Mafia 46 - Ace Attorney - GAME THREAD

[Squigs44]

Answer for Squigs 2 (I tried underlining my answer, but I think Underlining questions may be better now)
You said you might vote for TrPrado near the end of the day. Why?

I doubted Prado at the time. Because he parked his vote.

When you made the post where you said you might vote for TrPrado (here), TrPrado was not voting for anyone. He had not been voting anyone for about 14 hours. Before that he had voted 4 different people. How was he parking his vote?

You said that Bozo lied, and said you pointed out where he lied in (this post). Can you quote the post where he lied and tell me how it was a lie?

That was my misunderstood.
My misunderstanding thought is that.
'Firstly bozo said he read Chipe as scum.
At near by Eod1, bozo said that was policy lynch.'
And I understand my misunderstood in conversation with bozo and posted it.
I will quote it in next reply.

Okay, so he didn't lie, you just misunderstood something he said? That's understandable, it happens to all of us.

[Durga]

When is the last time teacon posted? I swear I saw him lurking recently. He's got to be scum

[Durga]

When is the last time teacon posted? I swear I saw him lurking recently. He's got to be scum

I take it back. He last visited Wed at 12pm.

[Durga]

Percy is lurking tho

[Squigs44]

Answer for Squigs 3(last)

You say that you townread Chippe, Percy, and teacon (here). Those townreads seem to be built at the very beginning of D1. The townread of Percy looks to be because he agreed with you? Why does agreeing with you make him townie? Any updates on your thoughts of teacon, or Chippe?

About Percy, I guess his thought of voting bozo and that might be correct.
So I think he is townie. I don't think he agreed me.
About Chipe, I have thought he is townie.
And I haven't read teacon and Percy's post Day2 yet, I am worried.

You said you don't think Percy agreed with you in this answer. But on day 1, you said:

Nextly, about Percy.
I thought boz might be scum.
(And I thought Percy might be town because of same thought.)
So, I don't want to players stop focus boz.

Having the same thought as someone is agreeing with them. You say here you think Percy is town because he also scumread Bozo. Why did scum-reading Bozo make Percy town to you?

[et]

Answer for Squigs.
Questions for et:
Why did you defend Percy's vote when Percy gave no reasoning, but scumread Bozo's vote when he gave no reasoning?

I didn't scumread bozo because he gave no reason.
bozo voted Chipe when Chipe was already voted by many players.
Firstly, I thought he may be irritated by Chipe's post as Durga and didn't want to talke about Chipe.
But he said he read Chip as scum. And he didn't explain why he read Chipe as scum at first. So I was starting to doubt bozo. I thought he just want to alive and vote to a player about to be victim of lynch.
And Percy voted bozo when no one voted bozo.
I think, his thought is what I thought. And, I read Percy as town because of same thought.

Thank you, after reading through your post three more times with this answer you just gave I finally see what this post was actually saying. I think.

After Bozo gave clear reasoning for his vote, did this impact your read on him?

Yes. He said, he read Chip as scum. And he didn't say why he read Chip as scum at first.
So, I read boz as scum strongly after I read it.


I leave here about half an hour, I will answer remaining questions afterward.

Help me out here. You are saying when Bozo originally didn't give a reason, you did not scumread him. But after he gave his reason and you read it, you did scumread him?

Yes, so I parked my vote. Just I asked boz questions. When Percy voted to bozo, I waited bozo's answer.
For example, Tom's answer for my question was very understandable for me. So I didn't doubt Tom.

[et]

Answer for Squigs 3(last)

You say that you townread Chippe, Percy, and teacon (here). Those townreads seem to be built at the very beginning of D1. The townread of Percy looks to be because he agreed with you? Why does agreeing with you make him townie? Any updates on your thoughts of teacon, or Chippe?

About Percy, I guess his thought of voting bozo and that might be correct.
So I think he is townie. I don't think he agreed me.
About Chipe, I have thought he is townie.
And I haven't read teacon and Percy's post Day2 yet, I am worried.

You said you don't think Percy agreed with you in this answer. But on day 1, you said:

Nextly, about Percy.
I thought boz might be scum.
(And I thought Percy might be town because of same thought.)
So, I don't want to players stop focus boz.

Having the same thought as someone is agreeing with them. You say here you think Percy is town because he also scumread Bozo. Why did scum-reading Bozo make Percy town to you?

My thought was that. Town had to bozo's naked vote. But anyone else except Percy don't focused that. Scum's may through that intentionally, or not read post in detail.
So, I thought Percy is one of the townie person.

[Squigs44]

Okay, I just read an et ISO. Pretty sure he is Town.

Things I like:

- He does a lot of town reading people who other people are scum reading. Generally, that's something that townfolk do a lot more than scumfolk. Speaking very generally, scumfolk more often townread people who are widely townread. Scumfolk don't want to (a) lose a potential mislynch target, or (b) overtly defend a scumbuddy. So, by and large, town reads from scum are given only to people who lots of others read as town. That is not a hard and fast rule, but it's a decent rule of thumb.

ET has had solid town reads on Carl, Chippe, teacon, and Percy, and at least a soft town read on Flavius (see pages 27, 53, 120). I'd say that, were et scum, it's pretty unlikely that he would have town reads on Chippe, teacon, Percy, and Flavius, as he would perceive them as mislynch targets (or else a scumbuddy). I just would not expect that. There was nothing forcing ET to townread those people. He had to go against the grain to do it, and he didn't even explain those reads very thoroughly. I don't think Scum!et makes those reads.

- His vote for Bozo seems sincere. Here is what he wrote at page 55:

My thought is that.
boz voted Chip because of many plays had voted.
And he don't join any conversation. Just he answered a few questions for him.
Because he don't want to stand out.
He don't make effort to find scum.
He just want to alive.
So, I think he is scum.

This especially makes sense after ET townread Chippe, and I generally grok the reasoning. I think ET understands this game, and is generally making sensible arguments. We shouldn't think of him as unsophisticated just because his posts reflect sometimes that English is not his first language.

Beyond that, it's just a tonal thing. His posts ring sincere to me, and I like how he has handled the claim/don't claim thing.

Scum et would townread Chippe and Percy because they were pushing Bozo with him. Carl was universally townread. Teacon is a strange townread, but perhaps they are scumbuds. Not saying et is scum, just that him townreading those people doesn't make him as townie as you are saying.

After et's answer to my question and re-reading his posts multiple times, I would agree that his vote on Bozo doesn't seem forced.

[Durga]

Ok I'm convinced

##vote EspressoPatronum

[et]

Rewrite
My thought was that. Town had to focus on bozo's naked vote. But anyone else except Percy don't focused that. Scum's may through that intentionally, or not read post in detail.
So, I thought Percy is one of the townie person.

[Squigs44]

Answer for Squigs 3(last)

You say that you townread Chippe, Percy, and teacon (here). Those townreads seem to be built at the very beginning of D1. The townread of Percy looks to be because he agreed with you? Why does agreeing with you make him townie? Any updates on your thoughts of teacon, or Chippe?

About Percy, I guess his thought of voting bozo and that might be correct.
So I think he is townie. I don't think he agreed me.
About Chipe, I have thought he is townie.
And I haven't read teacon and Percy's post Day2 yet, I am worried.

You said you don't think Percy agreed with you in this answer. But on day 1, you said:

Nextly, about Percy.
I thought boz might be scum.
(And I thought Percy might be town because of same thought.)
So, I don't want to players stop focus boz.

Having the same thought as someone is agreeing with them. You say here you think Percy is town because he also scumread Bozo. Why did scum-reading Bozo make Percy town to you?

My thought was that. Town had to bozo's naked vote. But anyone else except Percy don't focused that. Scum's may through that intentionally, or not read post in detail.
So, I thought Percy is one of the townie person.

Okay, that is a much better reason for town reading him, thanks.

[et]

We've been arguing for a long time about whether EspressoPatronums play was optimal. The general consensus is that no, it was not.
Whether his play was optimal or not doesn't matter. What matters is whether his play was scummy or not. For anyone wishing to move on from this tireless back and forth, answer these NEW questions:

Do you think that EP pulled this move to fish for PRs? Why or why not?
Do you think that EP pulled this move to look more townie? Why or why not?
Do you think EP actually believes his long post (does it feel genuine), or do you think he wrote it simply to defend himself?
Besides this play, and his posts being "calculated" what other reasons do you see for him being scum?

Do you think that EP pulled this move to fish for PRs? Why or why not?
No. If he is scum, he can fish for PR claiming PR. If he is town, there are no reason to fish for PR

Do you think that EP pulled this move to look more townie? Why or why not?
Fundamentally yes.

Do you think EP actually believes his long post (does it feel genuine), or do you think he wrote it simply to defend himself?
I think EP actually believes.

Besides this play, and his posts being "calculated" what other reasons do you see for him being scum?
Yes. Scum claiming as VT is very risky. So very townie move.
But there are return too. Some players may read EP as town strongly and vote me.
My conclusion is, regardless he is scum or town, he can claim VT such as early time.

[EspressoPatronum]

Lets do a modified Pascal wager, EP.

Lets operate under the assumption you are VT.
There are two actions:
1) Claim VT and ask et to claim
2) Do not claim my role and let et claim his role only if he is a PR and is the lead vote-getter near EoD
There are three possible facts:
A) et is a VT
B) et is a PR
C) et is scum

That makes six outcomes:
1A : Both claim VT, day goes on as if there were no claim
2A: Neither ever claim, day goes on as if there were no claim
1B: et claims, you are lynched, et is NKd
2B: If et the lead vote getter near EoD, et claims, you are lynched et is NKd, if you are the lead vote getter near EoD, you are lynched, et's role remains hidden
1C: et can claim VT, day goes on as if there were no claim, or he can fake claim forcing a CC
2C: et can not claim a role, day goes on as if there were no claim, or he can fake claim near EoD forcing a CC, or mad rush onto you.

1A and 2A have the same outcome, 1C and 2C have almost the same outcome, but 2B is better than 1B. Thus, 2 is equal to or better than 1 in all cases. Do you disagree?

With only the two actions presented and their respective outcomes, I agree with your assessment. 2 is better than 1 in all cases.

But I do not agree there were only two actions, and I do not think #2 is as 100% reliable in practice when compared to theory.

I could have claimed and not asked (action 3). I also could have not claimed + et may have claimed regardless (action 4). Adding those into the equation, do you think the outcomes change? My initial thought is #3 probably yields better results.... I'll file that away for next time.

I also think relying on the lead vote-getter strategy is risky with 6 mafia in the game. We saw a swing happen last time, and it's possible a swing happens this time. What if we went with option #2, et doesn't claim PR bcz he's safe, then the maf swings the vote in the last minutes? In this outcome, we had every opportunity to get a claim from et, but we lost out because we thought he was safe.

[Durga]

Ok now teacon is DEFINITELY looking at this thread

[Squigs44]

Lets do a modified Pascal wager, EP.

Lets operate under the assumption you are VT.
There are two actions:
1) Claim VT and ask et to claim
2) Do not claim my role and let et claim his role only if he is a PR and is the lead vote-getter near EoD
There are three possible facts:
A) et is a VT
B) et is a PR
C) et is scum

That makes six outcomes:
1A : Both claim VT, day goes on as if there were no claim
2A: Neither ever claim, day goes on as if there were no claim
1B: et claims, you are lynched, et is NKd
2B: If et the lead vote getter near EoD, et claims, you are lynched et is NKd, if you are the lead vote getter near EoD, you are lynched, et's role remains hidden
1C: et can claim VT, day goes on as if there were no claim, or he can fake claim forcing a CC
2C: et can not claim a role, day goes on as if there were no claim, or he can fake claim near EoD forcing a CC, or mad rush onto you.

1A and 2A have the same outcome, 1C and 2C have almost the same outcome, but 2B is better than 1B. Thus, 2 is equal to or better than 1 in all cases. Do you disagree?

With only the two actions presented and their respective outcomes, I agree with your assessment. 2 is better than 1 in all cases.

But I do not agree there were only two actions, and I do not think #2 is as 100% reliable in practice when compared to theory.

I could have claimed and not asked (action 3). I also could have not claimed + et may have claimed regardless (action 4). Adding those into the equation, do you think the outcomes change? My initial thought is #3 probably yields better results.... I'll file that away for next time.

I also think relying on the lead vote-getter strategy is risky with 6 mafia in the game. We saw a swing happen last time, and it's possible a swing happens this time. What if we went with option #2, et doesn't claim PR bcz he's safe, then the maf swings the vote in the last minutes? In this outcome, we had every opportunity to get a claim from et, but we lost out because we thought he was safe.

Well... action 4 is out of your hands so really isn't an action. Action 3 is just like action 2 except it gives the mafia the info that you are not a PR, so I still think 2 is slightly better.

If mafia swings the vote at the last minute like that they out themselves. I guess it depends on the availability of both of you to be around at the deadline as well. But in general, the longer you wait the better.

[EspressoPatronum]

​To Espresso
....
I understand what you said but I have different thought.
(1) If I claimed PR, just you are voted all players (or no lynch is possible too).
We can't get much information about other players.
(2) I think judge don't hope so.
(3) So, I think that's too early.
(4) I don't try to persuade you.
(5) Please receive as my opinion.

*EP's note - I numbered your responses in the quote so I could speak to them individually.

(1) You're right. My intent in asking was for that exact scenario to occur if you were a PR. Probably best you held off until later so we could hash out the different outcomes.
(2) tbh I don't know what the judge was thinking. It seems to have generated quite the discussion though, so props to them for that I guess.
(3) Most people agree with you here.
(4) And yet it's wholesomely persuasive.
(5) Will do.

@Neph After processing and reading his replies to me and Squigs, it's pretty hard to read et as scum. Seems pretty town to me.

@et what are your thoughts on the potential for the mafia to swing the vote by up to 6. What is the best way to insulate ourselves from a surprise EOD shift?

[Squigs44]

As of right now I think they are both likely town. After having a discussion with et I feel much better about et. Would still like to hear an answer from et about how TrPrado was parking his vote. Would still like to hear from others about this post of mine on EP.

[Durga]

Does anyone scum read either player?

[EspressoPatronum]

Well... action 4 is out of your hands so really isn't an action. Action 3 is just like action 2 except it gives the mafia the info that you are not a PR, so I still think 2 is slightly better.

If mafia swings the vote at the last minute like that they out themselves. I guess it depends on the availability of both of you to be around at the deadline as well. But in general, the longer you wait the better.

Interesting. Fair enough.

What are your thoughts on @Flav?

The reason I'm so worried about this vote swing is that I think we had a scum lined up to die, but the bozo swing at the end ruined it. I'm trying to make sure that doesn't happen again.

If Flav is scum and the vote swing happened the way I think it did, the mafia have gone unnoticed. I also think that such a vote swing between et and me would be obvious, but I think the maf already pulled off a swing and haven't answered for it. Who's to say they can't do it again?

[Percy Williams]

Only on page 120, but my method of working through Town reads demands I vote Espresso, but I don't feel good about either of these votes. I'd save the next vote force for later game to force the Mafia's hand.

##vote EspressoPatronum

Gosh, I'm unclear again. To clarify, I have a solid Town read on ET, as though he is a low poster, what I've seen is good and Town motivated. So I vote Espresso.