Lataro's Simple Fun Game Over: Town wins.

For your simulated organized crime needs.

Moderators: jestingrabbit, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Madge
Posts: 66
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 3:45 am UTC
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby Madge » Sat Jan 26, 2013 6:18 am UTC

Silknor wrote:
Madge wrote:Anyway, the assassin going down means that our town PR has less issue with claiming. Gov/Tracker/RB/Jailkeeper (minus whichever have been ruled out), do you feel as if you're safe claiming?


That question...just wow. Not, "is it safe for the town power role to claim?", but instead a flat out request that they claim. I don't know if that was the world's worst thought out trick question or a very subtle joke (I recommend using a smiley when making such a subtle joke :D ).


It was a poorly phrased question; what I meant is, "would it be safe for our special PR to claim"; phrasing it to address the special PR is really the worst way I could have gone about it. I expected the responses to be stuff like "if we have a RB, we've got two doctors so we should be OK", and "if we have a XXXXX we have 0% chance at having doctors so an XXXXX shouldn't claim under any circumstances", rather than "you're just as bad as snark trying to out that power role!".

But the truth is, I am really hating this setup. I wish it was either fully closed, so I wouldn't know what to expect, or much more straightforward in how it's open. It makes me so uneasy that there's the setup info at our fingertips but nothing to do with it, and at the end of the day it's a huge albatross around my neck and I should really just pretend I'm in a closed game because obviously my fixation on working out the setup is not helping town, and probably never will.

I mean, what do we actually gain from knowing the setup? We'd just know which powers scum will use against us and which powers we can use against scum, and to be honest the biggest thing there is the risk of a roleblocker/godfather/extra kills. (Did Adam H have any sort of assassinread on USN, do you think? I should look through and see if it was likely that he used his shot on her so early, or if it was scum using a second kill.)
I'm writing a supernatural romance novel, it updates the first weekend of every month. You can find it here.

User avatar
Madge
Posts: 66
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 3:45 am UTC
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby Madge » Sat Jan 26, 2013 6:21 am UTC

EBWOP
>much more straightforward in how it's open

I meant, "much more clear what the potential setups are; for example, choosing between 4 setups without the pesky variations"

But I do love the concept of this sort of setup; I just don't think it's conducive to my personal enjoyment, and I think everyone else is having a fun enough time trying to work it out :P.
I'm writing a supernatural romance novel, it updates the first weekend of every month. You can find it here.

User avatar
Carlington
Posts: 1588
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:46 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia.

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby Carlington » Sat Jan 26, 2013 7:54 am UTC

If I was a cop:
Spoiler:
I targeted Bartimaeus and got roleblocked.


Well, colour me surprised. I didn't know somebody could plead town that much and actually end up being town. Since I'm such a naïve noob and I really want to get better at this, can I just go ahead and ask you guys questions?
For example, do you think it would be likely, if we had a doctor, that they would have claimed by now? When does it become "safe" for different roles to start claiming, because that's something I'm not understanding at this point. Having said that, I've only ever played face-to-face vanilla mafia before in my life, so I'm still trying to understand power roles to begin with.
Kewangji: Posdy zwei tosdy osdy oady. Bork bork bork, hoppity syphilis bork.

Eebster the Great: What specifically is moving faster than light in these examples?
doogly: Hands waving furiously.

Please use he/him/his pronouns when referring to me.

User avatar
Madge
Posts: 66
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 3:45 am UTC
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby Madge » Sat Jan 26, 2013 10:39 am UTC

Doctors basically never claim unless they're about to be lynched; they have a huge target on their back because they're our best defense against mafia, so there's an understanding that a doctor would not claim. In fact, the thought of someone claiming doctor without being about to be lynched is very dangerous imo.

It becomes "safe" to start playing, at least in my experience, when either you know there's doctor/s to protect you (i.e. if you're the roleblocker, though then the mafia can still find and kill you), or if we're down to the end game. I think d3 is a good time to start claiming (fingers crossed we don't lynch our Chosen VT, because this setup is driving me nuts, etc).

However, if you're a cop and you have a guilty result, you're meant to immediately claim as such. I notice your cop breadcrumb has you roleblocked so you needn't worry about that.

Basically, as a general rule, only claim if you're about to be lynched or if everybody's asking you to. If you're doctor, don't claim and protect anyone who does.

Also, I knew there were good odds that Snark was town because that's how he always acts when he's town about to be lynched. It was why I changed my vote; I was getting a bad feeling about lynching him.
I'm writing a supernatural romance novel, it updates the first weekend of every month. You can find it here.

User avatar
Madge
Posts: 66
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 3:45 am UTC
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby Madge » Sat Jan 26, 2013 10:40 am UTC

EBWOP

*it becomes "safe" to start claiming
I'm writing a supernatural romance novel, it updates the first weekend of every month. You can find it here.

User avatar
Carlington
Posts: 1588
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:46 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia.

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby Carlington » Sat Jan 26, 2013 2:33 pm UTC

Alright, but how do town's power roles know that there's a doctor if the doctor never claims such until they're about to be lynched? Then town gets at best one night of protection before mafia NK's the doctor. I can't think of a better way to play it, but it seems like an awfully ineffective strategy.
Re: Snark, I wouldn't know. At the very least the pool of scum candidates has reduced by about a quarter.
Kewangji: Posdy zwei tosdy osdy oady. Bork bork bork, hoppity syphilis bork.

Eebster the Great: What specifically is moving faster than light in these examples?
doogly: Hands waving furiously.

Please use he/him/his pronouns when referring to me.

User avatar
BoomFrog
Posts: 1069
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 5:59 am UTC
Location: Seattle

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby BoomFrog » Sat Jan 26, 2013 2:50 pm UTC

Hello, I have caught up. If I am a cop:
Spoiler:
My hovercraft is full of eels.


Carlington wrote:Alright, but how do town's power roles know that there's a doctor if the doctor never claims such until they're about to be lynched? Then town gets at best one night of protection before mafia NK's the doctor. I can't think of a better way to play it, but it seems like an awfully ineffective strategy.
The doctor can use his power every night without revealing who he is. That's how all power roles work, they send their power usage PM to the mod each night.
Re: Snark, I wouldn't know. At the very least the pool of scum candidates has reduced by about a quarter.
Are you saying that you had a list of four possible scum and snark was one of them but he is now dead? Who are the other three? D1 you didn't seem to have nearly that strong of an opinion.

I have a town to scum list that I will post, but I want to hear Carlington's answer first.
"Everything I need to know about parenting I learned from cooking. Don't be afraid to experiment, and eat your mistakes." - Cronos

User avatar
eculc
Wet Peanut Butter
Posts: 451
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 4:25 am UTC

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby eculc » Sat Jan 26, 2013 3:39 pm UTC

well, there were 12 players before and there are three less now. that's one-quarter of the total players.

at least, I'm pretty sure that's where he's coming from.
Um, this post feels devoid of content. Good luck?
For comparison, that means that if the cabbage guy from Avatar: The Last Airbender filled up his cart with lettuce instead, it would be about a quarter of a lethal dose.

User avatar
Silknor
Posts: 842
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 1:21 am UTC

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby Silknor » Sat Jan 26, 2013 4:01 pm UTC

Carlington wrote:For example, do you think it would be likely, if we had a doctor, that they would have claimed by now? When does it become "safe" for different roles to start claiming, because that's something I'm not understanding at this point.


0% Chance of a preemptive claim. Doctors almost never claim preemptively. I can see two reasons for a doctor claim in a simple setup: either they strongly suspect X is not scum because they targeted them and no one died that night (and the setup rules out other reasons for that like a roleblocker), or they are close to being lynched and claim it out of desperation.

Safety in claiming is a function of known remaining roles, not of time. Eg. it's generally safe for a cop to claim when they know there is a doctor and the scum are unable to either do unblockable kills or roleblocking.

Madge wrote:However, if you're a cop and you have a guilty result, you're meant to immediately claim as such.


Absolutely wrong.

1. In this setup, a guilty result at this point is, as far as the cop can know, meaningless. Every single game is possible still, and in each game, there is either an insane cop by default or a variation with an insane or paranoid cop. Since each setup has a cop, the cop can't narrow which setup we're in any further down (even if they were roleblocked, since there's a chance of a roleblocker in each setup).

2. Even if a cop had a 100% certain guilty result (such as a simple, open, setup with a guaranteed sane cop and no godfathers), it would be a bad idea to immediately claim. If you can get someone lynched anyway, then why claim to do it? Claiming in many situations means you just die the next night, and if they counterclaim, you may end up being lynched that day anyway! By contrast, if they are lynched anyway, you are much less likely to die that night (unless it's safe to play follow the cop anyway, in which case you don't need a guilty result to start), and thus you have the chance to cop more people. Even if you can't get them lynched, you may be able to get enough suspicion on them to make it quite likely they'll be lynched if you show up dead as a cop. Obviously that last part doesn't apply in late game (whenever it is possible that a mislynch instantly losses the game for the town), but we are decidedly not at late game, and note the total lack of any qualification or nuance in Madge's incredibly flawed claim.

3. The "If I was a cop" system weighs heavily against claiming before late game (and late game doesn't mean day X, it varies on how close to town losing we are, eg. in a simple setup, 3 town 2 scum is late game, because if a townie is lynched they lose [also if no lynch], while 4 town 1 scum can mislynch once, or no lynch twice before being in that same lynch right or lose position, again, only for pure vanilla setups, doctors, roleblockers, NK-immune, vigs, etc, all change that). If a cop dies, the town will still have all of their results. So one of the big reasons to claim, the fear that the cop will die without revealing all of their results, is removed.

Madge's advice is wrong in general, very wrong in this game, and if meant to be actual advice to a cop in this game, incredibly anti-town.

Carlington wrote:Alright, but how do town's power roles know that there's a doctor if the doctor never claims such until they're about to be lynched? Then town gets at best one night of protection before mafia NK's the doctor. I can't think of a better way to play it, but it seems like an awfully ineffective strategy.


Because it's not "safe to claim once a doctor claims," it's "safe to claim because you know there is a doctor based on the setup, and you know other things, like no roleblockers/unblockable kills." One of the main reasons to use a random setup is to prevent claiming/follow the cop. So no, it's very unlikely the doctor will claim unless they're about to be lynched. And it wouldn't make sense for another power role to claim then because:

1. There's a good chance we'll lynch the doctor anyway. Even if we knew for sure there was a single living doctor, if scum counterclaimed, there'd be a 50/50 chance of lynching the doctor. And since we don't know there's a doctor, that claim is fairly likely to be a scum trying to save themselves (and they may or may not know that there's no doctor).

2. The power role wouldn't last long as you point out.

3. There's a good chance the power role would get roleblocked.

There's still plenty of possibilities for claims, especially as we get closer to the end, and not counting claims of desperation. But this setup makes them much less likely than an open, non-random setup with the same roles as what we actually have. And I suspect that was at least part of the reason Lataro opted for a setup with so much randomness.

@eculc/Boomfrog:

That's how I read it too, but if you consider assassin scum, it's wrong. We had 3 scum out of 12 players, and now 2 scum out of 9 players, which is a very small narrowing down.
Nikc wrote:Silknor is the JJ Abrams of mafia modding

User avatar
Suzaku
Posts: 279
Joined: Thu May 31, 2012 10:20 am UTC
Location: Tokyo, Japan

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby Suzaku » Sat Jan 26, 2013 11:58 pm UTC

OK, I'm awake and back.

Some thoughts about the night:
People seem to be thinking that Adam shot US and the Mafia killed Adam, which is certainly one possibility. It's also possible that the Mafia have a hitman and that there were two Mafia kills, or that there's a second, as yet unclaimed, vig who shot either one.
After a quick re-read of Adam's posts, I don't see a lot of suspicion of US, and I think I'd be a bit surprised if he targeted her. As a result, I think it may be more likely that there were two Mafia kills, one of which happily took out our assassin.

I think that, at this point, if there is a second vig, who has already used up their shot, they should probably claim who they shot. Please don't unless there is a consensus that I'm right, though, as I may not have thought that through far enough.

Carlington wrote:...can I just go ahead and ask you guys questions?
Yes, absolutely. Please do.
Pronouns: he/him/his > they/them/their >> it/it/its
Time Zone: JST (UTC+9)
─────────────────────────
Some guy on the Internet wrote:The thing about the inevitable, it has a bad habit of actually happening.

User avatar
Suzaku
Posts: 279
Joined: Thu May 31, 2012 10:20 am UTC
Location: Tokyo, Japan

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby Suzaku » Sun Jan 27, 2013 12:05 am UTC

EBWOP: The above speculation about kills ignores the possibility that there was a third attempt which was somehow blocked.
Pronouns: he/him/his > they/them/their >> it/it/its
Time Zone: JST (UTC+9)
─────────────────────────
Some guy on the Internet wrote:The thing about the inevitable, it has a bad habit of actually happening.

User avatar
Madge
Posts: 66
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 3:45 am UTC
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby Madge » Sun Jan 27, 2013 12:14 am UTC

Thanks for the clarification of my advice, Silknor; I'm far less experienced than you are, so my advice isn't going to be top notch all the time. I'm sad that my less than stellar advice is contributing to your vendetta against me.

I do still maintain that claiming can be a function of time; when we're down to three players of course they're all going to claim so the kingmaker than work out to the best of their ability who the town is. But I guess in that situation there's not going to be another night so the mafia won't be able to kill the people who claim. I more meant that I saw it as a general rule that claims would begin to happen more and more as games went on; sometimes people claim pre-emptively if they have a weird role, too, but that's in closed setup games.

Also, I meant to say: tomorrow, we should have our Chosen VT claim their role as Chosen BEFORE they reveal the setup clues.

So everyone include something in their first post something saying "I am not the Chosen VT", until the Chosen VT makes their claim, then we verify that nobody else wants to counterclaim (thus we have confirmed Chosen or at most two people claiming to be Chosen).

If we have a confirmed Chosen VT, I think the best course of action will be for the rest of us to claim our roles (depending on how many are alive, whether we have two docs, etc), and then for the chosen VT to reveal the setup clues. (this is the part I'm worried about; will our benefits outlined below outweigh the dangers of scum knowing everyone's roles? I'm really not sure about this.)

The reason for this is because the mafia will not know which roles are safe to claim; they won't know whether we have two cops, two vigs, etc. So we'll be forcing them to commit to a claim; and if the chosen VT posts and their claim isn't consistent with the variations listed, then we know they're scum and can be safely lynched.

This gets more complex if Snark or someone was the chosen VT, because then mafia can claim chosen and just choose whichever variants allow for their scummates claims to be consistent whilst also implicating a real townie. However, the mafia doesn't know anymore than we do whether Snark was Chosen, so if we force them to post in their first post saying "I am not the chosen VT", then we can at the very least force them to risk CCing the REAL chosen VT, or look scummy by being the last to claim not to be chosen. (We can agree that if the chosen VT claims after everyone else has stated they are not Chosen, that automatically makes them scummy and they should be treated with extreme suspicion)

But yeah. That's my idea. Let me know if there's any vulnerabilities I haven't anticipated. I think it could be a good weapon for us.

Before Silknor finds an obvious flaw, let me state that I am not saying we should do it; I'm saying we should discuss whether it is a good idea. I can already think of potential vulnerabilities, like the Chosen VT would be better off not claiming early on but letting discussion happen first, and the absolutely huge risk that claiming our roles will represent.
I'm writing a supernatural romance novel, it updates the first weekend of every month. You can find it here.

User avatar
eculc
Wet Peanut Butter
Posts: 451
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 4:25 am UTC

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby eculc » Sun Jan 27, 2013 1:13 am UTC

Even if snark wasn't the chosen VT mafia can still claim or counter-claim.

though, that's pretty easy to deal with. if there's a counter-claim, we lynch one of the two that claimed. if they're town, then we lynch the other one. Alternatively, they both post what variation we're using and we decide from there if it's safe for power roles to confirm one of the setups, thus saving us a townie lynch.

since we have no way of knowing if snark was the chosen VT though, we run into a bit of an issue if there's no counter-claim. We could gain a bit more info like this, though:

we wait to post until a chosen VT claim (so, the first post of D3 will be a chosen VT claim. DO NOT CLAIM THE VARIATION YET!). after that, if there's a counter-claim we do as above. if there's not, we have either the chosen VT or scum (but not a power role), so we might be able to save a townie lynch if the chosen VT posts a valid variation (and we can confirm it without putting power roles in danger, if possible).

If we continue with the IIWAC strategy, we might be able to find scum by having valid cop results D3 as well.
Um, this post feels devoid of content. Good luck?
For comparison, that means that if the cabbage guy from Avatar: The Last Airbender filled up his cart with lettuce instead, it would be about a quarter of a lethal dose.

User avatar
Madge
Posts: 66
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 3:45 am UTC
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby Madge » Sun Jan 27, 2013 1:23 am UTC

The only problem with your "nobody posts until the chosen VT claims" strategy is we stall conversation for a day or so, and even then, if Snark was the Chosen, mafia can see it's taking a while and decide to claim Chosen so that way they have free reign on what to claim (doubly so if they get daychat).

I think it's strictly better we have everyone claim whether they're the Chosen or not in their first post along with If I Was The Cop. Otherwise things are better for scum since they can claim Chosen VT if/when they know it's safe and cause a fuckload of confusion for us. (Since they'll have some good knowledge on what setup it is based on their roles, they can announce the variations that cause the most headaches for us)

Plus, what happens if scum doesn't want to claim Chosen? Then we have deafening silence and nobody wants to claim and waste time.
I'm writing a supernatural romance novel, it updates the first weekend of every month. You can find it here.

User avatar
Silknor
Posts: 842
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 1:21 am UTC

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby Silknor » Sun Jan 27, 2013 2:04 am UTC

Madge wrote:I do still maintain that claiming can be a function of time.


Sure, as long as it's recognized that time is being used as a proxy for number of players left. But I don't think I was ever arguing with you on this point. Rather I was objecting to Carlington asking "when," because when is ambiguous as to if it means which day or how far into the game (based on number dead, mostly).

Also, I meant to say: tomorrow, we should have our Chosen VT claim their role as Chosen BEFORE they reveal the setup clues.


By meant to say, you mean forgot to say, not said something else and meant this right? I'm assuming so, but I want to make sure I understand correctly.

Moving on to the substance: I think Madge's strategy is a good one, with two caveats:
1. Remember that just because only 1 person claims Chosen VT, it does not mean they are town. I'm going to assume that the Chosen VT is selected from VTs post variations, not pre, see mod question below. If so, then there could be as few as 4 possibilities for the VT. One is dead, and it's entirely possible that two more will be dead tomorrow (especially because going with this strategy strengths the scum's incentives to use a Hitman kill tonight in order to have a higher chance of killing the Chosen VT). If one VT dies between D2 Lynch and N2, we have roughly a 30-40% chance the Chosen VT is already dead. If two VT die in that timespan, the chance exceeds 50%. Those numbers were not generated rigorously, and are only rough estimates.

2. Any decision regarding a mass roleclaim on strategic grounds should be deferred till tomorrow, specifically until after any logical inferences from common knowledge about the setup have been drawn. Mass roleclaim is likely to be helpful to the town, after all, it generally is in games without roles designed specifically to discourage it, and the ability to combine it with the Chosen VT's variation reveal (even though we should take it with a large grain of high-quality sea salt) makes a mass claim even better for town than normal. But analysis of that question will be simpler and less probabilistic tomorrow, since some roles may be gone, and we are likely able to rule out some additional setups.

Mod Question Interlude: Is the Chosen VT necessarily a player who remains Vanilla Townie after variations, or could it be someone who was a VT before variations but who eventually gained a power?

That said, we shouldn't mass claim. It's not that I think mass claiming is bad for town. I think it's generally good. Too good. Game-breakingly good. I don't know at this point exactly how good, due to the high degree of uncertainty, but we may have a small number of VT (due to variations) and a relatively large number of possible power roles. The variation check from the chosen townie (again, with a massive grain of salt) makes it even stronger.

I know almost that no living players here have played with me before. So I'm including these to show that this is a consistent position for me.

Silknor wrote:I've always opposed mass claims, I'll do so here, and I'll keep doing it. I think it ruins the game. And I don't mean I think it tilts the scales a bit towards one side, I mean I think it takes the fun out of the game for both (or all where it applies) sides. Under a mass claim, one side loses, but nobody wins.


Silknor wrote:I don't know how no one else has brought this up yet.

Mass claiming sucks.

I don't think I've played in one of Roband's games before so I have no idea if he usually has a powerful anti-mass claim method in place. I don't know if there is one here, there's some bastardry after all, and I don't know what it is the mods aren't telling us, but it's certainly possible that it's related to mass claim.

But that doesn't change the fact that mass claiming sucks. I don't mean it's a bad strategy, quite the opposite. It generally sucks precisely because it's too good. It's less destructive in some games compared to others. This may even be one of the less destructive ones, since there's 4 cops and 3 Vanilla, meaning there's some space for scum to hide (and it's not too hard for the scum to pretend to be a cop in a game where we don't know their sanities), thus the guessing game that results has a smaller number of larger sets. But it's not an enjoyable way, to me at least, to play mafia. It might be a good strategy for the town. But it still sucks.

Remember, the S is for sucks.


I support the Chosen VT finding strategy Madge posted (again, grain of salt due to significant probability scum could fake it without a counter claim and we wouldn't know). I support the chosen VT posting their variations. But I urge strongly against a mass claim.

@eculc: I fail to see the merit in waiting around for a Chosen VT claim. Posting which variations can be delayed regardless, and there's no reason to waste valuable discussion time. There's plenty of things to discuss regardless of if 0, 1, or 2 claim Chosen VT.

If only a single person claims Chosen VT, then it's likely we won't be able to confirm that they are being honest. And I don't see how waiting around not posting will make that task any easier.
Nikc wrote:Silknor is the JJ Abrams of mafia modding

User avatar
Lataro
Posts: 9
Joined: Mon May 03, 2010 6:56 am UTC

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby Lataro » Sun Jan 27, 2013 2:24 am UTC

Mod Question Interlude: Is the Chosen VT necessarily a player who remains Vanilla Townie after variations, or could it be someone who was a VT before variations but who eventually gained a power?

The chosen VT was picked from remaining VT after a setup was fully put in place.
DS9, after being told the story and moral of the boy who cried wolf by Julian.

Garak: "Are you sure that's the moral?"
Julian: "Of course. What else could it be?"
Garak: "Never tell the same lie twice."

User avatar
eculc
Wet Peanut Butter
Posts: 451
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 4:25 am UTC

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby eculc » Sun Jan 27, 2013 4:35 am UTC

The "first post claims" idea was intended to either force scum to claim if they were going to, or get the townie to claim their ability. I agree it's not the best idea as it stalls discussion, but It was what I thought of at the time of my post.

either way, if there's multiple claims I don't think we'll have a problem, it's when there's only a single claim that we start having something to worry about.

Silknor, I agree that mass-claiming isn't always warranted for the fun of the game, and I know that I've played many games where there were either anti-massclaim mechanics built in or there was a rule against massclaiming in general. That said, it's a lot of what we have to work with if we get a valid variation tomorrow.
Um, this post feels devoid of content. Good luck?
For comparison, that means that if the cabbage guy from Avatar: The Last Airbender filled up his cart with lettuce instead, it would be about a quarter of a lethal dose.

User avatar
Silknor
Posts: 842
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 1:21 am UTC

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby Silknor » Sun Jan 27, 2013 4:59 am UTC

Don't forget that both scum, and no townie, might claim. The normal rule of lynch one and if it's scum you have a confirmed townie does not work.

eculc wrote:I agree that mass-claiming isn't always warranted for the fun of the game, and I know that I've played many games where there were either anti-massclaim mechanics built in or there was a rule against massclaiming in general. That said, it's a lot of what we have to work with if we get a valid variation tomorrow.


Yes, randomness is generally a mechanic that discourages massclaim. And there's a lot of randomness. Lataro is an skilled player and mod, but it would've been easy to overlook the interaction between the Chosen VT, massclaims, and a potentially low VT count. I didn't notice it until Madge's post, and it was a long time before anyone mentioned it. I don't suspect that Lataro balanced the game with the intent that a massclaim occur, or was even likely. And looking at the setup, a massclaim seems pretty gamebreaking. And if it had happened Day 1, with the Chosen VT coming in on day 3...

And I don't at all get the "it's a lot of what we have to work with if we get a valid variation tomorrow" claim. We have one scum dead, a good chance at multiple remaining town power roles, a good number of players alive, a good number of posts, possibly the Chosen VT, and "If I was a Cop." We have a ton to work with. What happened to scumhunting?
Nikc wrote:Silknor is the JJ Abrams of mafia modding

User avatar
Madge
Posts: 66
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 3:45 am UTC
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby Madge » Sun Jan 27, 2013 5:09 am UTC

Silknor wrote:Don't forget that both scum, and no townie, might claim. The normal rule of lynch one and if it's scum you have a confirmed townie does not work.


I had thought of that, but didn't want to say it in case scum consisted of two newer players and they hadn't thought of it themselves. It's a very bad idea to give advice to scum.
I'm writing a supernatural romance novel, it updates the first weekend of every month. You can find it here.

User avatar
Silknor
Posts: 842
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 1:21 am UTC

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby Silknor » Sun Jan 27, 2013 6:13 am UTC

Madge wrote:
Silknor wrote:Don't forget that both scum, and no townie, might claim. The normal rule of lynch one and if it's scum you have a confirmed townie does not work.


I had thought of that, but didn't want to say it in case scum consisted of two newer players and they hadn't thought of it themselves. It's a very bad idea to give advice to scum.


The general argument: It's almost always a good idea to think about what scum can do. It's probably the most important part of figuring out how good strategies are. And there's a very strong case for posting it publicly:
1. Scum will naturally spend more time thinking about their strategic options than a typical townie.
2. Only one scum needs to be able to think up the strategy for them to use it. If no one posts about it, every townie must independently discover and analyze that strategy to ensure it isn't more effective than it should be.
3. Lets say the scum are newer players and wouldn't think of it themselves eventually. Don't you want a fair fight? :D

But let me get this straight. You proposed a strategy and discovered a hole in it that if the scum realized and the town didn't, could lose the-game for the town. And then you decided to keep it to yourself?

That's 4 reasons I suspect you from today alone:
1. Asks the town special if they feel they're safe claiming, aka. asking them to blindly claim.
2. Claims that a role(blocker) has been ruled out when it's impossible you could know that based on publicly available information. And after I had twice posted that no roles could be ruled out.
3. Says a cop with a guilty result should immediately claim. A terrible strategy in general, and 10 times worse in a game where the cop with one result can't possibly know their sanity. And we have a "If I was a cop" system on top of it.
4. Figures out how scum could easily beat town if town doesn't recognize a hole in a strategy you propose. Doesn't tell town.

Vote: Madge
Nikc wrote:Silknor is the JJ Abrams of mafia modding

User avatar
Carlington
Posts: 1588
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:46 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia.

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby Carlington » Sun Jan 27, 2013 9:02 am UTC

With regards to way back when, with my claim that the pool of scum candidates is 25% smaller now, I was actually referring to the fact that there were 12 possibilities for scum before, and now there are 9. I don't have any sort of shortlist yet, I am apparently terrible at reading people. I'm sure I'll pick it up given time though.
I see what everybody's point was with the doctor definitely not claiming - as long as we know there's a doctor, though, one town power role can claim, and then the doctor can protect them every night. Of course, even then, assuming scum guesses wrong as many times as possible, that still only gives us a guaranteed upper limit of 4 nights of doctor protection, assuming no roleblocks, and that scum keeps aiming for the doctor and mis-killing. Although, scum knows who scum is, so probably only 4 nights, really.
To sum that up - am I right in thinking that, provided we're in a setup with 1 doctor, that doctor will necessarily be killed before D5? Or is there something I've overlooked?
As for setups, I think we could be in:

- A, with at least variations 1 and 6, but possibly more. Although, if this is the case, either the Governor didn't use their power, or was roleblocked.
- B, with at least variation 3 (note that if we're in any setup of B, town has at least one, possibly two doctors. But if we're in B3x, then town has exactly 1 doctor.)
- C, with any number of variations as far as I can see
- D, with at least variation 6, but possibly more.

Am I doing okay with my figuring-out-of-things? As far as I can see, those are our possibilites, so we haven't narrowed it down much. But it is very likely we have a doctor. Probably not likely enough to claim yet - don't anybody claim unless we're certain there's a doctor, I don't think we should risk losing our power roles.

As for scumtells, I don't know who to believe about Madge's advice - can I get some more people to weigh in on what they think about it? Because I could side with Silknor that Madge giving bad advice is a scumtell - but I don't know if Madge is giving bad advice. If Madge is giving good advice, and Silknor's trying to convince people that it's not good advice, then Silknor is going to look scummier, imo. Basically, whether I suspect Silknor or Madge depends entirely on the quality of Madge's advice, at this point.
However, Silknor is seeming a little off to me, in his accusation that Madge is scummy. He was entirely against Madge for a while, then two posts ago he flip-flopped suddenly, saying he completely agreed with Madge's advice, and then in his very next post he says Madge's advice is terrible again, and votes Madge.

I'm a little concerned, as well, that the relatively high proportion of noobs in this particular game is going to be advantageous to scum. Scum can safely hide behind the fact that they're giving advice to the new players - but subtly influence the way the newbies think (myself included). I'm trying to keep away from playing follow-the-leader as much as I can at the moment, because it would be all too easy for scum to make a case that seems watertight to somebody that doesn't know better (i.e: me, and the other new guys), but really is flawed - then they have the extra protection that if anybody tries to call them out, they can point the finger at them, and the already-convinced newbies will follow.
Kewangji: Posdy zwei tosdy osdy oady. Bork bork bork, hoppity syphilis bork.

Eebster the Great: What specifically is moving faster than light in these examples?
doogly: Hands waving furiously.

Please use he/him/his pronouns when referring to me.

User avatar
Madge
Posts: 66
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 3:45 am UTC
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby Madge » Sun Jan 27, 2013 9:40 am UTC

To be honest, I think the reason Silknor is flip-flopping about whether my advice is good or bad is because I gave both good and bad advice at different times.

I agree with him for the most part, though; obviously I disagree that I should be lynched based on the fact I gave advice. Goodness knows at least I'm trying, when we have experienced players lurking. And furthermore I came up with an entire strategy that is overall mostly helpful to town and most importantly harmful to scum as far as their options go for claims. Admittedly we're well and truly fucked if scum gets to claim Chosen.

You're right though, Carlington; I wouldn't claim anything unless you think it will help town (and at this point I don't think there's any claim that would).

At the moment, obviously, Silknor is ringing my alarm bells like crazy since it feels like I'm being unfairly victimised/singled out simply because I happen to be the one posting strategies. But that said, I think it's just the natural OMGUS that is making me suspicious of Silknor since d1 they were so dang helpful. I think it's more likely that scum is watching us get at each others' throats and standing back lest they be caught in it and stumble over themselves.
I'm writing a supernatural romance novel, it updates the first weekend of every month. You can find it here.

User avatar
Madge
Posts: 66
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 3:45 am UTC
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby Madge » Sun Jan 27, 2013 9:43 am UTC

Living Players:
1. Carlington
2. Christophoros
3. wam
4. Phredd94 boomfrog
5. Bartimaeus
6. Silknor
7. Suzaku
8. Madge
9. Eculc

wam, boomfrog, suzaku: you guys are experienced, what are your thoughts on this whole thing? I notice wam hasn't even posted today.
I'm writing a supernatural romance novel, it updates the first weekend of every month. You can find it here.

User avatar
Carlington
Posts: 1588
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:46 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia.

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby Carlington » Sun Jan 27, 2013 9:50 am UTC

Is that list of living players in any particular order? Because I don't like seeing my name next to a big ol' "1."
Kewangji: Posdy zwei tosdy osdy oady. Bork bork bork, hoppity syphilis bork.

Eebster the Great: What specifically is moving faster than light in these examples?
doogly: Hands waving furiously.

Please use he/him/his pronouns when referring to me.

User avatar
Madge
Posts: 66
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 3:45 am UTC
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby Madge » Sun Jan 27, 2013 9:52 am UTC

It's in the order from the first post.
I'm writing a supernatural romance novel, it updates the first weekend of every month. You can find it here.

User avatar
Carlington
Posts: 1588
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:46 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia.

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby Carlington » Sun Jan 27, 2013 9:55 am UTC

Oh, good. I just know lots of people have announced their intention to post a most-to-least-scummy list, and seeing my name at the top of a list so soon afterwards is scary.
Also, I totally agree with Madge - if nobody posts, we have nothing to even try to scumhunt with. The more posting that happens, the more evidence we can gather, and the more scum we can lynch.
Kewangji: Posdy zwei tosdy osdy oady. Bork bork bork, hoppity syphilis bork.

Eebster the Great: What specifically is moving faster than light in these examples?
doogly: Hands waving furiously.

Please use he/him/his pronouns when referring to me.

User avatar
Madge
Posts: 66
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 3:45 am UTC
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby Madge » Sun Jan 27, 2013 10:02 am UTC

I'll do one of those too if you like:

Leaning scummy:
wam Suzaku - for being experienced players and relatively quiet today.

Neutral leaning slightly scummy:
boomfrog - for being quiet, but less scummy than the others because new to the game.
Silknor - OMGUS
Carlington - for asking questions; I flashback to a time I won as scum on epicmafia by having a newbie player pretend to be more of a n00b than they really were, I bussed the hell out of them, and it went very well.
Bartimaeus Christophoros Eculc - not too much to go on, lurking and whatnot
I'm writing a supernatural romance novel, it updates the first weekend of every month. You can find it here.

User avatar
wam
Posts: 201
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 9:08 am UTC
Location: South England

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby wam » Sun Jan 27, 2013 2:18 pm UTC

Sorry traditional weekend issues and most of my attention was on Batmafia.

If I was a cop

Spoiler:
I investigated Silknor and got town


I have skim read the strategy argument between madge and silknor but need to go back and re-read it along with the events that lead to snark's lynch.

Should get that done tomorrow.
Come join us playing mafia signup here

User avatar
Silknor
Posts: 842
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 1:21 am UTC

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby Silknor » Sun Jan 27, 2013 3:55 pm UTC

Carlington wrote:To sum that up - am I right in thinking that, provided we're in a setup with 1 doctor, that doctor will necessarily be killed before D5? Or is there something I've overlooked?


Roleblocker/jailkeeper keeping the doctor alive long. Anyway, I don't really understand your focus here. We don't know if there's a doctor, and we don't know if there's a mafia roleblocker.

owever, Silknor is seeming a little off to me, in his accusation that Madge is scummy. He was entirely against Madge for a while, then two posts ago he flip-flopped suddenly, saying he completely agreed with Madge's advice, and then in his very next post he says Madge's advice is terrible again, and votes Madge.


Madge has posted one piece of good advice and several pieces of very bad advice. The analysis on the Chosen VT was largely accurate (though incomplete, as she left out a few things, more notably the possibility that both scum claim Chosen VT when the Chosen VT has already died). That she posted some bad analysis doesn't make her incapable of posting good analysis, but if she is capable of good analysis, then a likely explanation for so many obvious and strongly anti-town mistakes in other advice is that she is scum.

Madge wrote:And furthermore I came up with an entire strategy that is overall mostly helpful to town and most importantly harmful to scum as far as their options go for claims. Admittedly we're well and truly fucked if scum gets to claim Chosen.


No, we aren't. Both scum claiming Chosen when the Chosen has already died is only a problem if we don't realize it's a possibility. That's why I still like the Chosen VT claiming strategy you outlined (with a decision on mass roleclaims either delayed, on strategic grounds, or completely avoided, on gameplay/balance grounds, and with the recognition that if 1 claims Chosen, it doesn't mean they're town, and if 2 claim Chosen it doesn't mean either is town.

The truly egregious part of your decision to hide your knowledge that the scum could both claim Chosen isn't that we're screwed if the scum do, and so you wanted to preserve the viability of the strategy that otherwise was good. That would be wrong still, but at least understandable, because if you really thought the scum couldn't figure it out (which I think is ridiculous) then maybe the strategy is worth pursuing without mentioning that pitfall. No, the part that is so awful, so scummy, is that as long as we are conscious of the possibility, two scum claiming Chosen can't hurt the town! You saw a flaw that could be easily patched up, thus turning the highly dangerous strategy you proposed into a good one, and kept it hidden. If you hadn't known, at least that would be consistent with some of the anti-town advice you've been throwing around. But you knew and lied by omission.
Nikc wrote:Silknor is the JJ Abrams of mafia modding

User avatar
Bartimaeus
Posts: 111
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 3:35 pm UTC
Location: Somewhere near NYC, but nobody's heard of

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby Bartimaeus » Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:49 am UTC

Madge is quite scummy. Very scummy, but there's something else that I'd like to address first.


ModProd Christophoros?

Huge lurker. He returned, lynched, and disappeared again. I'd vote for him if I weren't curious as to if he's forgotten the game entirely.

User avatar
Suzaku
Posts: 279
Joined: Thu May 31, 2012 10:20 am UTC
Location: Tokyo, Japan

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby Suzaku » Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:59 am UTC

Monday morning, at work.

Will be back with a real post later today, but at first glance Madge does not look too good.
Pronouns: he/him/his > they/them/their >> it/it/its
Time Zone: JST (UTC+9)
─────────────────────────
Some guy on the Internet wrote:The thing about the inevitable, it has a bad habit of actually happening.

User avatar
BoomFrog
Posts: 1069
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 5:59 am UTC
Location: Seattle

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby BoomFrog » Mon Jan 28, 2013 5:03 am UTC

First for the record, I played with Silknor before and he is objectively always against mass claims. That is not a scummy position for him.

That said, he's aggression is surprising. Madge is clearly just bad at strategy. (sorry). If she is scum then her "attempts" to trick the power role and cops into claiming are just way too blatant. I can't see scum thinking those would work so I'm pretty sure she is town and didn't realize how badly worded her suggestions were. I've never played with Scum-Silknor before but he is usually a much more passive player. That said, they are both on the town end of my scum list.

Speaking of, everyone should make a list of all the players and your impression of each. And the end summarize your conclusions. Do not just list summerys of actions, you must draw conclusions for the list to be useful. If you're having trouble drawing conclusions just go with your gut and say what your thinking. The more honest raw thinking you put down the better we can judge you. If you are town you have nothing to worry about by being honest (except of course don't even hint what your role is besides town). This really should have been done D1. At the bottom of the page you can sort posts by author. That can help reread people individually.

1. Carlington - Refuses to attack anyone or state a real opinion (slightly scummy, but reduced for noobyness). Says scum are easier to find now which ignores the assassin death (sounds like thinking from a mafia perspective) - scummy

2. Christophoros - Disappeared D2. Pushes for more fake roadblocked claims. (would help scum find the cop, slightly scummy for bad strategy but reduced for noobyness). Not much content and voted for snark in a "me too" fashion. (scummy). Attacked wam for "encourage the vig to waste his shot (slightly townie extra townie if wam is scum) - slightly scummy, needs a modprod.

3. wam - Lots of neutral strategy talk. Posts "shot snark" then later says vig should withhold but only after Suzaku said it first. (scummy). Keeps vote on Eculc (very townie is Eculc is scum) - Slightly scummy unless Eculc is scum (then town).

4. Phredd94/Boomfrog - Draw your own conclusion.

5. Bartimaeus - Supports vig vote (slightly scummy) Asks good questions promoting discussion (slightly townie). Clearly rereading and analyzing the thread, posts several analysis of several players (very townie). Voted Snark, but argued both sides (net slightly scummy) - Townie

6. Silknor - Pages of strategy talk, most is good although overly detailed but that's silknor's style. (townie) Contains flawed advice about the roleblocked cop claims (scummy).* Points out significant errors in Madge's posts D2. (townie) - Town

7. Suzaku - Sound anti-assassin ideas for dealing with Snark. (townie since mafia would prefer the assassin to get their kill off, and mafia didn't know snark wasn't the assassin). Low content (slightly scummy, but excused for RL issues) Voted Eculc (if Eculc is scum then very townie) - Slightly townie (unless Eculc is scum)

8. Madge - Lots of empty content D1. (scummy) Votes Snark then changes to Eculc (neutral unless Eculc is scum) Comes up with an excellent strategy for a mass claim (very townie) but purposely withheld talking about a potential flaw (the flaw isn't a real flaw but the intention is scummy) - All over the place but posting the Follow-the-chosen strategy would have been a suicidally bad idea for mafia, so - slightly town

9. Eculc - Overly nervous about the RVS vote on him (slightly scummy). Very "me too" vote on Snark including saying town-snark isn't aggressive which is clearly false, Snark is always aggressive. (scummy) No comments on other players except his intention to lynch snark (very scummy) - Scum

Town
Bartimaeus
Silknor

Neutral
Suzaku
Madge
Christophoros

Scum
Wam
Carlington
Eculc

Ecluc tops the charts and his flip would also shed some light on other's alignments if he is scum due to the close race yesterday.

Vote Eculc

*Spoilered because after all the analysis I proved myself wrong. But I don't want to delete my 45 minutes of work. You really don't need to read this, but it basically proves that Silknor's modification of the Mass Cop Claim was a good idea.
Spoiler:
Silknor wrote:*There's one twist here though, the roleblocker. The typical thing to do, when a cop gets roleblocked, is for the mod to tell them that it failed or that they didn't get a result, not to say, report town regardless of alignment. As such, if there's a roleblocker, and if they hit the cop, said cop is in a potentially tricky situation. To say they were roleblocked is the same as a cop claim, is always an option of course. To lie is risky, as it always is when townies lie**, especially here, for obvious reasons. To say they investigated their self and got whatever they think they would've gotten is an option as well***

***For this to work, eg. for the cop to be able to say that when roleblocked without revealing that they are a cop, other people have to do so as well. Eg. if we agreed on such a system, we might say that at the start of the day, non-cops flip a coin twice, and if it comes up heads both times, they pretend to have investigated their self, otherwise they give a result on someone else. If the cop gets roleblocked twice, then the problem resurfaces, but this is clearly not particularly likely, and the cop under such a system does not seem to be worse off than without they would be if roleblocked twice without the mass cop report.

This is the original proposition of the Silknor flavor Mass cop report. For this analysis I'm ignoring the possibility that the cop target a person who died, because at this point Silknor hasn't considered that possibility. Bold shows the possibilities that silknor is considering which don't include the cop saying they target a dead person and safely lying about the result. So we have four possible scenarios:

Silknor's Mass Cop claim:
Cop who was not RBed: truthful
Non-cop who not RBed: 1/4 chance to give strong clue that he is not a cop.
Cop who was RBed: Gives strong clue to scum that he is a cop.
Non-Cop who was RBed: 3/4 chance to prove non-cop.

Original Mass Cop claim:
Cop who was not RBed: truthful
Non-cop who not RBed: looks like a cop
Cop who was RBed: Outed as a cop
Non-Cop who was RBed: Outed as a non-cop

But we have 10 non-mafia players and 1-2 cops. The chance that a cop is RBed is very low at most 1/5, most likely 1/10. Under Silknor's system the RB target who looks like a cop is still going to be killed the next night by scum since he is still 3/4th chance to be a cop. So the benefit of Silknor's modification is 1/4 of the time the mafia's kill will be directed at a non-cop instead of randomly possibly hitting a cop. P= number of players alive D2. So there is a (1/4)*(1/P) chance that silknor's modification saves the cops life. The downside is that a quarter of the players each night will give a strong clue that they are not a cop. So there is a (3/4)*(1/(P(3/4)))=(1/P) chance that the cop would be hit under Silknor's system.

Oh, silknor was right.
"Everything I need to know about parenting I learned from cooking. Don't be afraid to experiment, and eat your mistakes." - Cronos

User avatar
BoomFrog
Posts: 1069
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 5:59 am UTC
Location: Seattle

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby BoomFrog » Mon Jan 28, 2013 9:16 am UTC

Ahh, I remembered why Silknor's strategy modification was flawed. It is a benefit if there is a mafia RBer but a detriment if there is not one. 50/50 whither there is one or not, but if Silknor is scum he already knows the answer. Still I rate him as likely town, but if we later discover there is no mafia RBer eyebrows will be raised. If we confirm that there is a RBer then Silknor is as town as you can be without a confirmed cop confirming you.
"Everything I need to know about parenting I learned from cooking. Don't be afraid to experiment, and eat your mistakes." - Cronos

User avatar
Christophoros
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 12:01 pm UTC
Location: The realm of the undead
Contact:

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby Christophoros » Mon Jan 28, 2013 10:07 am UTC

I thought these things stopped over the weekend?

iiwac
Spoiler:
iiwac I investigated Madge and got town result


Have found that the free PCs in the cafeteria allow meto sign i and post. Thefore will post again in my lunch break.

Chris
"Analogies in writing are like feathers on a snake."

"Exaggeration is a billion times worse than understatement."

Never Forget

User avatar
wam
Posts: 201
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 9:08 am UTC
Location: South England

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby wam » Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:23 am UTC

Ok I have re-read all of yesterday. Basically there was so much suspicious activity on both the snark and the eculc bandwagon I would be accusing >50% of the players. Therefore It's not helpful till we see Eculc flip.

I still think Eculc is scummy and his starting comment today doesn't help.

eculc wrote:So. While it's unfortunate snark turned out to be town, it's nice to know that we no longer have an assassin in our hair.

Also unfortunate that adam is now dead with a 1-shot vig (Possible that he used it last night on USN?) It doesn't help us narrow down our setup much, though we know that we're not in setup A (and there's only one possible setup from section B).

Don't have much to put here yet but expect more content later.


Expressing regrets like that is a common scum tactic to appear townie.

Vote Eculc

As to everyone else

1. Carlington

Seems to be town newbie to me, very hesitant, also play hasn't changed since yesterday which suggests he didn't have night chat with someone giving him advice.

Town

2. Christophoros

Lurking badly, seems to be jumping around a bit.

Neutral leaning scummy

4. Phredfrog]

Phred seemed town. Boomfrog seems town (but always does)

Town

5. Bartimaeus

Will look bad if ecluc flips scum other than that nothing really stood out.

Neutral leaning scummy

6. Silknor

Masses of content, more strategy than scum hunting though. Seems very proactive, like the arguments about madge even if I think theyre flawed (see below for more analysis)

Town

7. Suzaku

Neutral , not real tells either way

Neutral

10. Madge

Scummy for her vote on snark rather than the strategy today

12. Eculc

See above

Now my thoughts on the madge strategy argument.

Bad strategy can come from town or scum. I feel that madges could be either and neutral. I agree with silknor about the info hiding thing but I can see her side as well. Bascially I see her as my second scum choice.
Come join us playing mafia signup here

User avatar
Christophoros
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 12:01 pm UTC
Location: The realm of the undead
Contact:

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby Christophoros » Mon Jan 28, 2013 12:34 pm UTC

BoomFrog wrote:2. Christophoros - Disappeared D2. Pushes for more fake roadblocked claims. (would help scum find the cop, slightly scummy for bad strategy but reduced for noobyness). Not much content and voted for snark in a "me too" fashion. (scummy). Attacked wam for "encourage the vig to waste his shot (slightly townie extra townie if wam is scum) - slightly scummy, needs a modprod.


FYI, I still think there should be a greater number of roleblocked claims than the average. Merely stating "would help scum find the cop" doesn't actually provide any reasoning to change my mind. I just know that if I were the cop I would want to have some cover should I ever get roleblocked.

FOS: BoomFrog for calling bad strategy without substantiating his position.

Thoughts on each player:
Bartimaeus - Neutrally scummy. Not much to go on. Then again, Pot + Kettle + Black so who am I to talk?

Silknor - Neutral. Definitely expressing a lot of opinion, and quite vehemently. I thnk the all-out attack on Madge might be OTT, since she's seeming fairly neutral to me.

Suzaku - Town. Nothing jumps out at me as scummy,and there's been some good town strategy.

Madge - Neutral. Originally I was thinking town, but recent notes from Silknor are quite persuasive.

Christophoros - Town. Definitely.

Wam - Scum. I really don't like this comment
wam wrote:If snark turns up town your going to look really bad!

Something about that just makes me think that Snark was a Godfather and they are playing us.

Carlington - Scum. Lots of posts, not much content. I know when I very first started I hid scum behind naivete, and this sounds very similar.

Eculc - Neutral. Has been talking tactics but not much else. Even when in danger of lynch D1 still did not talk muc other than strategy.


That's that. This keyboard is aggravating in that it doesn't register 1/4 of my keypresses, so I will look again when I get home.
"Analogies in writing are like feathers on a snake."

"Exaggeration is a billion times worse than understatement."

Never Forget

User avatar
wam
Posts: 201
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 9:08 am UTC
Location: South England

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby wam » Mon Jan 28, 2013 12:38 pm UTC

Godfather's only turn up town to investigations by cops. Their true role is revealed upon death*

*This is true for normal godfathers but you can have death godfathers but that is considered highly bastard and won't be the case in newbie simple games.
Come join us playing mafia signup here

User avatar
BoomFrog
Posts: 1069
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 5:59 am UTC
Location: Seattle

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby BoomFrog » Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:46 pm UTC

@chris, sorry, i didn't do the full strategy analysis until i got to silknor. I should have qualified that your suggestion is townie if there is a mafia roleblocker and scummy otherwise.

If there is no roleblocker then you are now needlessly eliminating a large % of the potential cops. However, if there is a roleblocker then your modification is superior to silknor's plan.
"Everything I need to know about parenting I learned from cooking. Don't be afraid to experiment, and eat your mistakes." - Cronos

User avatar
Suzaku
Posts: 279
Joined: Thu May 31, 2012 10:20 am UTC
Location: Tokyo, Japan

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby Suzaku » Mon Jan 28, 2013 4:07 pm UTC

Here's my list, and that's all you'll be getting tonight.

1. Bartimaeus - Posting style (especially in earlier posts) is short and fairly brusque, which feels scummy, although the content is not. I don't think that his support of a vig vote (i.e. underlined votes or some other method of suggesting a vig target) is scummy, quite the opposite in fact. I'm going to assume that BF misinterpreted the comment, as he wasn't here on D1, but otherwise that would be a check against BF. Some good analysis posts, most of which I can agree with.
Voted for Snark, with some reasonable arguments. Voting town!Snark is not scummy for someone who hasn't played with him before, as far as I'm concerned, so no minus there.
Not much so far D2, but I'm hardly one to talk.
Overall: fairly towny, with no major pings.

2. Carlington - Comes across to me as noob town. D1 posts strike me as trying to think things through aloud, rather than trying to deliberately confuse. Where he has the information required, seems to be drawing appropriate conclusions from it, and logic is sound. I'm certainly not going to hold a lack of understanding against him.
Voted for wam, originally "with the sole intention of not putting anybody new in jeopardy of being hammered." Although leaving the vote there after it was mentioned that that reasoning was flawed is a bit scummy.
Overall: Noob town.

3. Christophoros - Low content (again, mihi quoque). What content there has been has been fairly townie - as with Carlington, I'm not going to hold votes on town!Snark against a new player. Gave a sound (although I disagree with the conclusion) analysis of adding 'No Result' to the IIWAC strategy.
Voted for Snark, giving reasons. Previous vote on wam was also justified.
Overall: Neutral leaning townie, although more content is needed to be confident.

4. Eculc - As others have also, I dislike his reaction to RVS, both the one(s?) on him and as a strategy. Although questions are by far more common as a starting gambit on these fora, RVS is still a very valid opening strategy, especially in open or semi-open games where role spec is fairly pointless. As I pointed out, was using flawed logic to argue against an IIWAC strategy.
I specced him as scum D1, and don't have any reason at this point to change my mind.
Overall: Scum.

5. Madge - I think that if my assessment of eculc is correct, she's likely town. Mainly because I think that if her apparent RV on eculc had been on her scummate then his reaction would have been different. I think that her D2 bad advice can, to some extent, be explained by frustration with the setup, and that the rest is a simple ... exchange of views ... with Silknor. This seems to ring true from reading previous games she's been in. I couldn't say which ones, even if you put me on the rack, but that's my recollection.
Voted eculc, although the claimed justification was weak.
Overall: Neutral leaning town, with reservations.

6. Silknor - Lots and lost (and lots and lots) of text. Much analysis of strategy, but much less of players. Strikes me as wanting to ensure the best odds (within the bounds of having fun - no massclaims) and trying to educate newbies on 'how it should be done' (a worthy goal). Seems to have plenty of experience and knowledge of the game.
Given some of the strategy content, I would be surprised if he left many tells as scum.
Comments regarding Madge's strategy are, I think, correct, but delivered very aggressively.
Overall: Leaning to town, but would not be overly surprised if I was wrong.

7. Suzaku - Not analysing myself.

8. wam - Proposed the IIWAC strategy. Very helpful in answering questions from Carlington. Not a lot of analysis D1, more D2. Consistent in voting for eculc, with which I agree.
Overall: I'll say that the positive content outweighs the lack of player analysis and go with town.

9. BoomFrog - I had no reads on Phredd before BF took over, and BF has seemed pretty towny, although his post count is necessarily low. Prompted these long player lists, which should help town, and our analysis generally agrees. That said, BF has pulled one over on me before, and I find him difficult (at best) to read.
Overall: Probably town, but I don't really trust my own read here.

On that analysis, there really is only one choice, and it agrees with my thoughts on D1.

Vote: eculc
Pronouns: he/him/his > they/them/their >> it/it/its
Time Zone: JST (UTC+9)
─────────────────────────
Some guy on the Internet wrote:The thing about the inevitable, it has a bad habit of actually happening.

User avatar
eculc
Wet Peanut Butter
Posts: 451
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 4:25 am UTC

Re: Lataro's Simple Fun D2: Dead People

Postby eculc » Mon Jan 28, 2013 4:12 pm UTC

BoomFrog wrote:@chris, sorry, i didn't do the full strategy analysis until i got to silknor. I should have qualified that your suggestion is townie if there is a mafia roleblocker and scummy otherwise.


How is his suggestion more townie or scummy based on information he would not have as a townie? If he knows which one it is, he must be scum so therefore should be lynched. But since we can't assume that he does know...

Care to explain your reasoning?
Um, this post feels devoid of content. Good luck?
For comparison, that means that if the cabbage guy from Avatar: The Last Airbender filled up his cart with lettuce instead, it would be about a quarter of a lethal dose.


Return to “Mafia”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Sabrar, SuicideJunkie and 8 guests