# Evil Dead Mafia Forbidden Thread - The Cabin in the Woods **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [December 18, 2008, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-forbidden-thread-the-cabin-in-the-woods/477796 "2008-12-18T20:11:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![NAF1138](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/naf1138/32/3245_2.png) [@NAF1138](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NAF1138)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-forbidden-thread-the-cabin-in-the-woods/477796/141 "2009-01-12T16:17:42Z")
> [@sachertorte](#): > > Possibly, possibly not. The shorter days might simply be more efficient. If the day were longer then it probably would have just taken longer for the town to start harping on you. That is, you might have only had one day to work in either case. The beginning of the Day is just fluff no matter what. A case could be made that shorter days just moves up the juicy parts. If town is playing well then a short Day really hurts town. If town is playing lazy then it doesn’t make any difference if the Day is longer. I think recent games have seen a lot of lazy play on towns part, but this game saw a lot of good play that was cut short by a too short Day. I think 24 more hours would have been ideal. Still fast enough to feel fast, but long enough that some decisions about the lynch can be made without everything being under the gun and sloppy. I think it would have also helped the town to have every thread end with the lynch to the threads went Nigt/Day instead of Day/Night. Psycologically I think it would have felt more like the Night was an intro into the next Day rather than the Night was a time to do a post mortem and then forget about it. I hated having the lynch in the middle of the thread. Oh and before I get spoiled: JSexton Mhaye amrussel are the people I think are most likely the remaining scum. ---
**Author:** ![Blaster\_Master](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/cab0a1/32.png) [@Blaster\_Master](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blaster_Master)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-forbidden-thread-the-cabin-in-the-woods/477796/142 "2009-01-12T16:33:29Z")
> [@sachertorte](#): > > My feeling is that anything that obfuscates your motivations is anti-Town. Changing styles is self-serving, that is, it helps you as an individual; since everyone else has no idea what team you are on, it helps you and _hurts_ them. So killing you is the easier than having to decide whether each of your actions is scum-motivated or some fancy new “style.” > > And it is very much more anti-town than it is anti-scum, because you could be scum. And even when you are not, obfuscating whether or not you are a powerrole is a very minor facet. In other words, hiding that you are scum is much more anti-town than hiding whether or not you are a powerrole is anti-scum. I see your point, but that’s also where the game loses a lot of fun with me. There are some people that I’ve played with enough times that I have an easier time getting a read on them simply because I’ve seen how they play as scum and as town enough times that I can often get unquantifiable reads and, as long as I don’t have to quantify them, I can play on them. For instance, in this game, I had a strong, unquantifiable, pro-town power role read on **NAF** , had he not claimed when he did, I would have killed him that Night, but fearing that he may have been doc-protected, I didn’t. So, sure his play is pro-town, but it also defeats one of the larger purposes of playing the game, which I like to look at a lot like poker, where it’s all about reading people. A lot of my actions go into considering, not just how I’m reading people, but how other people will read and react to my actions. Obviously, I made some poor calculations in this game, and had endless bad luck (like all of my failed Night kills, and then hoping for **NAF** to be around and he wasn’t, while not wanting **JSexton** around, and he was, etc.). But the less I have to work to determine other people’s roles, and the less I have to work to play my role well based on a pre-established pattern, the less fun I have with the game. As a point, I think one of the most fun games I ever played in was the Batman one. Obviously, we lost, but the enormous challenge of digging myself out of such a huge hole was a blast, and I think it showed through my play. Finally, just if it eases your mind, I usually pick the general flavor of my style before I even find out what role I have. Sometimes it requires tweaking, and I was not happy with how I ended up feeling I had to play this one, because my IRL lack of time on Day One, combined with a being behind from the getgo, and being worried about how easily **peeker** would track me down, I don’t think I had much of a choice other than to go from my intended style of lurky, to extremely lurky and very aggressive. Anyway, FWIW, I’ve already chosen my intended style for the next game I play in. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![NAF1138](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/naf1138/32/3245_2.png) [@NAF1138](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NAF1138)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-forbidden-thread-the-cabin-in-the-woods/477796/143 "2009-01-12T16:37:26Z")
> [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT FIVE](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/30): > > Whoa! Nice catch, Hal! Am gonna take a closer look at Mhaye. Grumble. :mad: ---
**Author:** ![Blaster\_Master](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/cab0a1/32.png) [@Blaster\_Master](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blaster_Master)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-forbidden-thread-the-cabin-in-the-woods/477796/144 "2009-01-12T16:40:29Z")
> [@NAF1138](#): > > If town is playing well then a short Day really hurts town. If town is playing lazy then it doesn’t make any difference if the Day is longer. I think recent games have seen a lot of lazy play on towns part, but this game saw a lot of good play that was cut short by a too short Day. I think 24 more hours would have been ideal. Still fast enough to feel fast, but long enough that some decisions about the lynch can be made without everything being under the gun and sloppy. > > I think it would have also helped the town to have every thread end with the lynch to the threads went Nigt/Day instead of Day/Night. Psycologically I think it would have felt more like the Night was an intro into the next Day rather than the Night was a time to do a post mortem and then forget about it. I hated having the lynch in the middle of the thread. > Oh and before I get spoiled: > > JSexton > Mhaye > amrussel > > are the people I think are most likely the remaining scum. Agreed on the discussion. I really do like the idea of allowing discussion to occur whenever, I do think it’s a very pro-town thing that needs to be weighted properly, because it doesn’t allow scum the opportunity to perhaps interupt discussions with kills, or just hope things cool down or whatever, and it allows town to keep momentum going, or immediately follow up on things. I would also agree that, in the future, if we do multiple threads again, Night/Day probably is a better division, though it’s obviously no different at all if it’s all in one thread, or there’s seperate threads for Nights and Days. As for the scum, I agree with the first two, though I think my read on **MHaye** is more of one of those unsubstantiable ones. For a third, I didn’t have a good read on **amrussel** , which may mean something, and I had one on someone else, whose name escapes me right now, but that would all depend on how the first two come out. ---
**Author:** ![NAF1138](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/naf1138/32/3245_2.png) [@NAF1138](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NAF1138)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-forbidden-thread-the-cabin-in-the-woods/477796/145 "2009-01-12T16:44:23Z")
I am thinking amrussel because he has been mentioned several times as suspicious but it hasn’t ever gone anywhere. Lack of traction seems to be a fairly reliable scum tell. The way he reacted to my claim pinged me a bit too, though I don’t actually remember how he reacted anymore, just that his reaction sent up a little flag in my head. ---
**Author:** ![Blaster\_Master](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/cab0a1/32.png) [@Blaster\_Master](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blaster_Master)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-forbidden-thread-the-cabin-in-the-woods/477796/146 "2009-01-12T16:45:14Z")
> [@NAF1138](#): > > Grumble. :mad: Bah, it’s hilarious! Then again, I don’t have any emotional investment in the town since I already lost. ---
**Author:** ![sachertorte](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sachertorte/32/3727_2.png) [@sachertorte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sachertorte)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-forbidden-thread-the-cabin-in-the-woods/477796/147 "2009-01-12T17:06:45Z")
> [@NAF1138](#): > > I disagree with sach on this one BlaM. All it does is make you like a new player every game. My problem with it is that you have recently been choosing anti-town playstyles. Ironically the only game of the last several I have seen you play in where you didn’t pick an anti-town style of play was SDMB…where you were scum. Wait, what?! How are we disagreeing here? How does allowing Blaster Master to play anti-town under the cover of “it my playstyle for this game” okay? If you can’t tell what alignment Blaster Master is by the way he plays, then what else can you do? _You’re left with no choice but to kill him_. He’s certainly welcome to play anyway he likes, but he shouldn’t be surprised if other players want to lynch him for it. > [@NAF1138](#): > > It wasn’t so I wouldn’t accidentally investigate a mason, it was so the doctor wouldn’t have to waste their time protecting a mason, particularly one who is playing as anti town as pedescribe. Pede and Hawk are doing more to lead the town into the scums hands than anyone else in the game. Hell, if I could have lynched Hawk after he was dead and started posting in the game again I would have. This hasn’t been a good game for either of them. Had the other masons claimed I would likely still be alive, and Diggit probably would be too and town would be in much better postition. Interesting. I agree with your assessment of pedescribe and Hawkeyeop. The lack of flexibility was unnerving. I’m curious about the Doctor now. I’ve never played Doctor so I wouldn’t know, but my feeling is there is little to no reason to protect pedescribe over NAF. However, I do see valid reasons to not protect NAF. NAF has to die. If he can die by scum’s nightkill all the better. The doctor may have decided that it was NAF’s time to die. (Personally, I think it is too early for this tactic. Another investigation would have been nice.) Also, the Doctor may have been protecting NAF for a few nights already and decided that scum would think “obviously the Doctor will protect NAF” so he protected someone else. > [@Blaster\_Master](#): > > I hope that mine and **peeker** ’s role in this game, if nothing else, sets a precedence for town giving a lot more consideration to PFKs before lynching them. Although, I suppose PFK isn’t an accurate term, since that necessarily implies exclusive wins as opposed to non-exclusive wins. Or has PFK just become synonymous with third-party regardless of win condition? That actually was a point of argument I had with (Roosh? about a non-malicious survivor PFK) before. If you label someone PFK, then don’t be surprised if Town refuses to believe the win condition is innocuous. It’s in the freakin’ name! Some have applied PFK to any third party. I try not to, but I had forgotten that the SK’s in this game were playing their own game within a game. My personal preference would be to apply PFK to exclusive win third parties, but not everyone follows that convention. > [@Blaster\_Master](#): > > As has come up in other games, I can’t agree here. A PFK is dangerous to the town if he can kill or if he is close to his win condition. As I said, the only evidence that I could kill was my admitted attempt against Cookies, but considering that all of the other kills on the other Nights had simpler explanations, I don’t think that there was enough evidence to believe I would kill. As added incentive, I had given enough reason, I think, that I wouldn’t be killing the following Night either, since I’d already said I’d use another power (nevermind that it wasn’t exclusive of other powers, they didn’t need to know that) and I was planning on using a non-killing power. So, the only reason I’d have for attempting a kill that Night is if I were one kill away from my win condition. You are assuming that Town knows that you are PFK. They didn’t. At least in my mind, it was plausible for you to be scum as well. While the indicators were more likely for a thrid party player, the evidence was not conclusive. And given a choice between you and Hal Briston, the choice remains simple. If town were choosing between you and a strongly suspected scum, then, yes, I would agree with you. But Town wasn’t dealing with a known scum or even a lightly suspected scum. They were dealing with a lurky Hal Briston. If it makes you feel better, I think Town should lynch Hal Briston ASAP now. > [@](#): > > On a win condition note, if **storyteller** had designed a PFK that could steal the town’s win in four Nights with imperfect play, then he did a bad job setting up the game. Maybe it’s a bit meta-gamey, but really, with a game the size of this one, four Nights is pushing it, even with perfect play and a lot of luck, so considering that, if I were a killing role, which is what they all thought I probably was, and that I clearly had failed on at least one Night, any threat of me killing the following Night should have been pretty much gone. You openly stated you tired to kill Cookies! That’s pretty strong evidence that you can kill. While it is unlikely and bad design for a PFK player to be capable of winning mid-game (especially when the win condition is secret). However: 1. Town didn’t know you were PFK, you could have been scum 2. Town doesn’t know that you have been “ineffective.” you say you have been ineffective, but Town can’t know that, and they can’t trust your word when you say you have bad luck. - On Night One three people died. One of these could easily have been your victim. - On Night Two and Three one Townsperson died. Maybe scum killed them, maybe a third party killed them. Town doesn’t know. You know you didn’t succeed in killing, but town doesn’t. > [@NAF1138](#): > > Oh and before I get spoiled: > > JSexton > Mhaye > amrussel > > are the people I think are most likely the remaining scum. I also think JSexton is scum. MHaye, I don’t know about, but I would not oppose such a lynch since it is unlikely for him to generate sufficient data from which to make an opinion. I’d also like Hal Briston killed for similar reasons. He’s not even paying attention to the game. amrussel, I think is town. His detailed analysis of players then sudden shift to vote for Hockey Monkey makes no sense for scum. Why open yourself to that kind of attack? If you want to vote for Hockey Monkey, make the case for Hockey Monkey. That kind of play is making me think Town. ---
**Author:** ![NAF1138](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/naf1138/32/3245_2.png) [@NAF1138](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NAF1138)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-forbidden-thread-the-cabin-in-the-woods/477796/148 "2009-01-12T17:17:40Z")
> [@sachertorte](#): > > Wait, what?! How are we disagreeing here? How does allowing Blaster Master to play anti-town under the cover of “it my playstyle for this game” okay? If you can’t tell what alignment Blaster Master is by the way he plays, then what else can you do? _You’re left with no choice but to kill him_. He’s certainly welcome to play anyway he likes, but he shouldn’t be surprised if other players want to lynch him for it. Maybe we aren’t disagreeing then. I don’t think that the choice to change the way you play is inherantly anti-town as long as you pick a playstyle that is pro-town. Put chosing an anti-town playstyle just because you want to change the way you play is anti-town by deffinition. So for me it isn’t that he is changing his style, but rather how he is changing it. Re: amrussel, of the three he is the one that would most likely change if I had more time to look at thing. Were I still in the game I would be continuing to push for MHaye’s lynch and slowly start building a case against JSexton. ---
**Author:** ![Pleonast](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pleonast/32/1183_2.png) [@Pleonast](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pleonast)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-forbidden-thread-the-cabin-in-the-woods/477796/149 "2009-01-12T17:24:56Z")
> [@Blaster\_Master](#): > > As has come up in other games, I can’t agree here. A PFK is dangerous to the town if he can kill or if he is close to his win condition. As I said, the only evidence that I could kill was my admitted attempt against Cookies, but considering that all of the other kills on the other Nights had simpler explanations, I don’t think that there was enough evidence to believe I would kill. Read what you wrote there: you admitted you attempted to kill another player. That’s enough to convict you in my eyes. I don’t know about how others play, but when I evaluate another player that I don’t know I can trust, I only look at their incriminating statements, not the others. Statements that could be interpreted positively for that player are self-serving and hence likely to be lies. Incriminating statements are not self-serving (given the general lynching tactics we use around here) and so are more likely to be truthful. So, for me, once you admitted that you attempted to kill another player, and combined with the other third party evidence from you, you needed to be lynched. ---
**Author:** ![storyteller0910](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecae2f/32.png) [@storyteller0910](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/storyteller0910)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 5:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-forbidden-thread-the-cabin-in-the-woods/477796/150 "2009-01-12T17:32:49Z")
From my perspective, this is a very tight game right now, with no clear favorite (this is in contrast to the last two games I’ve moderated, where one side has jumped out to a clear lead by Day Four or so. The Scum took a pretty big body blow by losing **macey** and **bufftabby** so early; both had considerable powers that they never really used. And I think that the Scum are likely to lose one or two more players in the Days to come. But the Town is playing in a very strange and unusual way. There have been a lot of claims, and as a result the Scum has been able to carefully tailor their actions and gambits toward the actual game situation. And the Scum still have access to a few specialized resources, including one with the potential to be very valuable to them if they use it properly. I don’t think that it’s out of the question that a power role or two is going to get lynched and I think the endgame is going to be extended, with a few well-hidden scum playing cat-and-mouse with a mostly- or all-vanilla group of Townies toward the game’s end. And I will say this: there is at least one Town power role baffling me with his/her choices so far. Very strange stuff. ---
**Author:** ![Blaster\_Master](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/cab0a1/32.png) [@Blaster\_Master](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blaster_Master)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-forbidden-thread-the-cabin-in-the-woods/477796/151 "2009-01-12T17:42:39Z")
> [@sachertorte](#): > > That actually was a point of argument I had with (Roosh? about a non-malicious survivor PFK) before. If you label someone PFK, then don’t be surprised if Town refuses to believe the win condition is innocuous. It’s in the freakin’ name! > > Some have applied PFK to any third party. I try not to, but I had forgotten that the SK’s in this game were playing their own game within a game. > > My personal preference would be to apply PFK to exclusive win third parties, but not everyone follows that convention. Agreed. Maybe we can use this opportunity to coin a term for that since I’m sure it will be a useful part of the lexicon in the near future. > [@](#): > > You are assuming that Town knows that you are PFK. They didn’t. At least in my mind, it was plausible for you to be scum as well. While the indicators were more likely for a thrid party player, the evidence was not conclusive. And given a choice between you and Hal Briston, the choice remains simple. If town were choosing between you and a strongly suspected scum, then, yes, I would agree with you. But Town wasn’t dealing with a known scum or even a lightly suspected scum. They were dealing with a lurky Hal Briston. If it makes you feel better, I think Town should lynch Hal Briston ASAP now. Fair enough, and perhaps that was a part of my miscalculation. I thought it was pretty clear that I wasn’t scum, or at least that the chance of me being scum was pretty small, and I felt like most people were voting for me because they thought I was PFK and not because they thought I was scum, where as **Hal** was being voted for for similar-ish reasons, but had a higher probability of being scum. So, I suppose it all depends on how dangerous you thought I was as a PFK. I was trying to get the notion across that I wasn’t dangerous, even if I was a PFK without outright stating it, but I needed more time. So yeah, I’m not surprised by the town’s decision, and it’s not so much that it was a bad decision, I just think that the available evidence, given a reasonable look by someone the town could reasonably trust, probably would have resulted in a **Hal** lynch. But, either way, as you correctly point out, it is a matter of perspective, and though I think I can put my frame of reference inside of what they know, it’s not always that simple. > [@](#): > > You openly stated you tired to kill Cookies! That’s pretty strong evidence that you can kill. While it is unlikely and bad design for a PFK player to be capable of winning mid-game (especially when the win condition is secret). However: > > 1. Town didn’t know you were PFK, you could have been scum > 2. Town doesn’t know that you have been “ineffective.” you say you have been ineffective, but Town can’t know that, and they can’t trust your word when you say you have bad luck. > > - On Night One three people died. One of these could easily have been your victim. > - On Night Two and Three one Townsperson died. Maybe scum killed them, maybe a third party killed them. Town doesn’t know. You know you didn’t succeed in killing, but town doesn’t. A couple points here that I couldn’t effectively get across. One, there was already one SK and while a second is plausible, it is improbable, especially when the third kill is more reasonably explained by a Vig who, as I explained at the time, probably was trying to do the most townie thing by taking out the leading votee, but, in the following discussion, realized it resulted in more confusion. You are correct about the Second Night but, again, I think a simpler explanation is a Vig chose not to kill, and the scum were successful than that the Doctor successfully blocked, and the other kill was a second SK or a Mafia hit. So, yes, I admitted I attempted to kill **Cookies** , but I don’t think an admission to attempting to kill someone, especially in the face of a complicated role-claim like I was making necessarily equates to a full-time killer. So you’re face with me being something nebulous, probably a third-party, but with a bunch of different roles, or a full-time SK who is less probable, and demonstratably failed at least once, and likely twice. Plus, again, if I killed the next Night, I was signing my own death warrant which, for a general SK, means game over. …Or maybe I’m just having too hard of a time putting myself in their frame of reference. > [@](#): > > amrussel, I think is town. His detailed analysis of players then sudden shift to vote for Hockey Monkey makes no sense for scum. Why open yourself to that kind of attack? If you want to vote for Hockey Monkey, make the case for Hockey Monkey. That kind of play is making me think Town. See, the whole scum would or wouldn’t do something is always a WIFOM game. I tried it in this game with my whole question avoidance gambit, and no one gave it more than a second’s thought. In this case, I think you may be doing the opposite and overthinking it a little bit. There’s sometimes good reasons for vote shifts for scum, but they’re just not immediately obvious because we don’t have perfect information. Not to forget, scum have the ability to converse during the Day here. There could be any number of reasons for that sort of behavior, and because it’s a mechanic we don’t play with often, it’s hard to judge what sort of stuff may do that. So, I think in this game, there’s a lot less behind a “scum wouldn’t do that”. However, that WAS the sort of thing I was hoping would come up, and didn’t, with regard to my gambit. I was hoping someone would say “hey, if he can talk to the scum during the day, surely they would have been yelling at him if he was considering any other phrase besides ‘I am town’”. ---
**Author:** ![sachertorte](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sachertorte/32/3727_2.png) [@sachertorte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sachertorte)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-forbidden-thread-the-cabin-in-the-woods/477796/152 "2009-01-12T17:47:01Z")
> [@storyteller0910](#): > > From my perspective, this is a very tight game right now, with no clear favorite (this is in contrast to the last two games I’ve moderated, where one side has jumped out to a clear lead by Day Four or so. I find that surprising. Town has mislynched once. The two SK’s produced one(?) kill (of scum) and are now dead. I would have expected Town to be in a significant lead. The only glaring error I can see is the Chucara lynch/investigate combo which was bad, bad, bad. But other than that Town has had remarkably good results despite wasting time on remarkably bad arguments. Speaking of bad arguments. Town had sunk to a new low. The Cookies “total lost” saga was bad. But the MHaye “Hal is an Alpha Redshirt” is even worse. Is Hal even paying attention to this game at all? He certainly isn’t paying attention to his own words. Deep down I’m hoping this is a scum ploy, that MHaye and Hal are going to distract the town with an “honest mistake.” Otherwise, I think I’ll cry. ---
**Author:** ![NAF1138](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/naf1138/32/3245_2.png) [@NAF1138](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NAF1138)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-forbidden-thread-the-cabin-in-the-woods/477796/153 "2009-01-12T17:52:17Z")
> [@sachertorte](#): > > I find that surprising. Town has mislynched once. The two SK’s produced one(?) kill (of scum) and are now dead. I would have expected Town to be in a significant lead. The only glaring error I can see is the Chucara lynch/investigate combo which was bad, bad, bad. But other than that Town has had remarkably good results despite wasting time on remarkably bad arguments. Except the two SK lynches don’t count towards the towns win condition and helped the scum while not gaining anything for the town. The Chucara thing was my fault, but I really did have some personal emergencies going on at the time and didn’t expect chucara to be lynched. ---
**Author:** ![sachertorte](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sachertorte/32/3727_2.png) [@sachertorte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sachertorte)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-forbidden-thread-the-cabin-in-the-woods/477796/154 "2009-01-12T18:01:36Z")
> [@Blaster\_Master](#): > > See, the whole scum would or wouldn’t do something is always a WIFOM game. I tried it in this game with my whole question avoidance gambit, and no one gave it more than a second’s thought. In this case, I think you may be doing the opposite and overthinking it a little bit. There’s sometimes good reasons for vote shifts for scum, but they’re just not immediately obvious because we don’t have perfect information. Not to forget, scum have the ability to converse during the Day here. There could be any number of reasons for that sort of behavior, and because it’s a mechanic we don’t play with often, it’s hard to judge what sort of stuff may do that. So, I think in this game, there’s a lot less behind a “scum wouldn’t do that”. > > However, that WAS the sort of thing I was hoping would come up, and didn’t, with regard to my gambit. I was hoping someone would say “hey, if he can talk to the scum during the day, surely they would have been yelling at him if he was considering any other phrase besides ‘I am town’”. The problem I have with the quick dismissal of “scum wouldn’t do that” is that all actions are not equal and words are far more important than what the action was. I find amrussel’s recent analysis plausible. That is, not faked. Therefore, I find it more likely that amrussel is being a flaky townie, voting for whomever, rather than a scum who feels the need to justify each vote. It’s just one data point among what should be many. But I haven’t paid much attention to amrussel. In fact, your failure to employ the “scum wouldn’t do that” strategy bolsters the probability that amrussel is town rather than diminishes it. If you are scum and you see “scum wouldn’t do that” fail to save anyone time and time again, the most recent of which netted a PFK. Would you employ that strategy the very next day? And amrussel’s is much more subtle. Someone may not even notice it. But again, it’s one data point. I lean town with amrussel; but I don’t know shit. As for non-anti-town third party, I’d suggest “Bystanders,” which envokes the notion that they are innocuous to the primary struggle between Town and Scum. “Innocent Bystanders” takes the idea even further but feels like a club to me (but that might be a good thing). And of course the SK-SK game within a game was hardly “innocent.” ---
**Author:** ![storyteller0910](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecae2f/32.png) [@storyteller0910](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/storyteller0910)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-forbidden-thread-the-cabin-in-the-woods/477796/155 "2009-01-12T18:05:35Z")
> [@sachertorte](#): > > I find that surprising. Town has mislynched once. The two SK’s produced one(?) kill (of scum) and are now dead. I would have expected Town to be in a significant lead. The only glaring error I can see is the Chucara lynch/investigate combo which was bad, bad, bad. But other than that Town has had remarkably good results despite wasting time on remarkably bad arguments. All true. But I base my analysis not only on a simple consideration of where things stand now, but also on a more nuanced idea of where things are most likely headed. The Town has only one true mislynch in four Days, which is a strong record. But - and here I’m not spoiling much - the PFK low-hanging fruit is all gone now. From here on out it’s just Town vs. Scum, and every non-scum lynch is a mislynch. The Town has made a lot of moves that have opened opportunities for the remaining Scum. And the Scum are playing quite well. Remember, the Scum don’t need to play to maximize mislynches; they need to play to be sure that at least one of them _never gets killed._ Some moves that set them back in the short term might serve them well in the long term in pursuit of that aim. So on balance, I think I see about a 50% chance of either side winning from here. The Town had a quick start, but have handcuffed themselves in some ways for the mid-game. If the Scum dominate the next four Days, or so, you’ll have a very tight endgame. ---
**Author:** ![NAF1138](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/naf1138/32/3245_2.png) [@NAF1138](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NAF1138)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-forbidden-thread-the-cabin-in-the-woods/477796/156 "2009-01-12T18:10:16Z")
This is why I don’t like town to catch scum in the first couple of Days. I can never say this in game because it will get me killed, but catching scum, particularly on a Day 1 lynch almost always hurts town. Very little information is generated and it makes town cocky and complacent. It would be great if town lynched scum Day 1 and then said, “Great, now we have a bit of advantage, let’s maximise it because that advantage is going to go away quickly.” Instead town always seems to say “Woohoo, we caught scum, we can relax for a Day or two.” ---
**Author:** ![sachertorte](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sachertorte/32/3727_2.png) [@sachertorte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sachertorte)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-forbidden-thread-the-cabin-in-the-woods/477796/157 "2009-01-12T18:14:20Z")
> [@NAF1138](#): > > Except the two SK lynches don’t count towards the towns win condition and helped the scum while not gaining anything for the town. The Chucara thing was my fault, but I really did have some personal emergencies going on at the time and didn’t expect chucara to be lynched. As I stated earlier, I consider SK’s as part of the Town’s lynch burden. That is, Town should be expected to lynch SK’s anyway so those aren’t mislynches by any stretch. I suppose you could make the argument that the SK lynches are neutral and that the town is up one scum lynch and down one Town lynch (tie). However, getting through 4 lynches with only one mislynch really should count for something. So maybe 2-1 Town instead of 3-1 Town? And I wouldn’t put the blame on you NAF (well a teeny-tiny bit in that you shouldn’t have been swayed by Chucara at all; heeeyyy, it was her fault, yeah, yeah :D). I was reading the thread too and I fully expected you to investigate Chucara based on what you had been saying. Town _didn’t even discuss_ the possibility that you would investigate Chucara. That was a big mistake. Though as mistakes go it worked out pretty good since you would have come back with a FALSE which would have necessitated Chucara’s lynch anyway. ---
**Author:** ![sachertorte](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sachertorte/32/3727_2.png) [@sachertorte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sachertorte)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-forbidden-thread-the-cabin-in-the-woods/477796/158 "2009-01-12T18:16:50Z")
> [@storyteller0910](#): > > If the Scum dominate the next four Days, or so, you’ll have a very tight endgame. To me that sounds like Town is ahead. ---
**Author:** ![storyteller0910](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecae2f/32.png) [@storyteller0910](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/storyteller0910)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-forbidden-thread-the-cabin-in-the-woods/477796/159 "2009-01-12T18:21:49Z")
> [@sachertorte](#): > > To me that sounds like Town is ahead. I think I’m not explaining myself properly. I’ll use a baseball metaphor. Right now, the Mets are winning the game, 3-1. But the Yankees have their cleanup hitter at the plate, with the bases loaded and nobody out, in the bottom of the fifth. And the Mets have already pulled their starter. Sure, the Mets are ahead. But I’ll bet if you calculated the odds of victory in this situation, it’d be equal for both sides. Well, the Mets are the Town. And of course, the Yankees are Scum. ---
**Author:** ![NAF1138](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/naf1138/32/3245_2.png) [@NAF1138](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NAF1138)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-forbidden-thread-the-cabin-in-the-woods/477796/160 "2009-01-12T18:29:45Z")
> [@sachertorte](#): > > As I stated earlier, I consider SK’s as part of the Town’s lynch burden. That is, Town should be expected to lynch SK’s anyway so those aren’t mislynches by any stretch. I suppose you could make the argument that the SK lynches are neutral and that the town is up one scum lynch and down one Town lynch (tie). However, getting through 4 lynches with only one mislynch really should count for something. So maybe 2-1 Town instead of 3-1 Town? I think if were a traditional SK I would agree with you. Town didn’t know it wasn’t a traditional SK, so I am not totally faulting them, but we could have figured it out if we tried (and I think if we had a little more time we might have.) But as it is, all town did was get rid of two players who could have gotten rid of scum for them, as well as helped town shrink the lynch pool. And that is what town needs to be focused on in the middle game I think. The first 3 Days or so should be about getting people to talk and getting anything that needs to be out out, removing anti-town distractions etc. Ideally you catch one scum somewhere in there. The middle game should be about closing up holes and preventing scum from having anywhere to hide, so you know what information you need to look at. Again, ideally you catch some scum. I think in a perfect world masons would all claim by Day 5 to aid in this process. There might be reasons for them to not, but I don’t see many. Cops should all try to claim sometime in here also depending on the quality of their investigations. But by Day 6 at the latest. In this middle game period I think it can be disaster to kill third party. Kill them early or kill them late, but killing them in the middle is a waste of your resources. You have bigger fish to fry. The only time this changes is if you have reason to believe that you have killed more than half of the scum already. But once over half the scum are gone I think that you are in endgame anyway. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-forbidden-thread-the-cabin-in-the-woods/477796.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-forbidden-thread-the-cabin-in-the-woods/477796.md?page=9)