Forum Mafia - Shawshank Redemption - Salvation lies within

[m_leonhard]

Btw, since I seemingly have to spell everything out:

An example of a good set of facts: Players x and y were seen visiting player z. Player z dies. Good double lynch candidates.

An example of a bad set of facts: Last game, player 1 (now player q in the present game) was scummy. Player p has been quieter this game. Bad double lynch candidates.

[the_paul]

Sure, that makes sense.
What you're saying here is more like 'a double-lynch isn't realistic' than 'a double-lynch isn't optimal', but I can follow that for sure. I'm approaching this with a mountainous (no power-roles) mindset, but in a game with hardclaims and counterclaims etc. taking control of the lynch, I can see why the cost of getting to the double-lynch is higher than any benefit the double-lynch could bring.


I wouldn't lynch you, because your response here seems like a town response. I'm more likely to hit scum then I would be on balance; I'm saying the random lynch isn't realistic and our odds are way better than that.

Now this is asinine.
You think that all of scum, and almost exclusively scum, would be on the train of a townie, but not on the train of a scum, or what? You're assuming scum are in whatever lynch goes forth?
Scum are aware of this and can just not all vote as a group. They can pursue organically crafted cases just like you can.

If scum is trying to force a lynch on someone that's not founded on anything real, you can see that happen in real time, call them out on it, and lynch them that day without wasting a mislynch on whoever they're chasing.

Maybe we're arguing semantics here, and maybe we both need to clarify our stances. My issue is with you wanting to drum up support to force a double lynch day 1 right off the bat, and maybe I'm putting words in your mouth in that regard. To play the hypothetical game, if Jessup and Beast were both acting really shady and at each other's throats, and the theory was that for sure 1 of them is scum, I'm all for a double lynch in a situation like that. My point is that a double lynch just for the sake of a double lynch does not make any sense to me.

To your other point, no I don't think any mafia team that has competent players would all pile onto 1 wagon. But there will almost definitively be some scum on any townie lynch. It just tightens the net on who needs to have pressure applied to them. If we had a devastating double townie lynch day 1, the net would not be that much tighter. Like you said, some people on those wagons are going to be less suspicious, but that's still a wide net and down 2 townies in a game of this size would be a difficult hole to dig ourselves out of.

I agree with your bolded section, but my concern would be that if we had agreed to manufacture a double lynch before the game even really got going, we are most likely going to end up lynching somebody for no reason. Shit, it's day 1, any "evidence" we use for a lynch is tenuous at best. If we were going to double lynch just to double lynch, I don't think we would end up with 2 cases that we felt very strongly about. After reading the post I quoted above, I'm pretty sure we actually agree on more than it seemed like, and we've spent our time arguing over semantics. If I've misconstrued your argument and wasted time, that's on me.

Wark, it feels like we should probably let this phase run. Halp is usually pretty active and hasn't posted at all, PartyFalcon has yet to write an essay, and Exalt hasn't mentioned occam's razor 1 time. If none of those things have happened yet, has this game even really started?

[the_paul]

Also I started writing that post an hour ago before my contractor showed up. Hopefully I didn't inadvertently parrot somebody who posted while I was dealing with him

[the_paul]

bleh, I'm retarded
the_paul why would you ever believe someone's D1 roleclaim anyway? If you can dodge the lynch by roleclaiming, then all townies are obligated to fakeclaim a powerrole if they're about to be lynched since otherwise they're letting a townie die (and a not-townie not-die) for no benefit. After all, if you're alive it's not like you can't admit the claim was fake on D2 or whatever, if you're killed it doesn't matter, and nobody sane is going to hold it against you that you posted an obviously fake roleclaim on D1.
The answer to the world of D1 panic claims is to ignore them any lynch people anyway. Then people won't do it because it doesn't save them. If you're aiming for scum you're less likely to have the problem of being on a town PR in the first place.

I'm not sure I ever believe anybody's roleclaim 100% until there is ironclad evidence, and even then I'm a cynic and always think of ways they could be scum. But my point was from the perspective of someone on the scum team, if somebody had to claim doctor or something to avoid getting lynched day 1, as scum that person would be on my shortlist of targets that night. Scum knows who else is scum, and townies rarely lie about having a specific power role, especially this early in the game, so if I were scum I'd feel good about targeting that person in the night phase. Or, as has been known to happen here, someone roleclaims or hints at something early in the game, and someone else comes flying into the thread to say NO I AM FLAVOR NAME, TOWN DOCTOR, THIS GUY IS LYING, and just like that we have power roles in the open. On this forum you have to be prepared to develop your strategies around the lowest common denominator unfortunately, and we have some players who are very fond of day 1 roleclaims as town power roles.

[WillBy]

Trying to quote your message literally crashed chrome on my phone, so I apologize for not multi quoting. On post #135
You guys are arguing against double lynch for the wrong reason. For some reason everyone is comfortable lynching one townie, but two is too far? I agree we shouldnt, but it's not because we might lynch a townie. It's because the relative advantage and knowledge gained by a single lynch over a no-lynch is much better than that of a double lynch over a single lynch. Scum can hide much easier between the two lynches and can coordinate and control the lynches.

I agree that double lynches can be situationally good. But putting someone on the chopping block for suggesting it, and that alone, is not enough to justify a vote. But I guess that's just my opinion/my vote.

Finally, switching his vote off you to push a double vote is 100% the right move. If he knows hes townie, then he has a (4)/14 chance to nab scum. Especially considering its beast hes voting. Then there's the added benefit that someone who doesnt want a double lynch flips to beast. If hes scum, like you said, he would still want a double lynch. But it's the right move for him either way.

[m_leonhard]

Especially considering its beast hes voting.

WillBy I'm a bit confused by your position right now but I think we're on the same page. Post #116: you question why we would want a double lynch without more information. Post #134: you acknowledge that it's easier for scum to manipulate double lynches. Which you also acknowledge in your most recent post. I think we agree on this. Without more information, it's easy for scum to manipulate. I also agree, a no lynch is the worse than a bad lynch simply for the lack of any information gained. A bad double lynch, isn't worth the information that it would provide. We're on the same page on this one.

I'm not putting Scarlet on the chopping block solely because he has suggested a double lynch. I'm putting him on the chopping block because he has insisted on a blind double lynch with no evidence to back it up at all.

I know this will get construed as me defending Beast, so I want to make clear: I AM NOT defending beast. But....why beast? Beast has literally said all of three things in this game. Is this some other random meta gaming shit? So what if prior games left a "bad taste" (to quote Kassius), that was a different game. I know nothing about him in this game at this point and his decision to vote for you, Willby, seems based on about as much evidence as everyone else has proffered. So, why do you think Beast? Based on the terms of this game. I'm genuinely asking.

[scarlet]

Maybe we're arguing semantics here, and maybe we both need to clarify our stances. My issue is with you wanting to drum up support to force a double lynch day 1 right off the bat, and maybe I'm putting words in your mouth in that regard.

A bit of both.

An actual, directed, town-controlled double lynch will never happen, because we have players who have literally never posted in the thread, a huge number of mostly inactive players, and exactly tying votes between two players requires the entire town to be actively engaged and present at end of day.

A double lynch is a great tool for hitting an anti-town townie and a scum at the same time (I'm gonna go ahead and say that any townie that get's lynched D1 is doing the town a disservice). It'd also be great for cases where there were e.g. multiple scum teams.

It's not realistically possible to lynch two scum on the same team by tying votes anyway (if they're not offline), because they can seesaw the lynch between the two of them by voting for one or the other and having the player with more votes vote for a random townie so the vote totals are uneven.

The only player who talked about this (who was heavily involved in the discussion) was the_paul, and willby brought up scum's opportunity for vote manipulation multiple times.
Voth kinda touched on vote manipulation but was pretty scattered in general, and it was way less explicit.

PPE:
wow what a bad time to get interrupted
I'll say what I was gonna say anyway:
m_leonhard chasing literally only this without doing anything else in the thread is terrible
The counterpoint would be Voth, who jumped out of mechanical discussion because he didn't think it was going to help him find scum and tried to make a case somewhere else. It's not an amazing case, but it's not literally nothing which is what leonhard has done.
m_leonhard It's not realistic that I'd be lynched today. Who do you plan to go after next? Who's next on your list of scum? Why haven't you said anything about them yet?

[Vehicle]

OK I've caught up and I'm leaving my vote on scarlet.

My original vote was a throwaway because it was early in the phase (but exalt is right that I shouldn't be saying I don't want to read in a mafia game) and I said as much, but now I think I smell a rat.

The past 4 pages have been arguing over process not substance, led mostly by scarlet. This isn't about scarlet's desire for a double-lynch, it's about the 4 pages of misdirection that I've waded through. Remember last game when scarlet was town and he was asking random players random questions to try to gain information? How come that scarlet's gone and instead he just wants to argue over strategy?

I may be open to voting for Beast or m_Leo instead, but for now my vote stays on scarlet. Beast always plays weird with these sporadic posts that border on nonsense and are rarely helpful, so I don't really put any stock in that. M_Leo did hop on the Willby wagon pretty quickly too, so that's why I say him. But I like my read of scarlet more than either of these two.

I'm busy at work but I'll check back before 7. kthx, I vote we end phase today. A 4-day Day 1 just seems too long to me.

[WillBy]

WillBy I'm a bit confused by your position right now but I think we're on the same page. Post #116: you question why we would want a double lynch without more information. Post #134: you acknowledge that it's easier for scum to manipulate double lynches. Which you also acknowledge in your most recent post. I think we agree on this. Without more information, it's easy for scum to manipulate. I also agree, a no lynch is the worse than a bad lynch simply for the lack of any information gained. A bad double lynch, isn't worth the information that it would provide. We're on the same page on this one.

I'm not putting Scarlet on the chopping block solely because he has suggested a double lynch. I'm putting him on the chopping block because he has insisted on a blind double lynch with no evidence to back it up at all.

I know this will get construed as me defending Beast, so I want to make clear: I AM NOT defending beast. But....why beast? Beast has literally said all of three things in this game. Is this some other random meta gaming shit? So what if prior games left a "bad taste" (to quote Kassius), that was a different game. I know nothing about him in this game at this point and his decision to vote for you, Willby, seems based on about as much evidence as everyone else has proffered. So, why do you think Beast? Based on the terms of this game. I'm genuinely asking.

We agree on double lynches, but I wouldnt say scarlet has insisted on it. He only change his vote to make a double lynch once, and I already covered why anyone should do the same. He has only continued to argue in favor of it, which seems like just his personality. At this point, I'd like to let him clarify his position. He'll do better than I can.

Regarding Beast, ill repeat the two reasons to vote him:

1. Beast has misplayed in his only (as far as I can recall) post this game, taking the bait from exalt. It shows he hasnt read the thread, or is incapable of making proper analysis. This is because he could be scum. No it's not concrete, but one misplay is better than nothing. And we should definitely lynch someone today. Even if Beast is a townie, theres the other reason to lynch him:

2. Beast is a liability to town. In the two games in recent memory (I cant remember if he played cruise ship mafia), he failed to play the game he was supposed to.
In ToS mafia, he outted the town doctor on D2, then failed to spend the rest of the game watching the doctor to find who killed them. He also blew an entire phase pretending he wasnt allowed to talk about his role or the game.
In tiger king mafia, he fake claimed a couple times then got himself modkilled. regardless of what you think about the rule he broke, Halp had clearly laid out what that rule was and he broke it. That modkill, while it actually saved town a phase of lynching him, left mafia much closer to winning. Had he played normal, town would never have hit mylo (or anything close).
In summary, beast is either scum or a liability to town.

[WillBy]

Scarlet I kept wondering why you are mentioning personal protective equipment, then I realized it's a "pre-post edit"?

Vehicle, how are we supposed to debate substance on D1 if double lynching only counts as process?

[Exalt]

As explained by multiple others and argued by myself, a blind D1 double lynch is bad for town. The fact that he's pushing for it, so hard, is really scummy to me. Shit, he literally just changed his vote off of me to ensure that one happens. If he's scum (which I think he is), tying up the vote with Beast is 1) a mechanism to ensure that a townie goes down with him and 2) a means by which the other scum can hide in the voting. It's shady af.

Again, if you go back to my first post on this issue, I am not opposed to double lynching ever. As brought up repeatedly, the Willby/Voth vote last game would have been a great time to use that mechanism.

Now, if someone could point to specific arcticulable facts that give rise to reasonable suspicion for two players equally right now, then I'd be open to hearing a double lynch argument. But just a blanket "two lynch good, one lynch bad" is not going to win me over.

Wanting to double lynch might be anti-town, but is it actually scummy? Is it truly alignment-indicative?

You got any other reasons as to why you're voting Scarlett? You did it D1 yesterday too. I'd rather lynch you first if there has to be a choice, considering you've done nothing useful so far, while scarlett at least creates interactions to analyze. What makes you town this game when you're playing the same way you do as scum?

[Exalt]

Wanting to double lynch might be anti-town, but is it actually scummy? Is it truly alignment-indicative?

You got any other reasons as to why you're voting Scarlett? You did it D1 last game too. I'd rather lynch you first if there has to be a choice, considering you've done nothing useful so far, while scarlett at least creates interactions to analyze. What makes you town this game when you're playing the same way you do as scum?

fixed

[Exalt]

That modkill, while it actually saved town a phase of lynching him, left mafia much closer to winning. Had he played normal, town would never have hit mylo (or anything close).
In summary, beast is either scum or a liability to town.

I thought about this actually. Any modkills should not only kill that player, but it should end the day phase too. Modkilling beast actually helped town, because it took away a free mislynch and an extra NK for the scum team.

[the_paul]

Also since I forgot to say it, I don't plan on voting Scarlet the whole way through. But when I hosted, I hated trying one post with a vote, another post with an unvote, then a 3rd post later on with the switched vote. When I find someone to switch it to I'll do it all in 1 post, I just find it way easier to track keeping it all together. I think we were mostly arguing about semantics scarlet. I read it as you were advocating that we commit to a double lynch on day 1 basically no matter what, whereas when I go back and read it again it sounds more like you're just starting a discussion on the idea of it, which is completely different. I voted for you based on my initial reading, and I'll unvote you when I decide who I'm going to vote for next based on the 2nd reading.

[Halp]

Hi, did not realize game started until late last night. I’ll get caught up after work. Field is most likely scum, though.