Standing guess: Imminent Doom is playable in a low-curve deck that wants to run four or five 1-drops anyways, mostly as a way of extracting extra value later in the game. Given the set, that means you're most likely to run Doom in UR Prowess (which naturally wants Unsummon and might be interested in Crash Through as R: draw a card, trigger prowess, get a sorcery in your graveyard for Countervailing Winds and the AKH payoffs) or running hot in the AKH pack (most likely in RW, given Fan Bearer and access to both 1-drop Cartouches). As Funkenstein noted above, this is a card that should be available late for any deck that does want it.
Scrounger should be solid in limited (it's reminding me of Prakhata Pillar-Bug, which played better than it looked due to its lifelink), but looking at the rest of the set I don't think it's going to be nearly as good as Faithbearer was. Part of Faithbearer's power was that basically every common and uncommon creature in Eldritch Moon was 2/3, 3/2, or 3/3, so a 3/4 matched up absurdly well against the format even before taking the lifelink into account. (IIRC this effect got called fundamental power and toughness back in the day.) Scrounger still stonewalls most of the early drops in Hour of Devastation, but this format looks like it's going to have a plethora of high-end creatures that are 4/4 or better (eternalize, a bunch of red and green 5- and 6-drops, plus some of the cards from the Amonkhet) and a 3/4 matches up poorly in that environment.
(The iconic example of this kind of format-based change in limited card evaluation was, is, and remains Terror and Shatter in original Mirrodin block.)
Hmm. I wouldn't write off Champion of Wits too quickly. The eternalize is overcosted, but a 2/1 for 3 that draws 2/discards 2 on ETB might be playable without any additional text, especially in a deck that wants discard outlets and/or cards in its graveyard, and if you were going to play the card anyways then it's not like having the option to spend a bunch of mana to convert a Champion in your graveyard into an uncounterable 4/4 that draws 4/discards 2 on ETB is bad even if you're not going to do so very often.
The card is less flashy than your average rare, especially given how high the eternalize cost is. But I think it might see play in spite of that.
Actually, you know what? You're right. I really *haven't* paid proper attention to your posts.
Up until now, at least.
Which is unfortunate for you, because if I had been paying proper attention to you I would have noticed the full implications of a couple of posts (notably 125) a while ago.
Tares 164 makes a lot of assumptions. I feel like that makes it wholly illogical.
Your comment on my gamestate analysis is that it's illogical because it makes a lot of assumptions... and I can't follow a town thought process for that. At all. What you're saying is both factually wrong and not relevant *at the same time*. It's wrong, because deductive logic is straight up "given X then Y" and 164 (and 201) are straight-up working through "if my assumptions are correct than they have the following implications about the gamestate" and helping me figure out whether those assumptions are correct (both by checking whether those assumptions generate consistent implications - see my D_V comments in 204, where I concluded that my assumption that D_V was likely scum was less likely conflicted with the implications of some of my other assumptions and that "D_V is likely scum" is less likely to be correct given that - and by indicating results that would falsify those assumptions). (To put it another way, it's *scientific* - I'm testing hypotheses.) It's also not relevant, because I don't see how whether or not 164 is illogical has a single whit to do with my alignment. My scumhunting process and especially gamestate solving process *is not rational* - or even *conscious*, for that matter. Reasoning is for error-checking (see: 164 and 204), drawing conclusions into the conscious (see 164 and 204 again) and for convincing other players that I'm right.
What I see no evidence of whatsoever is you actually trying to figure out *why* I'm making my assumptions, and whether or not they're genuine. Let's say for the sake of argument that 164 *was* illogical... again, so what? What does that say about my alignment?
What it *is* consistent with is scum whose primary motive is to *discredit* me. The entire comment is a *classic* ad hominem - "he's not being logical, you shouldn't listen to him".
Let's look at the rest of your questions/comments towards me in 202:
So, I'm rereading the game and I just realized how much I dislike Tare's 68. It's kind of a roller coaster, and a little stretchy. Particularly the "if you have the name, you have a strong idea of what the role could be. Is it egregious enough to be a strawman, though? And would scum!Tare be that obvious about it?
Classic, classic scum behavior - sniping at a townie with a wagon on them without actually committing a vote and while leaving himself an escape hatch to back off if needed.
@Tare: in 114, you say again that you still think Cyan is town. Orginally you said it was because you thought all the scum had posted already. You upped him to a strong townread, where he still apperently sits in 164. Do you have a more substancial reason now?
@Tare: What is the question in 116 supposed to accomplish?
@Tare: in 117, you ask Az to expand on Iso, DV, and Cyan. I notice Anak is missing. Do you have a read on Anak, and if so, what is it?
The first two questions are... I guess the best way to put it is that they *could* come from town but I don't think they *do*? They're not *inconsistent* with a town mindset, but they're fakeable and I gutfeel that they *are* faked.
The third question is rich for somebody who's now accusing me of not reading his posts thoroughly - I made my Anak read fairly clear back in 62, and had put him in the leanscum pile back in 164. More importantly, it's a much clearer example of a question that doesn't actually help get to my mindset - how does my read on Anak help Killjoy figure out why I didn't ask Az to elaborate on his Anak read, especially when the players I asked Az about were two scumreads that Az was townreading and a townie that I considered a far stronger townread than Az did (provided that his townreads were in order of strength).
Now, let's take a look at Killjoy's original batch of questions back in 65:
I disagree that it's moving too fast. Osie is just really obvious scum.
You're pushing for Osie being town really hard, and also that "Az has a higher than usual chance of being scum" feels weird, like a toss-in. Why is that the case?
Also explain why you think all the scum are here already?
Also, what are your thoughts on Osie's behavior, independent of the wagon speed?
That first question is a scum question through and through. There's no actual curiosity, just an attempt to discredit - both through painting my Osie read as being extreme ("pushing for Osie being town really hard" - I don't know, does it count as "really hard" when it's intended to derail a wagon that a) has developed to L-2 within the first 24 hours of the game and relatedly b) is on a player that you think will flip town?) and by the classic "when did you stop beating your wife?" rhetorical trick.
And that's doubly damning in light of me being the *other* major wagon at the time, because it's absolutely consistent with the classic scum tactic of staying on the sideline and sniping at a seemingly vulnerable townie to discredit them without getting their hands dirty by committing to a vote. And that's true of absolutely everything Killjoy has posted towards me this game.
Also, explain why you think I'm "pushing for Osie being town really hard"? I thought I was pretty clear that I my thought process was less "I have a strong townread on Osie" and more "I have very strong reservations about how this wagon has developed and think Osie is more likely town than not because of it".
I don't believe it moved too quickly at all. I think the wagon speed was fine. I just think there was some bussing going on. I'm thinking one scum on the wagon, one scum off.
It is 1 minute to deadline. There are two wagons at L-1: a wagon on me and a wagon on J. Random Sleb, a hypothetical player who you have a null read on and who has no relevant interactions. You are the only player not voting, and no one else is online. Who do you hammer, and why?
Tare and Az both white knighting Osie so strongly leads me to think one of them is probably scum getting credit for a "spicy read" (I obviously think that's tare). (I currently think Osie is more likely town than scum here, but hey both seem much more confident in that read)
Yeah, that's what I'm seeing here, although I feel like that makes them less likely scum together.
I'm quoting this post in its entirety. Take a good look.
Killjoy thinks Osie is scum, with one scum on the wagon and one scum off. He *also* agrees with shadow that one of myself and Azrael is scum getting credit for a spicy read (I think, given the context, that shadow is referring to what is usually called "white knighting").
Wait, what?
If either myself or Az is scum defending Osie and Osie is scum, then by syllogism whichever of me and Az is defending Osie is defending a scumbuddy. That's not a towncred move, that's just scumteam preservation - the towncred move when your scumbuddy is being run up is *bussing*.
And yet... as far as I can tell, Killjoy is saying that he thinks that Osie is scum *and* that one of Az and myself is defending Osie for towncred. That dog don't hunt.
How does this thought process make sense as town? I can't see it.
It makes absolutely perfect sense if Killjoy is scum, though - especially scum who *knows* that Osie is town. In that case, it's a straight-up slip - Killjoy knows Osie will flip town, ergo one of Az/myself defending Osie for towncred makes perfect sense!
Except Killjoy *should* think that Osie will flip *scum*, in which case one of Az/myself would be defending a scumbuddy.
Oops.
But wait, there's more! While I'm here, let's take a look at a couple of Killjoy posts *not* involving me:
Taredas* - Taredas is the kind of formiddable player who isn't necessarily easy to get a face-value read on. In looking over his posts, you see a lot of longer analysis posts that are more difficult to accurately parse. I saw only a small number of tells that I'd view as confirmatory town, and I had some concerns that he might be being a little slick at several points. For instance, he started off voting for AI very strongly, but backed off of AI citing an explanation for AI's behavior that he didn't want to explain. I'm pretty sure I know what he's suggesting there, but I don't know that I agree that it was reasonable for Taredas to think that. Taredas, why did you unvote AI?
It's not an exact match by any means. But it feels similar, morphologically (and if you don't understand morphological thought process, you don't understand me). And I think the key point Az raised against me in Gatecrash also applies to you here: your unvote is slick. It's not really supported by your thought process - it's just "this isn't going to work out, I need to leave the wagon now".
It's also not the first time this game you've bailed off a wagon like this:
Damn it. Her tone is completely different in Avalon.
Sigh. Unvote.
---
TL:DR:
- Killjoy's questions towards me are not consistent with town trying to sort me and *are* consistent with scum trying to discredit me.
- Killjoy's overall position in the gamestate is consistent with being scum: he's pushed on popular wagons on easy mislynches (Osie, tomsloger) while sniping from the sidelines at the strong player who drew a wagon (me) without committing to the attack.
- The way Killjoy has bailed off of *both* major wagons he's been on has been artificial.
- Post 65 is a mindset breach and scumslip: Killjoy thinks that one of Az and myself is white knighting Osie despite having a scumread on Osie.
- Okay, so apparently I will be trying to use mindset analysis this game after all.
There are four active Council members, one is the pregame kill, that leaves three. Town win condition is to eliminate the Mafia Council, ergo Council is scum. Three possible Mafia flavor names, presumably three Mafiosos, you figure it out. (Outside chance of only two Mafia (in which case scum flavor is Az and Zionite) but I'd be really surprised by only two Mafia in a modern MTGS mini so...)
Prod received, will give 120% tomorrow night after work.
Add Iso to the "willing to lynch D1" list.
See, Iso's on the shortlist of players for whom *not posting* is a pretty good indicator of them being scum. (See also: me; Gatecrash is the most recent example.) That's been the case at least since WitchHunt, and even a cursory examination of Disinheritance indicates that this hasn't changed while I've been gone. I've had Iso on the backburner waiting to see if and when he showed up and started playing; my instinct starting the game was that Iso was likely scum if he still wasn't participating by the middle of D2, but after two "this is why I'm not posting" posts and promising to be more active after the deadline would have already passed I'm comfortable calling it now.
Also @Tare: of there's a burnout vig, isn't giving him a second shot a little swingy?
I'm not sure I believe you here.
Firing on the vig is a bad idea *unless* a kill clanks first (in which case it's a very, very good idea). It's the other 3-4 good town burnouts I'm looking to rearm.
@Tare: in 114, you say again that you still think Cyan is town. Orginally you said it was because you thought all the scum had posted already. You upped him to a strong townread, where he still apperently sits in 164. Do you have a more substancial reason now?
@Tare: What is the question in 116 supposed to accomplish?
It splits the playerbase into two groups - players who think I'm scum/would support the Tar wagon and players who don't. It's specifically phrased the way it is to sidestep "I think X is scum but Y is even more likely to be scum". There's a reason for that, but I'm not going to explain at this time.
@Tare: in 117, you ask Az to expand on Iso, DV, and Cyan. I notice Anak is missing. Do you have a read on Anak, and if so, what is it?
I thought I'd made that clear already? Anak's a weak scumread, mostly based on how he's handled his PR - his posts early felt like he was using his PR to justify not contributing rather than trying to communicate through a PR. (I'm less confident about that at *this* point, but that's based entirely on his posts since you asked this question - 275 in particular reads.)
@Taredas: Who in this game do you have experience playing with already?
Definitely played with: Az, Cyan, kpaca, Iso
Definitely modded, think I've played with* but can't remember: tomsloger, Huntzilla, Killjoy
Definitely modded, don't think I've played with*: D_V, Anak
No prior experience: You, Osie
* - Unless you're counting "was in Mind Screw Salvation where I was a postless, voteless Survivor in addition to being the mod", in which case I've played with all five.
i keep looking at tare's #201 and i dont like his treatment of shadow or huntz either
iso gets swept under the rug too, but he hadnt/hasnt done anything
@tare
how does huntz look like a deep wolf?
what is your read on shadow?
Hunt: Hard to explain, mostly his position in the gamestate. Best way I can put it is that most of his posting feels like it's mirroring the thread consensus except for his stances on my wagon and calling kpaca/shadow town-on-town; that's consistent with deep wolf (if he *is* deep wolf then his defense of me is for towncred and/or pocketing and kpaca/shadow is either for the same or to justify a townread on a partner) and doesn't fit as well if he's scum who thinks he has a safety blanket. Problem is, it's *also* consistent with Hunt being town going with the flow, hence the null read overall.
Shadow: I'll put it this way:
Unvote, Vote: shadow
Strong scumread, preferred lynch for the day (with the possible exception of Iso, given his continued not posting (see above) and how good of a rolehunter Iso is?) - not sure he's my *strongest* scumread, but he's close and if he's scum then there's a very good chance he is specifically the Mafia disruptive role (Roleblocker or the like):
- Shadow has claimed Seppel.
- Given Seppel flavor and how this game seems to be handling flavor I'll be surprised if shadow's role is anything other than disruptive or maybe something to do with votes (barring scum!shadow who swapped a safeclaim with a buddy). (This is contributing to my scumread on Shadow - my sense of the setup says that the kind of roles that make sense for Seppel flavor don't overlap much with the kind of roles town is likely to have in the setup..)
- I'll be surprised if the Mafia doesn't have at least one role whose main function is to interfere with town abilities, because how often do the Mafia *not* have such a role outside of very low-power games?
- Given the game's flavor, the flavor of the Mafia members is known: Azrael, Iso, and Zionite (barring the corner case where there are only two scum in which case Zionite is absent) - I'm guessing Iso is a disruptive role and Zionite is a goonish role. Furthermore, since the Mafia have flavor that identifies them as Mafia, they need safeclaims.
- *IF* Bur wanted to give the Mafia safeclaims that would match with them trueclaiming their abilities, then Seppel makes a lot of sense for the disruptive role's safeclaim given the above. Operative word "if" - scum safeclaims matching abilities is an assumption I'm making, but it's not a safe assumption and I know it. That said, it's a common enough mechanism of making safeclaims that I'm willing to make the assumption (should *probably* check whether Bur has ruin previous games and whether he used full safeclaim PMs in them - safeclaims matching true abilities is much more likely if the mod provides full safeclaim PMs).
(Why yes I *will* play outguess the mod, thank you very much!)
---
Lynch pool: shadow, Iso, tom (not sure if Tom belongs here or in the next pool given the last few pages; not clearing tom for it, got burned really badly by doing that with Proph back in the 2015 Invitational, but also not sure I actively want to lynch him toDay)
Would not oppose a lynch but not going to fight for it either: D_V, Hunt, Anak? (scumread but I'm a bit wary of lynching him toDay despite that)
Actually, considering that I've 99% burned any chance of being the N1 Mafia kill I should probably just claim (even setting aside "deadline and wagon state says you should consider claiming") - if I can't draw the N1 Mafia kill my ability is better off in the open so that the relevant players know to take it into account when using their abilities.
I'm Vaimes, all-around nice person and antidote to Mafia burnout. There's two burnouts I'd expect to be in the game given the mechanic and the number of players, and as you might expect given my flavor I've got one of them: I can burnout to let another player reuse their own burnout. This doesn't let the target reuse their regular abilities, and it only works on players who have already burned out (hence why I need to claim, because if I'm *not* lynched toDay then the roles with strong burnouts need to consider firing early). No other abilities.
(The other burnout I expect in the game is a vig shot. Suspect there's 4-5 strong town burnouts total [counting the vig] plus 1 or 2 strong scum burnouts that I don't want to recharge; design senses say scum are likely to have a permablock/ mass roleblock/"deplete target player's burnout" as a burnout, so keep that in mind.)
Maybe Az is right and the nervousness I'm seeing is not scum nervousness.
Maybe I should also check Avalon to see what she did that game to see if it compares.
... Do I need to rethink my Killjoy townread? Because this reads like how I tend to bail off of scumreads as scum (like how I bailed off AI in Return to Ravnica).
It's a 100% classic mislynch/misread of a new townie player. And I hate that Taredas was trying to contribute to it in the limp-wristed, inauthentic fashion that he did. It was pretty awful.
You're quite right that my opening vote was inauthentic. You're just wrong about *why*.
As I commented on back in signups, my tonal analysis reads have been giving me bad results lately - see the 2015 Invitational, and there's a couple of games I've lurked offsite while I didn't have time to play (the Mafia Championships and a game or two on 'Scum). It's gotten to the point where having a strong tonal townread on a player is a reason to *scumread* that player. So I've busted out a few of my older tricks, including a classic from MafiaScum Large Normals - run a vote on a scummy-but-I'm-not-sure-they're-scum player early D1 and see how many people bite. (Think I talked about this back in Redux Mirror, where it didn't work due to a combination of a voting restriction and a wagon-averse group of players.)
Which is exactly what I was doing with Osie. He was scummy enough that I was comfortable breaking RVS to vote him, but thought it was entirely possible that my first instincts were wrong and Osie was, in fact, town. I could have voted my *other* scumread (shadow), but I wanted to keep him on the backburner until he'd answered why he was supporting D_V's mass name claim suggestion. So I ran Osie up the flagpole. (To put it another way, I was trying to answer the question "are we in a world where the Osie wagon will gain lots of support or are we in a world where the Osie wagon flames out like a damp squib?".)
Only problem was, the technique I was using is one I developed for *Large* Normals (usually 16 players or more), where the lynch threshold is 8 or higher. More problematically, D_V had placed a true random vote, and in Minis the third vote has the combined effect of the third and fourth vote in a Large - I wanted to see if the Osie wagon would blow up but didn't want to force it to do so. Hence, a vote with no belief behind it. I mean, I guess I could have just *not posted*, but **** that noise - especially since I *did* want to get shadow's explanation for supporting nameclaim without tipping him off that I considered it voteworthy. Almost certainly botched the execution, but :shrug:.
And... I'm not even sure why I'm bothering to type this, because I kind of think I'm the correct lynch toDay given the gamestate *despite knowing I'll flip town* (assuming Az is town, but at this point I think that is the case). Not going to push through my own lynch, but not going to fight it either.
(Really wish Cyan hadn't morphed into MTGS's equivalent of DGB [aka Kami of Lunacy in the Crosstown games] sometime around the 2015 Invitational - would be a lot more confident .)
I agree with him you could stop trying to play so cryptic despite the pr.
These waters remain uncharted, though not for lack of trying.
Great devotion yields great reward.
nice
id like to be in charge of reading anak please. because im good at it and posting restrictions are my bailiwick.
so far, town. especially if he's really me. i'm always town in this setup.
Not sure if this makes {Anak, Tom, X} more or less likely, but I think this probably comes from a scum mindset either way?
And while I'm trying not to put much stock in tonal analysis the little nagging voice in my head is reading tomsloger's posts and going "wait, are you *sure* you're reading this game and not SG-1/Mind Screw?".
And tom fits into basically all of the scumteams.
Yeah, kinda think tom's more likely to flip scum than shadow at this point.
Unvote, Vote: tomsloger
(Hi Az! Welcome to inauthentic reasoning based on "I'm not going to have the time/opportunity to actually see whether my new techniques work this game, so **** putting more work into this game than the bare minimum".)
Okay, let's run through the town!Az worlds assuming no busted reads (never a safe assumption, especially this early, but the exercise is useful):
As a reminder, assuming 0-1 scum on my wagon ({shadow}), 1-2 scum on the Osie wagon {D_V, Anak, Huntzilla}, 1-2 scum off both wagons {Iso, tomsloger}.
Shadow, D_V, Iso - doubt it, don't think shadow and D_V are buddies
Shadow, D_V, tomsloger - again, this is a D_V/Shadow team and thus unlikely. Also, would D_V and tomsloger really be willing to both vote Az despite lacking townie support if they were scumbuddies?
Shadow, Anak, Iso - pretty much the scumteam equivalent of a nullread (nothing to support or refute this team)? That's true for basically every Anak/Iso team, actually - Iso's been too inactive and off to the side to generate strong connections, Anak's PR has had the same effect.
Shadow, Anak, tomsloger - Plausible. Shadow/tom haven't really interacted, and Anak is Anak.
Shadow, Huntzilla, Iso - Leaning against this team, but with low confidence because it's based on an assessment of how Hunt would act on it. Hunt's play so far gutfeels like if he's scum then he's the deep wolf, and considering Iso's reputation and Huntzilla's middling scumgame deepwolf!Hunt doesn't mesh well with scum!Iso.
Shadow, Huntzilla, tomsloger - Much more plausible than the Iso version, given how lynchable tom tends to be.
D_V, Anak, Iso - another Anak/Iso team, so perfectly plausible
D_V, Anak, tomsloger - again, D_V/Tom teams require that both D_V and Tom were willing to vote Az despite lacking any support from town.
D_V, Huntzilla, Iso - another Hunt/Iso team, same reason for being skeptical as before.
D_V, Huntzilla, tomsloger - See previous D_V/Tom comments, but this is the one team where a coordinated scum assault on Az might make sense - if this is the team then Az has nailed two of them D1, and that's a situation I could see scum try to counterattack to try to discredit the attacker (Chainsaw Defense!).
Anak, Huntzilla, Iso - another Hunt/Iso team, previous comments apply.
Anak, Huntzilla, tomsloger - Don't see any reason why not?
D_V, Iso, tomsloger - Again, requires D_V and Tom to both be scum voting Az without support. Making a special note of this one, however - I've got gutfeels that this team is actually plausible in spite of that.
Anak, Iso, tomsloger - Again, all the Anak/Iso teams are plausible to me.
Huntzilla, Iso, tomsloger - See previous comments on Hunt/Iso.
So, best-fit teams in town!Az world are {Shadow, Anak, Iso}, {Shadow, Anak, Tom}, {Shadow, Hunt, Tom}, {D_V, Anak, Iso}, {Anak, Hunt, tom}, {Anak, Iso, tom}, maybe {D_V, Hunt, Tom}, maaaaaaybe {D_V, Iso, Tom}. All three scum on the Osie wagon isn't out of the realm of possibility, in which case the team would be exactly {D_V, Anak, Hunt}; I'm dubious about the possibility of no scum on the Osie wagon, but {Shadow, Iso, Tom} feels plausible enough outside of that to not discount it completely.
Actually, looking at that... I don't like D_V's play, but there's not a lot of scumteams that make sense for him since I think he's anti-aligned with shadow *and* tomsloger. There's the D_V version of the little black dress scumteam {Anak/Iso/X} and a couple of "I think my argument against these two players being buddies is less likely to be accurate in the case of this specific team" and that's it. Couple that with being the first player to suggest mass name claim (fairly bold move for scum) and there's a pretty good chance I'm wrong on D_V and he's town.
Osie up from leantown to full townread given most recent posts.
I think either my D_V or shadow scumread is busted - very strongly doubt the first two players to suggest nameclaim are both scum - but I'm not sure which.
Az is my keystone read for the setup; leaning town on him given page 4 posting but not confident, and I think both gamestate and what I should be doing are very different in town!Az and scum!Az worlds. Need to assess what gamestate looks like given town!Az and scum!Az...
Actually, let me just do that now?
If town!Az:
- Az town by given, Cyan strong townread, kpaca moderately strong townread. That means either shadow is scum or the wagon on me is all-town; both are plausible, especially at 4 votes and the second leading wagon on my other strong townread (I'm town, I think Osie is town, if both leading wagons are on town then scum usually don't care which wagon they support).
- Counterwagon on Osie is {(D_V), Killjoy, (Tar), Anak, (kpaca), Huntzilla}, with D_V, kpaca, and myself all leaving the wagon and Huntzilla not initially joining it due to wagon size. Factor in wagon target and the players not involved with the wagon are Az (town by given), Cyan (strong townread), tomsloger, shadow, and Iso. So either the scumteam is *exactly* {tomsloger, shadow, Iso} or there's at least one scum involved with the wagon - and Osie's a townread, so unless that's a busted read all the scum are *on* the wagon.
- That implies, assuming no busted townreads, roughly 0-1 scum on my wagon ({shadow}), 1-2 scum on the Osie wagon {D_V, Anak, Huntzilla}, 1-2 scum off both wagons {Iso, tomsloger}.
Flip that around, assume scum!Az:
- Az is now scum by given, so definitely one scum on my wagon. Cyan and kpaca still townreads; I think shadow is actually *less* likely to be scum in this world? Scum generally don't all pile onto a single wagon when both leading wagons are on town, preferring to either spread evenly or stay off both wagons. Doesn't apply if I'm wrong and Osie is scum, but that would imply that the scumteam is *exactly* {Az, Osie, shadow} and that feels dubious by corner-case standards.
- With one scum given offwagon, that puts 0-2 scum involved with the Osie wagon. Scum!Osie is slightly more plausible in scum!Az worlds than in town!Az worlds, but I think it's still a corner case. Still have a hard time seeing the Osie wagon get that much support that fast without at least one scum on it, so...
- I think the best fit scum!Az worlds have the second scum on the Osie wagon and the third scum was off to the side; scum!Az with two scum on Osie is dubious since it would mean all three scum rejected the scum tendency to react to multiple wagons on town by sitting on the side eating popcorn, scum!Az with two scum on the sidelines would mean that the Osie wagon hit L-2 without a single scum vote. That would mean one scum in {D_V, Anak, Hunt} and one scum in {Iso, tom}. That leaves six likely scum!Az worlds:
Az, D_V, Tom - Tom's off-Tar, off-Osie vote is specifically *on Az* and D_V moved off of Osie *onto Az* so this would require *both* of Az's partners to be bussing him when he's not under heavy suspicion. No.
Az, Anak, Tom - Maybe? Anak fits into basically every team given his post restriction and how he's played it so far, Tom just requires that Az pulled the "throw a scumbuddy in as your weakest scumread" and Tom's response is consistent (or more accurately isn't inconsistent) with scum who knows that the player attacking him is scum.
Az, Hunt, Tom - would require that Az put both of his scumbuddies on his scumlist when neither was under heavy suspicion, not likely.
Az, D_V, Iso - D_V's behavior from P3 on is really weird if he's scum with Az. Plausible, but only barely.
Az, Anak, Iso - This... is a possible team. Az's townread on Iso feels premature to me, and Anak is still the free space of scumteam worldbuilding.
Az, Hunt, Iso - I don't think that meshes with Az/Hunt interactions? Az/Tom might be scumbuddies, but I don't think I can say the same for Az/Hunt. I'd reassess it if I get lynched toDay and Az doesn't go after Hunt toMorrow, but nobody listens to dead players so :shrug:.
So, scum!Az requires either {Az, Anak, Iso}, {Az, Anak, Tom}, or me having busted reads. Probably means Az is just town and I should move him above kpaca on the town/scum list. Definitely means I don't want to lynch Az toDay - every realistic scum!Az world has Anak as his scumbuddy, and scum!Anak does not imply scum!Az.
Need to run through the town!Az scumteam list and see what I can get out of it, but I'm out of time right now.
@Taredas: Why is wanting to do something because it's fun a reason that warrants a vote? This game was designed to be flavorful.
Because I think your *actual* reason is because you're scum trying to push a plan that will benefit scum and your "because it's fun!" is just public justification now that I called you on it.
Especially after this post, because mindset dissonance much? I mean, let's walk this through:
1) You explicitly note that this game was designed to be flavorful.
2) If this game is flavorful, then presumably the roles are flavorful - that is to say, if you have a player's role name, then you have a strong idea about what their abilities are.
3) Ergo, full name claiming D1 is probably pretty close to a D1 massclaim - and I'd expect some sort of counter to that in the setup, if nothing else then because D1 massclaim breaking the game is something that is supposed to be considered in setup review. (Actually, I suspect straight-up D1 massclaim would be *better* for town than a D1 nameclaim - nameclaim has the downside of a massclaim [giving scum a pretty good idea of who the strong town power roles are] without the upside of locking scum into claims and coordinating town abilities.)
4) And yet... you're advocating D1 nameclaim, and the *only* reason you give is "because it's fun".
Now, if you thought that D1 nameclaim was likely to *help* the town, that would be one thing (I think it's possible that Az thinks this, which is one reason I'm reserving judgment there) - but I don't see any evidence for that. If you didn't think nameclaim would matter one way or another, that would be another thing - but I don't see why you would think that given "this game was designed to be flavorful".
What I do see is a scum thought process covered up with "because it's fun".
This all sounds like much ado about nothing. My rolename is Newcomb/NotVoxicuss. Go ahead and tell me what my role does.
This comes across as a scum trying to present the pro-town argument without having an obvious reason for doing so. Vote Taredas
@Taredas: You actually think names will provide scum an accurate idea of what roles people have? Really?
Alright, I'm seppel, what does that tell you about me?
You, on the other hand, I'll just go ahead and answer: it tells me that the Mafioso with Iso flavor is the Mafia disruptive role.
Azrael
Iso
osieorb18
kpaca
D_V
Killjoy
shadowlancerx
Anaklusmos
Cyan
Scum
Huntzilla
Taredas
tomsloger
Game over?
Can you explain the Iso, D_V, and Cyan reads (assuming the list is ordered in townread strength, which I think is safe given 115)? I've got Iso down as "too early to tell, but early game is not encouraging", Cyan's my strongest townread, and D_V's my second strongest scumread (based mostly on post 35) but I'm not as confident about that read as I'd like.
It is 1 minute to deadline. There are two wagons at L-1: a wagon on me and a wagon on J. Random Sleb, a hypothetical player who you have a null read on and who has no relevant interactions. You are the only player not voting, and no one else is online. Who do you hammer, and why?
(Dream start for a Doom deck is probably T2 Firebrand Archer/Spellweaver Eternal, T3 Thorned Moloch/Bloodwater Entity, T4 Doom + Unsummon or Magma Spray.)
Scrounger should be solid in limited (it's reminding me of Prakhata Pillar-Bug, which played better than it looked due to its lifelink), but looking at the rest of the set I don't think it's going to be nearly as good as Faithbearer was. Part of Faithbearer's power was that basically every common and uncommon creature in Eldritch Moon was 2/3, 3/2, or 3/3, so a 3/4 matched up absurdly well against the format even before taking the lifelink into account. (IIRC this effect got called fundamental power and toughness back in the day.) Scrounger still stonewalls most of the early drops in Hour of Devastation, but this format looks like it's going to have a plethora of high-end creatures that are 4/4 or better (eternalize, a bunch of red and green 5- and 6-drops, plus some of the cards from the Amonkhet) and a 3/4 matches up poorly in that environment.
(The iconic example of this kind of format-based change in limited card evaluation was, is, and remains Terror and Shatter in original Mirrodin block.)
(That said, it's a perfectly cromulent sideboard card in burn formats.)
The card is less flashy than your average rare, especially given how high the eternalize cost is. But I think it might see play in spite of that.
Actually, you know what? You're right. I really *haven't* paid proper attention to your posts.
Up until now, at least.
Which is unfortunate for you, because if I had been paying proper attention to you I would have noticed the full implications of a couple of posts (notably 125) a while ago.
You're scum. Get lynched.
Let's look at 202 again:
Your comment on my gamestate analysis is that it's illogical because it makes a lot of assumptions... and I can't follow a town thought process for that. At all. What you're saying is both factually wrong and not relevant *at the same time*. It's wrong, because deductive logic is straight up "given X then Y" and 164 (and 201) are straight-up working through "if my assumptions are correct than they have the following implications about the gamestate" and helping me figure out whether those assumptions are correct (both by checking whether those assumptions generate consistent implications - see my D_V comments in 204, where I concluded that my assumption that D_V was likely scum was less likely conflicted with the implications of some of my other assumptions and that "D_V is likely scum" is less likely to be correct given that - and by indicating results that would falsify those assumptions). (To put it another way, it's *scientific* - I'm testing hypotheses.) It's also not relevant, because I don't see how whether or not 164 is illogical has a single whit to do with my alignment. My scumhunting process and especially gamestate solving process *is not rational* - or even *conscious*, for that matter. Reasoning is for error-checking (see: 164 and 204), drawing conclusions into the conscious (see 164 and 204 again) and for convincing other players that I'm right.
What I see no evidence of whatsoever is you actually trying to figure out *why* I'm making my assumptions, and whether or not they're genuine. Let's say for the sake of argument that 164 *was* illogical... again, so what? What does that say about my alignment?
What it *is* consistent with is scum whose primary motive is to *discredit* me. The entire comment is a *classic* ad hominem - "he's not being logical, you shouldn't listen to him".
Let's look at the rest of your questions/comments towards me in 202:
Classic, classic scum behavior - sniping at a townie with a wagon on them without actually committing a vote and while leaving himself an escape hatch to back off if needed.
The first two questions are... I guess the best way to put it is that they *could* come from town but I don't think they *do*? They're not *inconsistent* with a town mindset, but they're fakeable and I gutfeel that they *are* faked.
The third question is rich for somebody who's now accusing me of not reading his posts thoroughly - I made my Anak read fairly clear back in 62, and had put him in the leanscum pile back in 164. More importantly, it's a much clearer example of a question that doesn't actually help get to my mindset - how does my read on Anak help Killjoy figure out why I didn't ask Az to elaborate on his Anak read, especially when the players I asked Az about were two scumreads that Az was townreading and a townie that I considered a far stronger townread than Az did (provided that his townreads were in order of strength).
Now, let's take a look at Killjoy's original batch of questions back in 65:
That first question is a scum question through and through. There's no actual curiosity, just an attempt to discredit - both through painting my Osie read as being extreme ("pushing for Osie being town really hard" - I don't know, does it count as "really hard" when it's intended to derail a wagon that a) has developed to L-2 within the first 24 hours of the game and relatedly b) is on a player that you think will flip town?) and by the classic "when did you stop beating your wife?" rhetorical trick.
And that's doubly damning in light of me being the *other* major wagon at the time, because it's absolutely consistent with the classic scum tactic of staying on the sideline and sniping at a seemingly vulnerable townie to discredit them without getting their hands dirty by committing to a vote. And that's true of absolutely everything Killjoy has posted towards me this game.
I'm quoting this post in its entirety. Take a good look.
Killjoy thinks Osie is scum, with one scum on the wagon and one scum off. He *also* agrees with shadow that one of myself and Azrael is scum getting credit for a spicy read (I think, given the context, that shadow is referring to what is usually called "white knighting").
Wait, what?
If either myself or Az is scum defending Osie and Osie is scum, then by syllogism whichever of me and Az is defending Osie is defending a scumbuddy. That's not a towncred move, that's just scumteam preservation - the towncred move when your scumbuddy is being run up is *bussing*.
And yet... as far as I can tell, Killjoy is saying that he thinks that Osie is scum *and* that one of Az and myself is defending Osie for towncred. That dog don't hunt.
How does this thought process make sense as town? I can't see it.
It makes absolutely perfect sense if Killjoy is scum, though - especially scum who *knows* that Osie is town. In that case, it's a straight-up slip - Killjoy knows Osie will flip town, ergo one of Az/myself defending Osie for towncred makes perfect sense!
Except Killjoy *should* think that Osie will flip *scum*, in which case one of Az/myself would be defending a scumbuddy.
Oops.
But wait, there's more! While I'm here, let's take a look at a couple of Killjoy posts *not* involving me:
This is reminding me of how I jumped off AI in Gatecrash, so let me quote Az's response:
It's not an exact match by any means. But it feels similar, morphologically (and if you don't understand morphological thought process, you don't understand me). And I think the key point Az raised against me in Gatecrash also applies to you here: your unvote is slick. It's not really supported by your thought process - it's just "this isn't going to work out, I need to leave the wagon now".
It's also not the first time this game you've bailed off a wagon like this:
---
TL:DR:
- Killjoy's questions towards me are not consistent with town trying to sort me and *are* consistent with scum trying to discredit me.
- Killjoy's overall position in the gamestate is consistent with being scum: he's pushed on popular wagons on easy mislynches (Osie, tomsloger) while sniping from the sidelines at the strong player who drew a wagon (me) without committing to the attack.
- The way Killjoy has bailed off of *both* major wagons he's been on has been artificial.
- Post 65 is a mindset breach and scumslip: Killjoy thinks that one of Az and myself is white knighting Osie despite having a scumread on Osie.
- Okay, so apparently I will be trying to use mindset analysis this game after all.
Unvote, Vote: Killjoy
Right.
Zionite's not in the game, Sir Chris is.
Because I did my homework?
There are four active Council members, one is the pregame kill, that leaves three. Town win condition is to eliminate the Mafia Council, ergo Council is scum. Three possible Mafia flavor names, presumably three Mafiosos, you figure it out. (Outside chance of only two Mafia (in which case scum flavor is Az and Zionite) but I'd be really surprised by only two Mafia in a modern MTGS mini so...)
Add Iso to the "willing to lynch D1" list.
See, Iso's on the shortlist of players for whom *not posting* is a pretty good indicator of them being scum. (See also: me; Gatecrash is the most recent example.) That's been the case at least since WitchHunt, and even a cursory examination of Disinheritance indicates that this hasn't changed while I've been gone. I've had Iso on the backburner waiting to see if and when he showed up and started playing; my instinct starting the game was that Iso was likely scum if he still wasn't participating by the middle of D2, but after two "this is why I'm not posting" posts and promising to be more active after the deadline would have already passed I'm comfortable calling it now.
---
Firing on the vig is a bad idea *unless* a kill clanks first (in which case it's a very, very good idea). It's the other 3-4 good town burnouts I'm looking to rearm.
Yes.
It splits the playerbase into two groups - players who think I'm scum/would support the Tar wagon and players who don't. It's specifically phrased the way it is to sidestep "I think X is scum but Y is even more likely to be scum". There's a reason for that, but I'm not going to explain at this time.
I thought I'd made that clear already? Anak's a weak scumread, mostly based on how he's handled his PR - his posts early felt like he was using his PR to justify not contributing rather than trying to communicate through a PR. (I'm less confident about that at *this* point, but that's based entirely on his posts since you asked this question - 275 in particular reads.)
... Why is this important? What does this tell you?
---
Definitely played with: Az, Cyan, kpaca, Iso
Definitely modded, think I've played with* but can't remember: tomsloger, Huntzilla, Killjoy
Definitely modded, don't think I've played with*: D_V, Anak
No prior experience: You, Osie
* - Unless you're counting "was in Mind Screw Salvation where I was a postless, voteless Survivor in addition to being the mod", in which case I've played with all five.
---
Hunt: Hard to explain, mostly his position in the gamestate. Best way I can put it is that most of his posting feels like it's mirroring the thread consensus except for his stances on my wagon and calling kpaca/shadow town-on-town; that's consistent with deep wolf (if he *is* deep wolf then his defense of me is for towncred and/or pocketing and kpaca/shadow is either for the same or to justify a townread on a partner) and doesn't fit as well if he's scum who thinks he has a safety blanket. Problem is, it's *also* consistent with Hunt being town going with the flow, hence the null read overall.
Shadow: I'll put it this way:
Unvote, Vote: shadow
Strong scumread, preferred lynch for the day (with the possible exception of Iso, given his continued not posting (see above) and how good of a rolehunter Iso is?) - not sure he's my *strongest* scumread, but he's close and if he's scum then there's a very good chance he is specifically the Mafia disruptive role (Roleblocker or the like):
- Shadow has claimed Seppel.
- Given Seppel flavor and how this game seems to be handling flavor I'll be surprised if shadow's role is anything other than disruptive or maybe something to do with votes (barring scum!shadow who swapped a safeclaim with a buddy). (This is contributing to my scumread on Shadow - my sense of the setup says that the kind of roles that make sense for Seppel flavor don't overlap much with the kind of roles town is likely to have in the setup..)
- I'll be surprised if the Mafia doesn't have at least one role whose main function is to interfere with town abilities, because how often do the Mafia *not* have such a role outside of very low-power games?
- Given the game's flavor, the flavor of the Mafia members is known: Azrael, Iso, and Zionite (barring the corner case where there are only two scum in which case Zionite is absent) - I'm guessing Iso is a disruptive role and Zionite is a goonish role. Furthermore, since the Mafia have flavor that identifies them as Mafia, they need safeclaims.
- *IF* Bur wanted to give the Mafia safeclaims that would match with them trueclaiming their abilities, then Seppel makes a lot of sense for the disruptive role's safeclaim given the above. Operative word "if" - scum safeclaims matching abilities is an assumption I'm making, but it's not a safe assumption and I know it. That said, it's a common enough mechanism of making safeclaims that I'm willing to make the assumption (should *probably* check whether Bur has ruin previous games and whether he used full safeclaim PMs in them - safeclaims matching true abilities is much more likely if the mod provides full safeclaim PMs).
(Why yes I *will* play outguess the mod, thank you very much!)
---
Lynch pool: shadow, Iso, tom (not sure if Tom belongs here or in the next pool given the last few pages; not clearing tom for it, got burned really badly by doing that with Proph back in the 2015 Invitational, but also not sure I actively want to lynch him toDay)
Would not oppose a lynch but not going to fight for it either: D_V, Hunt, Anak? (scumread but I'm a bit wary of lynching him toDay despite that)
I'm Vaimes, all-around nice person and antidote to Mafia burnout. There's two burnouts I'd expect to be in the game given the mechanic and the number of players, and as you might expect given my flavor I've got one of them: I can burnout to let another player reuse their own burnout. This doesn't let the target reuse their regular abilities, and it only works on players who have already burned out (hence why I need to claim, because if I'm *not* lynched toDay then the roles with strong burnouts need to consider firing early). No other abilities.
(The other burnout I expect in the game is a vig shot. Suspect there's 4-5 strong town burnouts total [counting the vig] plus 1 or 2 strong scum burnouts that I don't want to recharge; design senses say scum are likely to have a permablock/ mass roleblock/"deplete target player's burnout" as a burnout, so keep that in mind.)
---
It's a useful tool/starting point, in that it's a proxy for the questions I'm actually trying to answer.
---
... Do I need to rethink my Killjoy townread? Because this reads like how I tend to bail off of scumreads as scum (like how I bailed off AI in Return to Ravnica).
---
You're quite right that my opening vote was inauthentic. You're just wrong about *why*.
As I commented on back in signups, my tonal analysis reads have been giving me bad results lately - see the 2015 Invitational, and there's a couple of games I've lurked offsite while I didn't have time to play (the Mafia Championships and a game or two on 'Scum). It's gotten to the point where having a strong tonal townread on a player is a reason to *scumread* that player. So I've busted out a few of my older tricks, including a classic from MafiaScum Large Normals - run a vote on a scummy-but-I'm-not-sure-they're-scum player early D1 and see how many people bite. (Think I talked about this back in Redux Mirror, where it didn't work due to a combination of a voting restriction and a wagon-averse group of players.)
Which is exactly what I was doing with Osie. He was scummy enough that I was comfortable breaking RVS to vote him, but thought it was entirely possible that my first instincts were wrong and Osie was, in fact, town. I could have voted my *other* scumread (shadow), but I wanted to keep him on the backburner until he'd answered why he was supporting D_V's mass name claim suggestion. So I ran Osie up the flagpole. (To put it another way, I was trying to answer the question "are we in a world where the Osie wagon will gain lots of support or are we in a world where the Osie wagon flames out like a damp squib?".)
Only problem was, the technique I was using is one I developed for *Large* Normals (usually 16 players or more), where the lynch threshold is 8 or higher. More problematically, D_V had placed a true random vote, and in Minis the third vote has the combined effect of the third and fourth vote in a Large - I wanted to see if the Osie wagon would blow up but didn't want to force it to do so. Hence, a vote with no belief behind it. I mean, I guess I could have just *not posted*, but **** that noise - especially since I *did* want to get shadow's explanation for supporting nameclaim without tipping him off that I considered it voteworthy. Almost certainly botched the execution, but :shrug:.
And... I'm not even sure why I'm bothering to type this, because I kind of think I'm the correct lynch toDay given the gamestate *despite knowing I'll flip town* (assuming Az is town, but at this point I think that is the case). Not going to push through my own lynch, but not going to fight it either.
(Really wish Cyan hadn't morphed into MTGS's equivalent of DGB [aka Kami of Lunacy in the Crosstown games] sometime around the 2015 Invitational - would be a lot more confident .)
---
Not sure if this makes {Anak, Tom, X} more or less likely, but I think this probably comes from a scum mindset either way?
And while I'm trying not to put much stock in tonal analysis the little nagging voice in my head is reading tomsloger's posts and going "wait, are you *sure* you're reading this game and not SG-1/Mind Screw?".
And tom fits into basically all of the scumteams.
Yeah, kinda think tom's more likely to flip scum than shadow at this point.
Unvote, Vote: tomsloger
(Hi Az! Welcome to inauthentic reasoning based on "I'm not going to have the time/opportunity to actually see whether my new techniques work this game, so **** putting more work into this game than the bare minimum".)
As a reminder, assuming 0-1 scum on my wagon ({shadow}), 1-2 scum on the Osie wagon {D_V, Anak, Huntzilla}, 1-2 scum off both wagons {Iso, tomsloger}.
Shadow, D_V, Iso - doubt it, don't think shadow and D_V are buddies
Shadow, D_V, tomsloger - again, this is a D_V/Shadow team and thus unlikely. Also, would D_V and tomsloger really be willing to both vote Az despite lacking townie support if they were scumbuddies?
Shadow, Anak, Iso - pretty much the scumteam equivalent of a nullread (nothing to support or refute this team)? That's true for basically every Anak/Iso team, actually - Iso's been too inactive and off to the side to generate strong connections, Anak's PR has had the same effect.
Shadow, Anak, tomsloger - Plausible. Shadow/tom haven't really interacted, and Anak is Anak.
Shadow, Huntzilla, Iso - Leaning against this team, but with low confidence because it's based on an assessment of how Hunt would act on it. Hunt's play so far gutfeels like if he's scum then he's the deep wolf, and considering Iso's reputation and Huntzilla's middling scumgame deepwolf!Hunt doesn't mesh well with scum!Iso.
Shadow, Huntzilla, tomsloger - Much more plausible than the Iso version, given how lynchable tom tends to be.
D_V, Anak, Iso - another Anak/Iso team, so perfectly plausible
D_V, Anak, tomsloger - again, D_V/Tom teams require that both D_V and Tom were willing to vote Az despite lacking any support from town.
D_V, Huntzilla, Iso - another Hunt/Iso team, same reason for being skeptical as before.
D_V, Huntzilla, tomsloger - See previous D_V/Tom comments, but this is the one team where a coordinated scum assault on Az might make sense - if this is the team then Az has nailed two of them D1, and that's a situation I could see scum try to counterattack to try to discredit the attacker (Chainsaw Defense!).
Anak, Huntzilla, Iso - another Hunt/Iso team, previous comments apply.
Anak, Huntzilla, tomsloger - Don't see any reason why not?
D_V, Iso, tomsloger - Again, requires D_V and Tom to both be scum voting Az without support. Making a special note of this one, however - I've got gutfeels that this team is actually plausible in spite of that.
Anak, Iso, tomsloger - Again, all the Anak/Iso teams are plausible to me.
Huntzilla, Iso, tomsloger - See previous comments on Hunt/Iso.
So, best-fit teams in town!Az world are {Shadow, Anak, Iso}, {Shadow, Anak, Tom}, {Shadow, Hunt, Tom}, {D_V, Anak, Iso}, {Anak, Hunt, tom}, {Anak, Iso, tom}, maybe {D_V, Hunt, Tom}, maaaaaaybe {D_V, Iso, Tom}. All three scum on the Osie wagon isn't out of the realm of possibility, in which case the team would be exactly {D_V, Anak, Hunt}; I'm dubious about the possibility of no scum on the Osie wagon, but {Shadow, Iso, Tom} feels plausible enough outside of that to not discount it completely.
Actually, looking at that... I don't like D_V's play, but there's not a lot of scumteams that make sense for him since I think he's anti-aligned with shadow *and* tomsloger. There's the D_V version of the little black dress scumteam {Anak/Iso/X} and a couple of "I think my argument against these two players being buddies is less likely to be accurate in the case of this specific team" and that's it. Couple that with being the first player to suggest mass name claim (fairly bold move for scum) and there's a pretty good chance I'm wrong on D_V and he's town.
{Tar}
Cyan
Osie
kpaca
Killjoy
Az
Huntzilla
Anak
Iso
D_V
tomsloger
shadow
Osie up from leantown to full townread given most recent posts.
I think either my D_V or shadow scumread is busted - very strongly doubt the first two players to suggest nameclaim are both scum - but I'm not sure which.
Az is my keystone read for the setup; leaning town on him given page 4 posting but not confident, and I think both gamestate and what I should be doing are very different in town!Az and scum!Az worlds. Need to assess what gamestate looks like given town!Az and scum!Az...
Actually, let me just do that now?
If town!Az:
- Az town by given, Cyan strong townread, kpaca moderately strong townread. That means either shadow is scum or the wagon on me is all-town; both are plausible, especially at 4 votes and the second leading wagon on my other strong townread (I'm town, I think Osie is town, if both leading wagons are on town then scum usually don't care which wagon they support).
- Counterwagon on Osie is {(D_V), Killjoy, (Tar), Anak, (kpaca), Huntzilla}, with D_V, kpaca, and myself all leaving the wagon and Huntzilla not initially joining it due to wagon size. Factor in wagon target and the players not involved with the wagon are Az (town by given), Cyan (strong townread), tomsloger, shadow, and Iso. So either the scumteam is *exactly* {tomsloger, shadow, Iso} or there's at least one scum involved with the wagon - and Osie's a townread, so unless that's a busted read all the scum are *on* the wagon.
- That implies, assuming no busted townreads, roughly 0-1 scum on my wagon ({shadow}), 1-2 scum on the Osie wagon {D_V, Anak, Huntzilla}, 1-2 scum off both wagons {Iso, tomsloger}.
Flip that around, assume scum!Az:
- Az is now scum by given, so definitely one scum on my wagon. Cyan and kpaca still townreads; I think shadow is actually *less* likely to be scum in this world? Scum generally don't all pile onto a single wagon when both leading wagons are on town, preferring to either spread evenly or stay off both wagons. Doesn't apply if I'm wrong and Osie is scum, but that would imply that the scumteam is *exactly* {Az, Osie, shadow} and that feels dubious by corner-case standards.
- With one scum given offwagon, that puts 0-2 scum involved with the Osie wagon. Scum!Osie is slightly more plausible in scum!Az worlds than in town!Az worlds, but I think it's still a corner case. Still have a hard time seeing the Osie wagon get that much support that fast without at least one scum on it, so...
- I think the best fit scum!Az worlds have the second scum on the Osie wagon and the third scum was off to the side; scum!Az with two scum on Osie is dubious since it would mean all three scum rejected the scum tendency to react to multiple wagons on town by sitting on the side eating popcorn, scum!Az with two scum on the sidelines would mean that the Osie wagon hit L-2 without a single scum vote. That would mean one scum in {D_V, Anak, Hunt} and one scum in {Iso, tom}. That leaves six likely scum!Az worlds:
Az, D_V, Tom - Tom's off-Tar, off-Osie vote is specifically *on Az* and D_V moved off of Osie *onto Az* so this would require *both* of Az's partners to be bussing him when he's not under heavy suspicion. No.
Az, Anak, Tom - Maybe? Anak fits into basically every team given his post restriction and how he's played it so far, Tom just requires that Az pulled the "throw a scumbuddy in as your weakest scumread" and Tom's response is consistent (or more accurately isn't inconsistent) with scum who knows that the player attacking him is scum.
Az, Hunt, Tom - would require that Az put both of his scumbuddies on his scumlist when neither was under heavy suspicion, not likely.
Az, D_V, Iso - D_V's behavior from P3 on is really weird if he's scum with Az. Plausible, but only barely.
Az, Anak, Iso - This... is a possible team. Az's townread on Iso feels premature to me, and Anak is still the free space of scumteam worldbuilding.
Az, Hunt, Iso - I don't think that meshes with Az/Hunt interactions? Az/Tom might be scumbuddies, but I don't think I can say the same for Az/Hunt. I'd reassess it if I get lynched toDay and Az doesn't go after Hunt toMorrow, but nobody listens to dead players so :shrug:.
So, scum!Az requires either {Az, Anak, Iso}, {Az, Anak, Tom}, or me having busted reads. Probably means Az is just town and I should move him above kpaca on the town/scum list. Definitely means I don't want to lynch Az toDay - every realistic scum!Az world has Anak as his scumbuddy, and scum!Anak does not imply scum!Az.
Need to run through the town!Az scumteam list and see what I can get out of it, but I'm out of time right now.
Do you *really* want me to answer this question?
You, on the other hand, I'll just go ahead and answer: it tells me that the Mafioso with Iso flavor is the Mafia disruptive role.
Can you explain the Iso, D_V, and Cyan reads (assuming the list is ordered in townread strength, which I think is safe given 115)? I've got Iso down as "too early to tell, but early game is not encouraging", Cyan's my strongest townread, and D_V's my second strongest scumread (based mostly on post 35) but I'm not as confident about that read as I'd like.
It is 1 minute to deadline. There are two wagons at L-1: a wagon on me and a wagon on J. Random Sleb, a hypothetical player who you have a null read on and who has no relevant interactions. You are the only player not voting, and no one else is online. Who do you hammer, and why?