scum read.
We did the math last game on killing into the different pools and there was something like a 4% increase in win rate by going small pool first, practically I think it is even better because it ensures one mafia dead at some point in the game, which I think is a lot more valuable than the zero value that an assumption of random killing attributes to it.
But last game the scummiest person was the scum in the big pool and we just killed them D1 for an easy game.
In post 102, Lukewarm wrote:I have reconsidered, and I think I am on now leaning towards voting from within the 6 player neighborhood now.
I think I have come to the conclusion that shooting in the 6p neighborhood is better even if we miss Day 1
There is just a much higher reward for hunting within the 6p Mafia
If we vote wrong the mafia kill likely lands in the group of 6, making it easier to figure out
I actually agree that getting out the 3-person hood mafia today makes the game harder than miseliming in the 6 person hood
Going to try to not respond to every single one of these but this stance is absurd
Why?
Because miskilling D1 almost always does not make the game easier than killing correctly.
I think the point you are trying to make is that killing into the big pool first, missing, and getting another NK in there makes solving that pool easier, but I don't think that is close to worth the value of not having to solve the small pool first.
The small pool scum is NOT someone we can just freely guarantee being able to kill if we kill aggressively into the big pool and do badly.
In post 39, Lukewarm wrote:My gut reaction to this set up, is that it makes more sense to eliminate from the 3 person neighborhood, unless someone from the 6 person neighborhood really stands out as a scum read.
We did the math last game on killing into the different pools and there was something like a 4% increase in win rate by going small pool first, practically I think it is even better because it ensures one mafia dead at some point in the game, which I think is a lot more valuable than the zero value that an assumption of random killing attributes to it.
But last game the scummiest person was the scum in the big pool and we just killed them D1 for an easy game.
So I looked back at the last game.
It is interesting that you site back that the math was done in the last game, without acknowledging that Bingle was the one that did the math, and that he was town that game, and that he also concluded that it was still better to shoot in the 6P pool.
I have been informed by a monkey that I should treat Bingle's mechanical talk as gospel, regardless of his alignment, but here I can clearly see that ConfirmedTown Bingle made the case that shooting from the 6P pool first is the better strategy.
IIRC Bingle did some initial math which was very wrong, I went back and corrected the math and we both agreed that the correct numbers were something along the lines of 41% town win rate vs 45% town win rate by killing into big pool first and little pool first respectively.
From a math standpoint it's definitely better to kill into the small pool first, bingle and some other people made some arguments about why killing into the big pool first was better that I don't agree with since I think they mostly make assumptions about things being good that are actually neutral.
I don't mind killing into the big pool first if the scummiest person in the game is there but I will advocate very strongly for not avoiding killing into the small pool today just because it is the small pool.
In post 39, Lukewarm wrote:My gut reaction to this set up, is that it makes more sense to eliminate from the 3 person neighborhood, unless someone from the 6 person neighborhood really stands out as a scum read.
We did the math last game on killing into the different pools and there was something like a 4% increase in win rate by going small pool first, practically I think it is even better because it ensures one mafia dead at some point in the game, which I think is a lot more valuable than the zero value that an assumption of random killing attributes to it.
But last game the scummiest person was the scum in the big pool and we just killed them D1 for an easy game.
In post 102, Lukewarm wrote:I have reconsidered, and I think I am on now leaning towards voting from within the 6 player neighborhood now.
I think I have come to the conclusion that shooting in the 6p neighborhood is better even if we miss Day 1
There is just a much higher reward for hunting within the 6p Mafia
If we vote wrong the mafia kill likely lands in the group of 6, making it easier to figure out
I actually agree that getting out the 3-person hood mafia today makes the game harder than miseliming in the 6 person hood
Going to try to not respond to every single one of these but this stance is absurd
Why?
Because miskilling D1 almost always does not make the game easier than killing correctly.
I think the point you are trying to make is that killing into the big pool first, missing, and getting another NK in there makes solving that pool easier, but I don't think that is close to worth the value of not having to solve the small pool first.
The small pool scum is NOT someone we can just freely guarantee being able to kill if we kill aggressively into the big pool and do badly.
In post 39, Lukewarm wrote:My gut reaction to this set up, is that it makes more sense to eliminate from the 3 person neighborhood, unless someone from the 6 person neighborhood really stands out as a scum read.
We did the math last game on killing into the different pools and there was something like a 4% increase in win rate by going small pool first, practically I think it is even better because it ensures one mafia dead at some point in the game, which I think is a lot more valuable than the zero value that an assumption of random killing attributes to it.
But last game the scummiest person was the scum in the big pool and we just killed them D1 for an easy game.
So I looked back at the last game.
It is interesting that you site back that the math was done in the last game, without acknowledging that Bingle was the one that did the math, and that he was town that game, and that he also concluded that it was still better to shoot in the 6P pool.
I have been informed by a monkey that I should treat Bingle's mechanical talk as gospel, regardless of his alignment, but here I can clearly see that ConfirmedTown Bingle made the case that shooting from the 6P pool first is the better strategy.
IIRC Bingle did some initial math which was very wrong, I went back and corrected the math and we both agreed that the correct numbers were something along the lines of 41% town win rate vs 45% town win rate by killing into big pool first and little pool first respectively.
From a math standpoint it's definitely better to kill into the small pool first, bingle and some other people made some arguments about why killing into the big pool first was better that I don't agree with since I think they mostly make assumptions about things being good that are actually neutral.
I don't mind killing into the big pool first if the scummiest person in the game is there but I will advocate very strongly for not avoiding killing into the small pool today just because it is the small pool.
In post 223, Dunnstral wrote:The reason I say that is because if we correctly eliminate in the 3 person pool today, the next 2 nightkills are going to be the other 2 in that pool
If we eliminate in the 6p pool today, and start from the 3p pool tomorrow, I think we have better odds, including if they take the 3p pool down to 2
The important thing is that if we lynch correctly into the 3p pool, we have an extra kill we can use and about a 56% chance of winning from there.
If we miskill into the big pool first and then start aiming for the small pool first we get three shots into essentially a pool of three and a pool of what will be either three or four, but needing to find two scum, which is definitely not better.
I can math it out, but hopefully it's clear?
Post
Post #495 (isolation #55) » Sat May 15, 2021 2:54 pm
Postby Vanderscamp »
I'm happy to keep spamming the thread about killing into the small pool not being a non-viable option, I like talking about this stuff, but given there were three votes on bingle for a while it didn't seem like the entire thread was actively averse to it.
Post
Post #498 (isolation #58) » Sat May 15, 2021 3:04 pm
Postby Vanderscamp »
Of the small pool I think Norwegian is towny and bingle and n_m are both scummy.
I strongly dislike bingle saying he's willing to hammer me, last game (where we were both town) he had a strong town read on me, I think GL's reasons on me here are decently worse than the cases made against me last game (with the exception of pooky's) and I don't believe he'd randomly be happy to hammer me here on the assumption that we're somehow going to kill a couple people that there is not a lot of strong consensus towards.
I would kill Dunn pretty happily in the big pool because of the complete lack of content, I read Marci as town from the meta about which pool she would be in despite reading her content as scummy.
I think I like lukewarm now, I'm null on hopkirk and I dislike GL pretty much exclusively because of his reasons for wanting to kill me.
Post
Post #524 (isolation #59) » Sat May 15, 2021 9:05 pm
Postby Vanderscamp »
In post 502, NorwegianboyEE wrote:And like Marcistar said, apparently Bingle thought it was a 50/50% chance either N_M or me could be scum with Hopkirk, his pet scumread. But now he is 100% sure it’s me and Hopkirk to the extent he will quickhammer someone he townreads just to eliminate us? Thst’s some scummy garbage. VOTE: Bingle
I agree with this
I'd like to hear what bingle thinks is different about me this game vs last game which would justify him being willing to hammer me here.