(potential) New successful scumreading tactic (tt)

Discuss the newest strategies involving the game in a professional manner and spread your knowledge

(potential) New successful scumreading tactic (tt)

Postby ThePainIsReal » Wed Dec 30, 2020 4:37 pm

note: like all scumreading tactics there will be "false positives" but upon testing this one seems to have a high success rate
I've been recently playing games of town traitor finding some strategies I can use to get ahead.
I remembered that when evil I often don't know what to vote on one of my own faction members, so I wait to see if anyone outright says "inno" or "guilty" to avoid getting pushed.
That gave me an idea: What if I look for people that seem to be doing the same thing?
So I played 2 games where we put up an evil that didn't necessarily have too much evidence making it obvious.
In one of them, I picked 3 people. 2 were mafia, 1 was innocent.
In the second one, I picked 2 people. 1 was Traitor, 1 was innocent.

If you're still confused on how it works, here's an explanation:
Some people scumread by finding people that didn't vote for an evil in its entirety. This of course has flaws because you get half of the town, and most non-voters are innocent.
This strategy is different though. First, of course, you have to hang an evil. Then look for the people that voted not late, not early, but right in the middle. You should get around 3 or 4 people. Then, take those people and see if any voted AFTER someone says "Guilty, <optional evidence>" You might get 1 person, maybe 2, and sometimes 3. Its almost guaranteed that at least 1 is evil if you get 3 in the end, like a free psychic vision.

And that concludes this thread. Happy hanging!
ThePainIsReal
Executioner
Executioner
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 5:11 pm

Re: (potential) New successful scumreading tactic (tt)

Postby kyuss420 » Thu Dec 31, 2020 6:45 pm

hmmm. with that logic, I should be checking people who are in the first 3 to vote on the evil, even when theres no evidence theyre evil. I should also check the guy that says ''guilty'' or ''innos sus'' during the voting phase.

So presuming that the remaining 4 evils are voting on the suspect, and theres 7? votes needed to hang.... chances are that one of those will vote in the middle, one will vote at the end, one will vote at the start and one will vote at any time.... (unless you presume that all mafia are voting at the same time)
If thats the case, you could choose 3 names in a row from anywhere on the voting list and have your ''free psychic vision''
goosegoosegoosegoosegoose
Spoiler: Image Spoiler: Image Spoiler: Image Spoiler: Image Spoiler: Image
User avatar
kyuss420
Serial Killer
Serial Killer
 
Posts: 2284
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2017 1:33 am
Location: Im here

Re: (potential) New successful scumreading tactic (tt)

Postby cob709 » Fri Jan 01, 2021 4:42 am

First 2 players to vote town are always evil
I SEE ALL
User avatar
cob709
Mayor
Mayor
 
Posts: 874
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2017 9:44 am

Re: (potential) New successful scumreading tactic (tt)

Postby ThePainIsReal » Fri Jan 01, 2021 6:04 am

kyuss420 wrote:hmmm. with that logic, I should be checking people who are in the first 3 to vote on the evil, even when theres no evidence theyre evil. I should also check the guy that says ''guilty'' or ''innos sus'' during the voting phase.

So presuming that the remaining 4 evils are voting on the suspect, and theres 7? votes needed to hang.... chances are that one of those will vote in the middle, one will vote at the end, one will vote at the start and one will vote at any time.... (unless you presume that all mafia are voting at the same time)
If thats the case, you could choose 3 names in a row from anywhere on the voting list and have your ''free psychic vision''

theres 1 mafia on stand, and witch is kinda situation based depending on if they're coordinating with maf or not
and middle has the highest chance to have 2 or more mafia members :)
and you dont check people who are in the first 3... i said the people voting in the middle
ThePainIsReal
Executioner
Executioner
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 5:11 pm

Re: (potential) New successful scumreading tactic (tt)

Postby OreCreeper » Fri Jan 01, 2021 10:27 pm

You can only scumread votes if votes were slow. If someone got put up in like 2 seconds, it's retarded to vote check.
OreCreeper
Vigilante
Vigilante
 
Posts: 626
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2017 3:52 pm

Re: (potential) New successful scumreading tactic (tt)

Postby kyuss420 » Sat Jan 02, 2021 3:52 am

ThePainIsReal wrote:
kyuss420 wrote:hmmm. with that logic, I should be checking people who are in the first 3 to vote on the evil, even when theres no evidence theyre evil. I should also check the guy that says ''guilty'' or ''innos sus'' during the voting phase.

So presuming that the remaining 4 evils are voting on the suspect, and theres 7? votes needed to hang.... chances are that one of those will vote in the middle, one will vote at the end, one will vote at the start and one will vote at any time.... (unless you presume that all mafia are voting at the same time)
If thats the case, you could choose 3 names in a row from anywhere on the voting list and have your ''free psychic vision''

theres 1 mafia on stand, and witch is kinda situation based depending on if they're coordinating with maf or not
and middle has the highest chance to have 2 or more mafia members :)
and you dont check people who are in the first 3... i said the people voting in the middle


I know what you wrote, i read it.

And by following your logic, I should be checking people who vote like i do (as evil), and check people within the first 3 votes. (As thats where the smartest evils, who can turn the tables on town, will be voting) but as a coven player, I like to prioritise the order of which coven member we lynch/kill first (ya know...no point lynching an outed medusa who cant visit, and townies know not to visit them...or an outed PM that used his kill potion n1, as he cant kill again until n4, if theres a CL or poisoner to find)

But my main point was, how many people in game vs how many votes are needed:

If 8 votes are needed and theres 4 coven alive + traitor (with 1 of them on the stand), I can guarantee that wherever you choose a sequence of 3 names, 1 of them will be evil. Unless ofc, they dont vote at all (but that would be dumb)

so you choose 3 names in the middle. Lets go with 7 votes needed... thats the first 2 voters and last 2 voters not being checked. 5 votes needed? Thats the first person and last person not being checked....statistically theres going to be an evil voter in EVERY sequence.....

Unless youre talking about guilty and abstainers, and saying evils always guilty in the middle.....but then you can check on who actually voted the player up vs who voted guilty on the stand (but smart players can tell when their team member is caught out and will probly be voting them up anyway....just to make themselves look less sus)

And then you have medusa, who is usually voting sus, just to get TIs to check them >:)
goosegoosegoosegoosegoose
Spoiler: Image Spoiler: Image Spoiler: Image Spoiler: Image Spoiler: Image
User avatar
kyuss420
Serial Killer
Serial Killer
 
Posts: 2284
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2017 1:33 am
Location: Im here

Re: (potential) New successful scumreading tactic (tt)

Postby ThePainIsReal » Sat Jan 02, 2021 11:32 am

kyuss420 wrote:
ThePainIsReal wrote:
kyuss420 wrote:hmmm. with that logic, I should be checking people who are in the first 3 to vote on the evil, even when theres no evidence theyre evil. I should also check the guy that says ''guilty'' or ''innos sus'' during the voting phase.

So presuming that the remaining 4 evils are voting on the suspect, and theres 7? votes needed to hang.... chances are that one of those will vote in the middle, one will vote at the end, one will vote at the start and one will vote at any time.... (unless you presume that all mafia are voting at the same time)
If thats the case, you could choose 3 names in a row from anywhere on the voting list and have your ''free psychic vision''

theres 1 mafia on stand, and witch is kinda situation based depending on if they're coordinating with maf or not
and middle has the highest chance to have 2 or more mafia members :)
and you dont check people who are in the first 3... i said the people voting in the middle


I know what you wrote, i read it.

And by following your logic, I should be checking people who vote like i do (as evil), and check people within the first 3 votes. (As thats where the smartest evils, who can turn the tables on town, will be voting) but as a coven player, I like to prioritise the order of which coven member we lynch/kill first (ya know...no point lynching an outed medusa who cant visit, and townies know not to visit them...or an outed PM that used his kill potion n1, as he cant kill again until n4, if theres a CL or poisoner to find)

But my main point was, how many people in game vs how many votes are needed:

If 8 votes are needed and theres 4 coven alive + traitor (with 1 of them on the stand), I can guarantee that wherever you choose a sequence of 3 names, 1 of them will be evil. Unless ofc, they dont vote at all (but that would be dumb)

so you choose 3 names in the middle. Lets go with 7 votes needed... thats the first 2 voters and last 2 voters not being checked. 5 votes needed? Thats the first person and last person not being checked....statistically theres going to be an evil voter in EVERY sequence.....

Unless youre talking about guilty and abstainers, and saying evils always guilty in the middle.....but then you can check on who actually voted the player up vs who voted guilty on the stand (but smart players can tell when their team member is caught out and will probly be voting them up anyway....just to make themselves look less sus)

And then you have medusa, who is usually voting sus, just to get TIs to check them >:)

the point is
picking 3 random people voting in the middle > picking 3 random people
you dont need to write an essay explaining why this is a shit strategy
ThePainIsReal
Executioner
Executioner
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 5:11 pm

Re: (potential) New successful scumreading tactic (tt)

Postby kyuss420 » Sat Jan 02, 2021 3:37 pm

didnt say it was a shit strategy, obviously it works for you, and if youve noticed how the regs usually vote when theyre scum (if they vote different when theyre scum) then bonus for you ^^
goosegoosegoosegoosegoose
Spoiler: Image Spoiler: Image Spoiler: Image Spoiler: Image Spoiler: Image
User avatar
kyuss420
Serial Killer
Serial Killer
 
Posts: 2284
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2017 1:33 am
Location: Im here

Re: (potential) New successful scumreading tactic (tt)

Postby andyadams222 » Thu Feb 17, 2022 9:59 am

ThePainIsReal wrote:
kyuss420 wrote:
ThePainIsReal wrote:
kyuss420 wrote:hmmm. with that logic, I should be checking people who are in the first 3 to vote on the evil, even when theres no evidence theyre evil. I should also check the guy that says ''guilty'' or ''innos sus'' during the voting phase.

So presuming that the remaining 4 evils are voting on the suspect, and theres 7? votes needed to hang.... chances are that one of those will vote in the middle, one will vote at the end, one will vote at the start and one will vote at any time.... (unless you presume that all mafia are voting at the same time)
If thats the case, you could choose 3 names in a row from anywhere on the voting list and have your ''free psychic vision''

theres 1 mafia on stand, and witch is kinda situation based depending on if they're coordinating with maf or not
and middle has the highest chance to have 2 or more mafia members :)
and you dont check people who are in the first 3... i said the people voting in the middle
I think that if you don't know how to write cv on your own, then I advise you to contact the professionals from resumesplanet review here https://www.bestessaytips.com/review_essay.php - real professional writers work here who will cope in the shortest possible time. I am very glad



I know what you wrote, i read it.

And by following your logic, I should be checking people who vote like i do (as evil), and check people within the first 3 votes. (As thats where the smartest evils, who can turn the tables on town, will be voting) but as a coven player, I like to prioritise the order of which coven member we lynch/kill first (ya know...no point lynching an outed medusa who cant visit, and townies know not to visit them...or an outed PM that used his kill potion n1, as he cant kill again until n4, if theres a CL or poisoner to find)

But my main point was, how many people in game vs how many votes are needed:

If 8 votes are needed and theres 4 coven alive + traitor (with 1 of them on the stand), I can guarantee that wherever you choose a sequence of 3 names, 1 of them will be evil. Unless ofc, they dont vote at all (but that would be dumb)


Unless youre talking about guilty and abstainers, and saying evils always guilty in the middle.....but then you can check on who actually voted the player up vs who voted guilty on the stand (but smart players can tell when their team member is caught out and will probly be voting them up anyway....just to make themselves look less sus)

And then you have medusa, who is usually voting sus, just to get TIs to check them >:)

the point is
picking 3 random people voting in the middle > picking 3 random people
you dont need to write an essay explaining why this is a shit strategy


I don't think this strategy is crappy either. I think everything is logical
andyadams222
Newbie
Newbie
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2022 9:55 am


Return to Strategic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests