Mafia with the Kitties - Day 5; DL 4/5

Victoire!

Set-up looks balanced.

Bussing by proxy was fun. Shame I never got questioned; I had some good answers lined up.

Except for how Mafia Bulletproof instead of a Town RB was supposed to make any sense balancewise.

<_<
>_>

Quote :

Gah, what is up with Shadoweh?

This is every scum QT ever.

Tierce wrote:

In the scum QT, callforjudgement wrote:

Tierce has got some image of the "perfect CFJ" in her head from seeing me in one game, that I wouldn't be living up to this game even if I were town, and thinks I'm scum for not living up to her expectations. So it's not just this game, she's going to end up seeing me as scum again and again and again…

D'aww, scum feeling offended because he was caught for the wrong reasons. <3

It's okay, I catch town for the wrong reasons much more often. :P

Nah, you caught me for the right reasons too, I think, if it's anything to do with the wagon surrounding Xalxe; I would have pushed him even if town, but I wouldn't have left the wagon like that as town. (The problem is that Shadoweh's careful explanation as to why my theory surrounding Xalxe was obviously wrong was clearly deficient, as, with players swapped, what I described actually happened. Conclusion: insane theories from someone who's normally quite logical is probably a scumtell, because it probably implies that the player making them knows information that the town doesn't, which is making their theory seem more plausible. So I left the wagon to protect DeasVail, with the hope of getting him all the way through to endgame.) I ended up realising you were town after that big argument you had with me at the end of day 2, by the way.

Meanwhile, I'm not really sure where the huge powerbussing between me and CES came from, but I was having trouble finding somewhere to put my vote, decided I couldn't put it anywhere but CES, and it sort-of snowballed from there. I had quite some fun doing it, too. (And CES is better at getting me vigged than I am at getting him lynched.) Based on the discussion in-thread, I think it worked, but I doubt it was enough by itself.

I'm a better gut scumhunter than logical scumhunter, so I was trying to wrap my read on you into something coherent. Meta cases are often hard to put into words; essentially, the feeling I had on you (and Deas, dammit) was that you were playing far from your town meta. Explaining it... meh.

And you're right, that kind of theory was too far-fetched for it to come from you-town. You are usually more down to earth, trying to match the pieces you do have, not adding extra factors.

Tierce wrote:

I'm a better gut scumhunter than logical scumhunter, so I was trying to wrap my read on you into something coherent. Meta cases are often hard to put into words; essentially, the feeling I had on you (and Deas, dammit) was that you were playing far from your town meta. Explaining it... meh.

And you're right, that kind of theory was too far-fetched for it to come from you-town. You are usually more down to earth, trying to match the pieces you do have, not adding extra factors.

I think a meta Achilles heel I do have is that I have more of a tendency to use relational tells as scum, and you may have picked up on that. The problem when I'm scum is not scumhunting; it's that I have the wrong amount of being sure or unsure, because of the different amount of information. (This is a trick that I think may work on players like DGB or CES; they doubt themselves slightly more as town, although they tend not to show it directly so you have to work things out indirectly, and it may be hard to pick up on in practice.)

Wrt the theory, the problem is not that I wouldn't run with it as town if I thought of it; just as town, I'd have less information to go on to come up with something like that, so I'd be less likely to. I also find it hard to have consistent scumreads on my own buddies; I really wasn't sure what to do about DV, because everyone else found them town for reasons that were obviously wrong, so I ended up having to drop the whole thing and hope nobody noticed (nobody called me on it, or maybe even noticed consciously, but I could have been caught like that).

By the way, CES, was your scumread on me genuine? (Maybe it doesn't even make sense to ask your scumbuddies that…)

Mastin, I feel sorry for you. I was deliberately trying to screw up VCA in the first couple of days (and it worked fine); the ironic thing is that your scumread on DV was partly based on incorrect information. We had no idea that Glork was DV's neighbour when we killed him; DV wasn't told Glork's name (nor presumably vice versa), so we didn't know who it was, and DV went V/LA before Glork posted, so we had no idea it was him when we made him send in the kill.

Vi, I'm vaguely concerned that your setups are breakable by mass flavourclaim, at least if people follow the fakeclaims given. My fakeclaim, I was planning to use, but in retrospect it would have been a bad idea if people were paying attention; it might look like a "flavour godfather", but having an ambiguous flavour is currently a scumclaim in a Vi game (because having the ability to have a safe flavourclaim with the same rolename as the actual scum flavour is something only useful for scum). I'm pointing this out so you can give town players ambigious flavour in future games in order close this loophole; even if you don't, the mere fact I've pointed this out should create enough modWIFOM to close the loophole by itself

The other problem is with the kill flavours being tied to the scum flavournames. This means that any scum who have performed a kill, unless they have ambiguous or unclear flavour, will be caught by a mass flavourclaim, and is the more serious problem. (We couldn't tell, without performing a kill, whether our individual kill flavour would be ambiguous or not.) The same way the vig's flavourname was determined, the scum's flavourname could be determined too. (Ironically, one remaining scum's kill flavour ended up implicating the other remaining scum's fakeclaim in Tierce's calculation, which was silly, but it could have been a lot worse…)


Finally, can someone still explain where that quickwagon on Xalxe came from? I was genuinely surprised when people started sheeping me on that. I'm not that persuasive when I'm just throwing an idea out there, am I? (Especially given that people thought my reasonign was bad.)

callforjudgement wrote:

Vi, I'm vaguely concerned that your setups are breakable by mass flavourclaim, at least if people follow the fakeclaims given. My fakeclaim, I was planning to use, but in retrospect it would have been a bad idea if people were paying attention; it might look like a "flavour godfather", but having an ambiguous flavour is currently a scumclaim in a Vi game (because having the ability to have a safe flavourclaim with the same rolename as the actual scum flavour is something only useful for scum). I'm pointing this out so you can give town players ambigious flavour in future games in order close this loophole; even if you don't, the mere fact I've pointed this out should create enough modWIFOM to close the loophole by itself

The other problem is with the kill flavours being tied to the scum flavournames. This means that any scum who have performed a kill, unless they have ambiguous or unclear flavour, will be caught by a mass flavourclaim, and is the more serious problem. (We couldn't tell, without performing a kill, whether our individual kill flavour would be ambiguous or not.) The same way the vig's flavourname was determined, the scum's flavourname could be determined too.

Huh, no.

Your scum rolename/flavo(u)rname implicates you when you perform a kill, and that is one of the reasons you have a safeclaim. Oversol's role broke through fakeclaims, and careful kill flavour analysis should reveal the flavourname of who performed the kill, but that is all. How would making a fakeclaim reveal who you are?

Felicia's kill flavour was obscure enough that we wouldn't be able to identify it without the flip, so you would be fine. The CATS flavour had me scouring my brain, especially since the way it was written didn't match the actual line.

The only issue with Vi's method is that it helps with PoE in lategame with regards to which flipped scum performed each kill (and thus helps with tracker roles, etc.); it didn't break the game on flavourclaim, because you had fakeclaims to use.

callforjudgement wrote:

By the way, CES, was your scumread on me genuine? (Maybe it doesn't even make sense to ask your scumbuddies that…)

It was, for the most part.

I did a re-read and I came across an early wall of yours and it just struck how similar your opinions then were to your opinions at the time of the re-read, specifically your opinion of me. Add attack on Xalxe which you continued with D2 despite the Ghostlinscum -> DVtown implication and you have a pattern of being decidedly more consistent than I'd expect from a townie. Given that you're a thoughtful but relatively inexperienced player, it seemed like a very plausible mistake for you to make as scum too.

callforjudgement wrote:

Vi, I'm vaguely concerned that your setups are breakable by mass flavourclaim, at least if people follow the fakeclaims given. My fakeclaim, I was planning to use, but in retrospect it would have been a bad idea if people were paying attention; it might look like a "flavour godfather", but having an ambiguous flavour is currently a scumclaim in a Vi game (because having the ability to have a safe flavourclaim with the same rolename as the actual scum flavour is something only useful for scum). I'm pointing this out so you can give town players ambigious flavour in future games in order close this loophole; even if you don't, the mere fact I've pointed this out should create enough modWIFOM to close the loophole by itself

It's possible that someone could have tried randomly googling flavor names to see if any duplicates came up once a Flavor Cop was known, because I would be surprised if anyone has the completely useless trivia knowledge needed to notice on their own that there are two faux feline Felicias. So I wouldn't say that a problem doesn't exist.

With that said, and I know this is unique to this game, you had an unused fakeclaim lying around from Ghostlin.

And of course there's always making stuff up - if you don't like my cats, get your own.

Quote :

The CATS flavour had me scouring my brain, especially since the way it was written didn't match the actual line.

I should have double-checked. It was correct in the mod copy of the game, but it would have helped if I looked at it.

Vi, did you/someone else split the game? Hold on, merging topics back...

The other thread won't merge back. Bah. Anyway, will add notices to continue over here. Carry on.

Probably my fault, sorry, sorry.

Also @cfj - Which Vi games (other than this one) are you looking at, exactally?

Random fun note: in this forum, when you attempt to merge posts back into another thread, it will simply add a link from the first thread to the new one.

Got to love cheap coding crutches.

Lololol. In retrospect....

Night Action PM wrote:

Actually, screw it. I will accept all blame and embarrassment if I'm wrong, but tonight, I want to
Vig: Tierce

If I am right, I will celebrate the glory of victory in my dying breath when CES kills me or something like that.