Open 893 - 09:12 - Postgame

[Alianna]

1.09

Votecount 1.09

Cobblerfone (2): imaginality, ssbm_Kyouko
ssbm_Kyouko (1): Elements
Gamma Emerald (1): Cobblerfone
Elements (1): Puffalicious
imaginality (1): Mizuki

Not Voting (3): shaddowez, Gamma Emerald, Thomith

With 9 players alive, it takes 5 votes to secure an execution.

The day deadline is in (expired on 2023-11-26 23:23:15).

[imaginality]

I did not like imaginality's catch up. The wallpost looked like the kind of post scum would make to fake a read and it looked like he was pairing Cobb's and me as scum buddies. Pairing 2 players as scum I consider it scum trying to setup chain mislim. The part where imaginality said where I was rewarding a town read made no sense to me.

- A

Only would be a chain mislim if Cobb (or you) are scum otherwise it fails as soon as one flips town. So are you saying you're sure Cobb is scum?

This attempt at insinuating that Puff has knowledge they shouldn't feels like a stretch to me...

I couldn't see why they would think I'd be able to push to get one of them mislimmed D2 if the other flipped town D1. And so if Puff were town I assumed they were meaning I'd want to tie them to a Cobb scumflip. But I think I misunderstood what they meant

[Puffalicious]

I did not like imaginality's catch up. The wallpost looked like the kind of post scum would make to fake a read and it looked like he was pairing Cobb's and me as scum buddies. Pairing 2 players as scum I consider it scum trying to setup chain mislim. The part where imaginality said where I was rewarding a town read made no sense to me.

- A

Only would be a chain mislim if Cobb (or you) are scum otherwise it fails as soon as one flips town. So are you saying you're sure Cobb is scum?

This attempt at insinuating that Puff has knowledge they shouldn't feels like a stretch to me...

I couldn't see why they would think I'd be able to push to get one of them mislimmed D2 if the other flipped town D1. And so if Puff were town I assumed they were meaning I'd want to tie them to a Cobb scumflip. But I think I misunderstood what they meant

You are right. If Cobb flipped scum, I thought you wanted to tie us as scum and if Cobb flipped town it did look like faking a read by pairing us both together. If you had a scum read on me and Cobb individually I could have seen it coming from any alignment.

- A

[Mizuki]

Think Imaginality's catchup is townie. I still think I have too many townvibes at the moment, so I'm fairly uncertain of that statement, but I also think I just still want to get Cobb today, so:

VOTE: Cobblerfone

[Mizuki]

Like part of me says that their right and I am tunneling their but I also just read back and fail to find anything I like about the slot. Don't like the posts, don't like where the vote has been, don't like the reasoning for those votes, etc.

[Alianna]

Enchant replaces shaddowez.

[Enchant]

Enchant

[Cobblerfone]

Plurality is not enabled in this game

I must have read that wrong.

Honestly, the reason why I'm a little confused is because the votes happened, but the reasoning for them had to be drawn out of Mizuki and Elements, rather than mentioned when the votes originally happened.
I could be reading too much into this though.

IMO that doesn't matter as much on its own. More important if subsequent

What do you mean by this - more important if "subsequent"

I meant "more important if there's a pattern of behavior". I think I intended to write "more important if subsequent posts are similar"? brain fart

-SNIP-

On the statistics stuff from Cobb:
Clearly the stats are wrong, and not just a little bit. But I have a weird hunch that in a {Puff, Cobb} scenario this could have been a good way to get off the Puff wagon and cause a bunch of noise and pointless content. (For example 188 feels like it could be pure chaff.)

In the end everyone agrees the stats were wrong but the time and attention taken has meanwhile helped shift focus away from Puff and also makes it look like Cobb unvoted from mistaken logic rather than the timing of the unvote coming under more question.

Whether that theory has weight, given Puff was only at E-2 not E-1, I'm not sure. Like I say, more just gut feel (reinforced a little by Cobb's recent posts being quite thought out which makes the stats error a little less plausible).

Why is puff town if I'm town? If you scumread me for trying to divert pressure from Puff because they're my alleged partner, and you scumread Puff for both my defense of them and for at least one other reason (being dismissive of townreads), doesn't it make more sense to vote Puff? Using this same reasoning, you could be scum trying to establish an illogical connection between a town player (myself) and your scum-partner Puff. This is dangerously poor logic, unless you have other reasons to vote me, I've missed. I'm a CS major; I'm bad at doing math in my head but my logic is generally sound.

The first bolded sentence makes it sound like currently relevant as a justification for townreading Mizuki for scumreading you. The second bolded quote makes it sound like distant past. Which is it?

This is my first game on this site in years. So it is both the set of "my most recent mafiascum games" AND the distant past.

On to setup speculation analysis to see if imaginality's comment on the hypoclaiming stuff makes sense or not

[Cobblerfone]

I did briefly consider if hypoclaiming (everyone picks a town role off the clock and then claims a target/result at the beginning of D2, the actual town PR's could claim their real results and then if they die) would be useful here, and I think it might be

unless the clock specifically landed on 5.

Would require everyone to be on board with it, though.

Can you expand on this? I hadn't considered hypoclaiming before you pointed that out, but now that you have I've noticed something. (waiting to post it for now)

Quoting the quote for conciseness. I had misremembered -- Mizuki brought up hypoclaiming first.

Okay, reasonable enough. I think any protectives hypoclaiming would feed more info to scum anyways.

I do think there is merit to hypoclaiming the roles adjacent to Mafia Rolecop - that is located on 3 and 9 so hypoclaiming as though you are one of 2, 4, 8, or 10 could work. It would not give mafia any more information about the roles in the setup than they already have, though they could fish out VTs that provide a result they know to be false. For example if scum!Mizuki performs the NK and I claim Followed Mizuki, she went nowhere - then scum!Mizuki would know I'm not a real Follower. Possibly I could still be a protective hypoclaiming as investigative but scum would know I can't guilty them in that scenario.

However, this post shows what I was remembering earlier about why I had a townread on Kyouko. Expressing unprompted concern about the protectives hypoclaiming feeding more info to scum in a naive hypo-claim scenario where all roles truthfully claim their hypoclaims (protectives hypoclaims their targets, gives scum more info about who to not target, because protective are more likely to re-target their targets, at least more than investigatives). But she doesn't just poo-poo the idea, she comes up with a better alternative.

That is a point against it but also Maf already have a 50/50 shot of guessing the exact setup since they can infer it from their PR.

on the subject of "bad" statistics, you are in good company

-SNIP-

Eh I think hypo might be viable if claiming target but not role/result

not bad when combined with Kyouko's

I think the ideal play for D2 is to do a pre-hypoclaim "categorical" claim where everyone claims whether or not they have a hard guilty. A hard guilty here would be a Rolecop that discovers a Rolecop/Roleblocker, or a Follower that sees their target kill. Assuming everyone claims they do NOT have a guilty, then we can proceed to hypoclaiming as though we are all one of the 4 roles that surrounds Mafia Rolecop. This will allow anyone who is actually on 2/4/8/10 to claim their results for post-flip analysis without giving too much away to scum in the moment. On the plus side, in the case of a hard guilty, there is a 50% chance that the other TPR is a protective that can save the player that claimed the hard guilty for more results D3 onward.

So the idea is claim hard guilty or no, if no hard guilty, then hypoclaim investigatives?

Okay, reasonable enough. I think any protectives hypoclaiming would feed more info to scum anyways.

I do think there is merit to hypoclaiming the roles adjacent to Mafia Rolecop - that is located on 3 and 9 so hypoclaiming as though you are one of 2, 4, 8, or 10 could work. It would not give mafia any more information about the roles in the setup than they already have, though they could fish out VTs that provide a result they know to be false. For example if scum!Mizuki performs the NK and I claim Followed Mizuki, she went nowhere - then scum!Mizuki would know I'm not a real Follower. Possibly I could still be a protective hypoclaiming as investigative but scum would know I can't guilty them in that scenario.

This strat isn’t great because based on the one player that is on 1/5/7/11 mafia can solve the setup

Those players are meant to fakeclaim the way a VT would during the hypoclaim and pretend they are a 2/4/8/10. Post-flip of the 1/5/7/11 they might know the exact setup if they can POE the actual result of an unflipped 2/4/8/10 from amongst the hypoclaims but I think as long as everyone sticks to 2/4/8/10 it should be +EV for town

All this hypoclaim business is most likely only ideal if we see VT Elim > VT NK btw. If something else happens it will need to be rethought based on the info available.

I'm not sure I follow the Gamma/Kyouko exchange here. But if we get a mafia flip, surely hypoclaiming is stronger? but yeah if we get a PR elim and/or NK everything changes.

[Gamma Emerald]

*sips*

[ssbm_Kyouko]

Hypoclaiming plan, in summary, assuming a town PR is not dead by morning of D2:

Everyone in turn claims whether they have a hard guilty or not

If nobody has a hard guilty, everyone hypoclaims as though they are one of the roles on 2/4/8/10 on the clock in the setup. When hypoclaiming, make sure the result you are claiming could be legit, like if you're pretending to be on 2 dont claim as though a 7 is in the game because it's not possible from 2's POV. Every hypoclaim needs to be believable so it can't be used to POE the TPRs. Also dont hypoclaim a guilty because we're checking for guilties before the hypoclaim so that will also out you as a VT. It is very important that any TPR on 1/5/7/11 claims as though they are on 2/4/8/10 otherwise this would obviously expose you.

Benefits of claiming the guilty first before any hypoclaims is half the time the other TPR is one that can protect the investigative TPR that claimed, and by claiming guilty first, the protective has not outed themselves

Benefits of claiming on 2/4/8/10 is that it does not give scum any info about the setup before flips unless someone claims an inno on scum where scum knows a real PR would have a guilty. In this case it helps scum POE into PR kills/wagons

Benefit of 1/5/7/11 claiming as a 2/4/8/10 - 1/5/7/11s do not have the ability to hard guilty anyone and it is still possible to crumb your actual result/target by using the hypoclaim. For example a doctor could say they tracked X nowhere and after that doctor flips, we can probably assume X was doctored if it would make sense from flipped doctor's POV to guard X. I don't think that 1/5/7/11s necessarily should crumb what they did because oftentimes it won't amount to a hard guilty or hard inno.

This is all recapped on mobile without referencing the setup clock but I think it should be accurate

[ssbm_Kyouko]

I guess I can extend that to say if a VT and a 1/5/7/11 TPR are dead on D2 this still works, also I think it's still good if we eliminate scum toDay. Eliminating scum or scum PR toDay might allow for more ways to guilty overNight too, not sure without checking the setup

[Cobblerfone]

Woke up early today and my mind got locked on the game. I guess sleep really does help process stuff. I didn't vote him yesterday because I wanted to make sure it wasn't just emotion fueling my vote, but I realized something: who are Imaginality's top scum reads? The two players who got to E-2 and the V/LA Enchant slot everyone else is also suspicious of by default. Why vote me when the only reason he gives for me being scum is that I was allegedly trying to defend scum!Puff? I think Imaginality is scum who decided in advance who he was going to vote: the non-RVS wagon of the day, so they go looking for reasons to vote me. But there's a problem, the only potentially scummy thing I've done is divert pressure off of Puff's wagon -- but it's only scummy if Puff is mafia. But he doesn't vote Puff despite having more reasons to vote them, instead he votes for me. Why? There are two possibilities: either Puff is mafia and he's voting me trying to manufacture evidence that Puff is town (he said that if I'm town, then Puff is town) OR Puff is town (more likely given Puff's pushback) and he's voting me because

I

was one of Puff's three votes AND Puff's wagon was mostly RVS.

VOTE: imaginality

[Cobblerfone]

Kyouko continues to be town

[Enchant]

lol cobberfone mafia

[Thomith]

lol cobberfone mafia

Why do you think that?

[Enchant]

VOTE: ssbm_Kyouko

[Thomith]

What's going on...

[Elements]

What's going on...

Enchant is here
That's what's going on

[Thomith]

Readslist:

Yay!

Thomith
Elements
Mizuki
Kyouko
Gamma
Puff
Shadow
Cobb

Nay!

This reads list gives me bad vibes and I'm not entirely sure why.
I agree with what Cobb has said a little, it feels like the 4 "scummiest" on the list have either already had a decent amount of suspicion on them, or haven't been posting walls so I could see this list maybe coming from a Mafia member trying to set up Mislims against people they think they potentially could out argue.

[Mizuki]

for those unaware

Enchant auto-hammers at E-1 so careful running people up who you don't want to get quickhammered.

Readslist:

Yay!

Thomith
Elements
Mizuki
Kyouko
Gamma
Puff
Shadow
Cobb

Nay!

This reads list gives me bad vibes and I'm not entirely sure why.
I agree with what Cobb has said a little, it feels like the 4 "scummiest" on the list have either already had a decent amount of suspicion on them, or haven't been posting walls so I could see this list maybe coming from a Mafia member trying to set up Mislims against people they think they potentially could out argue.

I sort of agree in the sense that I usually think replacements have a fresher perspective on the game and are therefore more likely to go against the grain of thought, and imaginality's mostly just gone along with everyone else

But also you could just apply Occam's Razor here and if both replace-in's find Cobb scummy I think he just is.

[Puffalicious]

VOTE: imaginality

- A

[Thomith]

It's not specifically that they find Cobb scummy - all 4 of their "scummiest" players seem like they could come from opportunistic scum.
Like it almost feel like the list is ordered from hardest to argue a lim for to easiest to argue a lim for, which has given me a bad gut feeling towards it.

[Puffalicious]

I've never played with Enchant and thanks for letting us now that he auto hammers at E-1.

- A

[Thomith]

I've never played with Enchant and thanks for letting us now that he auto hammers at E-1.

- A

Is that actually true?