[S] All The King's Men - Loyalists win!

[BoomFrog]

Hello, Silknor, are you going to actually participate and scum hunt today?
Vote Silknor

[BoomFrog]

Oh, and slbub, yes I do believe the lists are useless. My original plan was to have everyone full claim today. Any scum who used their truthify yesterday could only safely claim vanilla today. But now we likely have one scum left and he has an extra truthify and I can't figure out how we could add a third layer of claiming to at least get some potential use out of the detectors.

[Silknor]

Yes, I intend to participate today. I've been following the thread, looking for something that seems suspicious, and I haven't found it yet. I assure you, I will be posting any suspicions I have. You'll note that me saying this is essentially the same as posting a list that says everyone is town, eg. not very useful! (Though it avoids the negatives associated with a "scum list", such as implications of greater certainty than exist and calling both good scum and good townies town in the absence of evidence for or against them; townies lying is bad, but townies pretending to be more certain than they are, especially when wrong, is a close second).

Food for thought: Assume the scum have truthified the statement "I am town". Can you name a hypothetical statement that if, made by a scum and lie detected, would provide useful information (eg. would show up differently than if they were a vanilla townie)? I've thought about this a lot and I can't think of any such statements. If no one has an answer for that, it would seem the lie detector will not be useful.

[Angua]

I can think of a statement. However, it would bring up at least one false positive if scum truthify someone else's statement, and possibly a second false positive if we do have a cop in the game. At least that would bring us down to three suspects though.


Statement: I know, or have known, the factions of other players before they are/were confirmed by the mod in game flavour and not via pms.
The strange wording is so that it should work even if there is only one scum left (as they wouldn't know the factions of any other players for sure, on the off chance that there is an independent left) and so that the mod doesn't mess with us by saying that we now know webby, misnomer and Adam's alignments.

[Angua]

ebwop: We obviously need to decide on the logistics of lie detecting before we start doing it so we don't get everyone doing the same statement - but I think everyone should post the statement in the meantime before we figure out how to do the lie detecting.

[Mavketl]

I think the mod will treat that statement in the same way as the earlier "I know who the scum players are" thing, that was also influenced by truthifying "I am town". I think that any statement that indicates someone's towniness will fall under that same rule. I have to wonder whether Silknor checked that with the mod before asking that question, to be honest. If my interpretation of the truthify mechanisms is correct, it would be an entirely safe non-contribution.

I'll make Angua's statement anyway, since it can't do any harm.
Statement: I know, or have known, the factions of other players before they are/were confirmed by the mod in game flavour and not via pms.

Lastly,

We obviously need to decide on the logistics of lie detecting before we start doing it so we don't get everyone doing the same statement

With scum having an abundance of truthifies, I think announcing beforehand what you will lie detect is a way to make sure you won't find anything - or worse, you'll find false positives. I think it's wiser to take the risk of a double detector, since there's at least a chance that you get something out of it.

Also, nobody should comment to lie-detecting that statement. If they see someone saying something else that could be detector-worthy, go for it!



Do you guys think "If you lynch me now, town will lose" would work for detection purposes in case we end up on D3 with 2v1?

Actually, what do I care what *you guys* think
Mod:
Scenario: there are 3 players left on D3 and the game is not over. One of the townies says "if you lynch me today, town will lose". If lie-detected upon, will the outcome be TRUE or FALSE?

If that works, I think it's worth considering to save your detection powers for later.

[Angua]

I was figuring that as my statement relies on town coming up false, it should be harder for scum to truthify. You don't have to necessarily be scum to know who is what faction - if we have a cop they should be able to tell the faction of at least one other player with certainty. Also, doing this on D2 means that now any hypothetical cop would have had a chance to find something out - therefore on d1 this statement could be seen as being synonymous with being scum (and so would be protected under an I am town goldify), but on d2 it shouldn't be. Which is why we can't just use the old d1 statements, as they only work for what the player knew at the time of making the statement.

[Mavketl]

Wouldn't it be problematic to use a statement that comes up as positive for scum and cops both? Unless you mean that scum truthifying their town results in this coming up false and we can use this statement to verify cop claims or something?

I was figuring that as my statement relies on town coming up false, it should be harder for scum to truthify

That's what I was going for with my D1 detection of "I am scum" (should come up as false for town, true for scum), but truthifying "I am town" does falsify things that indicate you are scum.


I think your statement is an interesting idea, but I don't know if it would work. I guess we can always try asking some more?

Mod: If a scum player makes Angua's statement (included below for clarity), would it come up as TRUE or FALSE?
"I know, or have known, the factions of other players before they are/were confirmed by the mod in game flavour and not via pms."

[Angua]

Asking is a good idea.

I know it will out an cop, but if we miss today, and scum gets an NK, then tomorrow it will basically just be down to scum to easily bandwagon to get a lynch. If we managed to get 2 or 3 players with that statement, then we probably have a better chance of killing scum either today or tomorrow, even if the cop is the one who is NKed - they will at least be able to claim whatever they learnt in N1.

However, I could be wrong - I'm still a bit fuzzy on mafia logic so there could be a massive loophole there. I realise that I'm basically sacrificing our cop if we have one, which might not be the best of ideas.

[Mavketl]

then tomorrow it will basically just be down to scum to easily bandwagon to get a lynch.

I think that's a bit pessimistic. In a 2v1 situation there's still a fairly large chance of town lynching scum. Scum will only have the chance to "easily bandwagon" if a townie is stupid enough to vote before the day's discussion is over.

Anyway, I wouldn't mind 'sacrificing' a cop if it lead to anything useful. But I'm worried that your statement will ONLY be 'true' for cops and not for scum who have truthified that they are town. Which is why I would suggest waiting with all the statements until the mod gives us an answer to that

[BoomFrog]

Mod: If a scum player makes Angua's statement (included below for clarity), would it come up as TRUE or FALSE?
"I know, or have known, the factions of other players before they are/were confirmed by the mod in game flavour and not via pms."

I think what you ment to ask was:

If a scum, who has truthified "I am town", made Angua's statement, would it come up as true or false?

Also I think I've got one idea but it's dependent on the following:

If a player truthifies a nonsense phrase such as "All elephents are green." and someone used detect truth on it, would it then come up as true?

And to make sure my basic premise is true:

If a scum has truthified "I am town" would a later claim of a town power that he doesn't have such as "I am a cop" come up false still?

If a scum has truthified the claim "I am a cop" would thier statement "I am town" come up as true or false?

If a scum has truthified a false power claim that is not nessesarily a town power such as "I am a roleblocker" would thier statement "I am town" come up as true or false?

[BoomFrog]

Can you name a hypothetical statement that if, made by a scum and lie detected, would provide useful information (eg. would show up differently than if they were a vanilla townie)?

No I belive that is already the whole point of the mod's ruling is that they are indistinguishable. However I do think we can still distinguish between power town and scum who have truthified "I am town". At least then we can narrow the field by all full claiming. But I don't think we should all claim until we have a workable plan.

P.S. It's a start but my vote still stands until you contribute some meaningful content.

[weiyaoli]

Votals:
Silknor (1): BoomFrog

Sorry, I have a headache and slight cold today so I can't really concentrate that much. My computer takes ages to quote things since my mouse is broken so I'll forgo that.

Boomfrog's questions:
Angua's statement will show false for town. And scum who truthified "I am town" will also come up as false.

Yes.

Yes. Truthifying "I am town" will not also truthify "I am a cop".

No. Truthifying "I am a cop" will make "I am town" will not also truthify "I am town".

Their statement of "I am town" will not be truthified as well.

If there are three players left and the game is not over, that statement will read true.

Webby was killed by the mafia, as someone said, I had Misnomer kill him in the flavor so I didn't have to have rocks fall, he dies scenario.

"I am scum" comes up false for AdamH.

If anything is confusing please ask again and I'll come back to it when I'm feeling a little better.

[BoomFrog]

I'm assuming these go together:

Mod:
Scenario: there are 3 players left on D3 and the game is not over. One of the townies says "if you lynch me today, town will lose". If lie-detected upon, will the outcome be TRUE or FALSE?

If there are three players left and the game is not over, that statement will read true.

If a scum player who has truthified, "I am town" says, "If you lynch me today, town will lose" and there are currently three players left in the game but it is not over then will that statement read true?

Also missed my most interesting one:

Can players truthify a nonsense phrase such as "all elephants are green" and it will read true once truthified?

[Mavketl]

I'm thinking what you're thinking and it's a good thought.

Not sure if it'll be enough, but it's something.

[Angua]

It would be nice to hear from slbub and Silknor for how they think we should act today.

[weiyaoli]

I'm assuming these go together:

Mod:
Scenario: there are 3 players left on D3 and the game is not over. One of the townies says "if you lynch me today, town will lose". If lie-detected upon, will the outcome be TRUE or FALSE?

If there are three players left and the game is not over, that statement will read true.

If a scum player who has truthified, "I am town" says, "If you lynch me today, town will lose" and there are currently three players left in the game but it is not over then will that statement read true?

Also missed my most interesting one:

Can players truthify a nonsense phrase such as "all elephants are green" and it will read true once truthified?

Yes, the statement will read true.

Yes. Nonsense statements can be truthified if you wish.

[slbub]

sorry, unitentional lurking,

but nothing is really sticking out at me that hasen't already been unsaid, silknor is the person who is most like scum that i have seen, so...

vote: Silknor

[BoomFrog]

Let's not get all bandwagonny here yet, we don't even have a deadline. We may yet have a plan that makes some use out of the truth detectors.

Unvote

So the plan is we all claim a unique and unrelated nonsense phrase and truthify it. And we all claim our powers. Do NOT claim a power and that you are town in a single statement. The result will be that we will have three statements from each player that should be true and are all independent. "I am town", "My power is X", and "Elephants are all green." All three of these should detect as true from a town player but (assuming one scum left) only two will return as true for a scum player unless the power claim was actually true.

It's not much, and on the con side we will be laying out all our cards for scum to see. The pro side is we will have a 1/3rd chance each to catch scum. Although picking randomly we will only have a 1/12 chance each to actually find scum. But that's better then nothing. Also on the plus side we can probably narrow down our suspects based on power claims. We can improve our odds by claiming what we detected after we use it so that there won't be any redundent checking.

I'd like to hear other's thoughts and possibly improvements on the plan before we actually do it. Also we should set an order to claim in. I'd like: Slbub, Silknor, Mav, Angua. (I'll let someone else put me in the list somewhere.)

[Mavketl]

Also we should set an order to claim in. I'd like: Slbub, Silknor, Mav, Angua. (I'll let someone else put me in the list somewhere.)

slbub, Silknor, Mav, Angua, BoomFrog.

Mod: if a scum member with no powers except the NK claims to have "no powers" or to be "vanilla", does a lie detector on that come back as TRUE or FALSE?

I think we should await the answer to that before going ahead with this plan, but if that works I'm all for it, as indicated by my previous post.

I'd like to remind everyone they should not use a lie detector on Silknor's "I am town", since that is either true or truthified (I used my lie detector on his "I am scum" on D1). There's also some comments I would like to make on how to use lie detectors best, but not yet. Consider this a special request for BoomFrog and Angua to not use their lie detectors right away after everyone has thrown out their statements.



On a side note, I'm genuinely disliking the way either Silknor or slbub is playing - whichever one of them is the townie. Because they are giving us nothing to go on, except in slbub's case the standard neutral-to-scummy one-liners.

[Mavketl]

EBWOP: I didn't phrase that last bit very well, my assumptions are shining through like something really shiny.

[Silknor]

Well as Mav points out, the odds of finding something useful do go down if a standard scum goon counts as vanilla/no powers.

One minor tweak to her question though to make sure we don't get thrown off:

Mod: if a scum member with no powers besides their inherent lie detector/truthify/inherited truthify from modkill claims to have be vanilla (or have no powers) except the inherent lie detector/truthify, does a lie detector on that come back as TRUE or FALSE?

Also, what about lie detecting "This sentence is false"?

The risk in this plan though, is not just revealing what power roles everyone is. It's that the scum has a falsify or something similar (a roleblock stopping a truthify or reversing the answer on a target player's lie detector for example). I have no evidence that this is the case, no hint in flavor, no implication in a mod answer, nothing. Only the knowledge that if I were designing this game, I'd put that in. That doesn't mean Weiyaoli did. But we have to be open to that possibility. We probably aren't in LYLO (though we could be, 3 town, 1 scum, 1 lyncher with a town target, for example is a loss if we lynch a town and a town gets NK'd, there's other possibilities too there), so I'm not really worried about that. If the plan leads to lynching a townie and a scum, that's almost certainly a win. But before we commit to it, I think we should be aware that it could backfire, and that we know exactly how. That said, I'm not opposed to this plan. For example, if we get two false statements, that should greatly increase the probability one is accurate. And the information could still be useful tomorrow even if everything comes out true, eg. by validating a cop claim or some other power.

[Silknor]

EBWOP: To be specific about the first line, when I say they go down, I mean they go down to zero, since they'll have 2 truthifies and only 2 false statements. I think the plan is useless then.

[weiyaoli]

If a vanilla scum with no inherent powers apart from their lie detect/truthify and faction kill claims to be vanilla, that statement will lie detect TRUE. "no powers" will come back FALSE if they still possess a lie detect or truthify.

[Angua]

Ok, so the plan is to have the three statements, and then we randomly choose which ones we want to lie detect? And hope that we get a false statement out of scum?

A tweaks to the plan- we should all make sure that we use different nonsense statements. eg if we all use elephants are green, I imagine that statement will come up as true for the in game universe once it has been truthified. We could either go for different colours of elephant, or different animals - but no one do the exact same thing (this is such an easy tweak I don't see the point in getting clarification from the mod).

Also, I think that slbub is acting the scummiest at the moment. I get the feeling that Silknor is the type of player to try and post well thought out things at the risk of not posting when they don't feel as though they've thought things through enough, at the risk of not posting often enough. slbub has yet to contribute much to this discussion, and put Silknor at L1.

[Mavketl]

Okay, if our scum is vanilla, all their three statements will be true. If we want people to claim "no powers" instead, it will only be true for anyone who has not used their truthify and lie detector already. Which doesn't really help us get scum, I think?

Basically, the only way this would get even close to having a chance of working is if we have a non-vanilla scum.

[BoomFrog]

I agree we should all have different nonsense statements, related to completly different topics just to be safe. And make sure they are clearly false normally. Also I agree that having not used your lie detector up yet is not scummy so lets say anyone claiming no powers should say, "I am vanilla". If someone does claim vanilla don't bother testing the claim, but at least knowing who is vanilla should help us narrow things down.

It seems we've reached a concensus. Slbub, please claim your full powers in a single statement without including saying that you are town. And then make a seperate nonsense statement and tell the mod that you truthify the nonsense statement.

[slbub]

ok I'll follow along,

I'm vanilla.

socks have always been made from pig's teeth, and are quite comfortable.

[slbub]

mods: deadline?

[Angua]

Also, Silknor - it would be good to hear from you soon.

[Mavketl]

why would you be anxious for a deadline at this time? we need to sort out everyone's statements.

[slbub]

I wouldn't say anxious for a deadline so much as wanting to know how much time we have to work with.

[BoomFrog]

This really shouldn't be taking this long. We all knew the plan. Silknor?

[Silknor]

I believe that your plan became bad for the town once the mod gave us his answer.

There's 3 possibilities:
1. The scum is vanilla or has powers that could be townie (doctor, rolecop, watcher, etc) which do not interfere with the plan, they can claim honestly. In this case, they can truthify both false claims and so have 3 true statements, thus it's useless.
2. The scum has non-vanilla powers that would incriminate them if revealed, but do not interfere with the plan. In this case, the plan has a chance of detecting them (we can't check every statement, only approx. 1/3rd of them, depending on how many lie detectors have been used, and including the scum's lie detector).
3. The scum has non-vanilla powers which interfere with the plan (bonus truthify, falsify, invert target's lie detector, roleblock, etc). In this case, the plan is either useless or will give false information. Even if everyone follows the plan, we could not distinguish this case from the others until someone dies.

There's no right answer to the distribution of probabilities between these outcomes, so I won't try to guess. However, if there was an equal chance of each, then we'd have about a 5/9 chance of useless (1+2/3rds of 2), 1/9 chance of useful (1/3rd of 2), and 3/9 chance of either useless or backfire (3, depending on the specific power).

When factoring in that in all case, we reveal information about our powers to the scum, I believe the plan is more likely than not bad for the town. If you still have a defense of it given the mod's answer, I would be interested in hearing it.

[BoomFrog]

1) Why does the mod's answer affect your opinion of the plan so much? Most of your objections apply before the mod's answer. Incidentally none of the mods answers were a suprise to me, it was exactly as I hoped. Which part surprised you? Your strongest objection is the possibility of scum interfearence but that hasn't been changed by the mod's answers.

2) Your assuming we have no other information to help guide us to use our detectors properly. Assuming we have any scum hunting skill at all we can improve our chances. I agree we cannot rely on it 100% but it can assist our scum hunting.

3) Assuming one scum left so only two scum truthifies we can 100% confirm one non-vanilla town. In this case the scum's truth detector is just as good as towns because they cannot risk lying today and getting lynched tomorrow for it. We will also probably get two confirmed town if there is one cop who copped town last night. Three confirmed town means we lynch the other two and win.

4) It seems to me that you realize that you are very likely going to be the target of Angua and my detectors since using a detect on slbub is now useless. Now is the absolute scummiest possible time for you to be raising an objection. If we don't go ahead with this plan I think your going to be lynched. If you are town at least you can take a shot with your detector before we lynch you. Without full claiming the detectors are useless with claiming they have a chance to be useful.

5) If scum have a secret way to manipulate detectors then the detectors are actually more useful for scum then for town. I doubt this is the case, honestly I think that would be a bit bastardly of the mod to give scum a publicly known way to thwart the detector AND a secret way. If we are tricked today then we still have one more chance to find scum tomorrow.

[Mavketl]

1) Why does the mod's answer affect your opinion of the plan so much? Most of your objections apply before the mod's answer. Incidentally none of the mods answers were a suprise to me, it was exactly as I hoped. Which part surprised you? Your strongest objection is the possibility of scum interfearence but that hasn't been changed by the mod's answers.

I would think that the thing about vanilla scum is of some influence.

Apart from that, I think it is unwise to discuss which statements we should/will be checking, in the case that scum does have to make a choice about which of their lies to truthify. That includes saying things like "we will definitely not check one of slbub's statements" - which I don't think is a good idea anyway. If I'd still have my detector (... >.> ) I would definitely use it on something/someone unexpected in the hope that scum is counting on us to spend everything on the 'logical' statement and doesn't truthify everything else.

[Angua]

It seems to me that you realize that you are very likely going to be the target of Angua and my detectors since using a detect on slbub is now useless. Now is the absolute scummiest possible time for you to be raising an objection. If we don't go ahead with this plan I think your going to be lynched. If you are town at least you can take a shot with your detector before we lynch you. Without full claiming the detectors are useless with claiming they have a chance to be useful.

Why is using a detect on slbub now useless?

I'm beginning to find Silknor very annoying, what with them taking so long to do anything, and then, after prompting, say that it's because they don't agree with it at all, however they never offer any alternatives. Please Silknor, if you have an alternative plan on how to play the rest of the day, please say it. If not, just go along with the rest of our plans. We're probably not going to get past D3 anyway, so I don't see how helpful scum knowing our powers will be.

[Silknor]

@Boom:

1: If a scum with no powers beyond their inherent NK, lie detector, bonus lie detector, and truthify is not considered vanilla, then the scum's second statement (in which they claim a power) will by necessity be false, unless perhaps they claim vigilante. This means they have 3 false statements to make, and likely only 2 truthifies. Thus, for example, if one person draws overwhelming suspicion, 3 could investigate them, and would be guaranteed to find a falsity, unless (possibly) they claim vigilante, which in itself would clearly be a big tip that they are scum. But the mod said that such a scum would be considered vanilla, which means that if such a scum exists, they have but 2 lies to truthify, and conveniently, they have two truthifies!

2. This is correct. If our non-lie detector related scum hunting is useful (eg. we suspect the scum more than the 1 in 4 chance we'd have by guessing at random), we can improve the odds somewhat.

3. You are making assumptions about the distribution of town power roles. And you're still wrong because that non-vanilla town power could, in many cases, be a power a scum might have (scum have had, in various games, just about every power a townie has, and certainly every power considered common). Which means you might "confirm" the scum!

4. I honestly believe your plan is likely to harm the town, regardless of who is the focus of investigations (since while the scales might be tipped in favor of town if we had an accurate idea of who scum is, I believe this is not the case. Obviously though, if I believe I will be lynched, either by majority or deadline, I intend to use my lie detector and report the results beforehand.

5. I find it rather obvious, and not at all bastardly, that a mod might include such a power. It's true that we are probably not at lylo (there is a slim chance of it though, eg. 3 town, 1 scum, 1 lyncher with a town target is lylo IFF a townie is lynch and killed). However, I do not find the defense "well even if it hurts the town, we probably don't lose right away" at all convincing. Because of course we can improve our chances of winning by foregoing the strategy that hurts the town.

Also, I believe you are wrong in saying that slbub's statements are not worth checking because they claimed vanilla. Saying "lets not bother checking vanilla" makes it obvious, if people took you at your word, that scum should claim vanilla if they lack the ability to distort the results of lie detectors beyond that which is publicly known. Which of course means that vanilla still has to be a valid target for checking.

@Angua: My "plan" is simple, don't do any plans that harm the town. In other words, if there isn't a good plan for using the lie detectors, and I don't believe there is, we should, you know, play Mafia, without relying on them as a crutch! If they're a useful tool, great, lets use them. And if they might be useful, lets figure out if they are! But if they're not useful, then acknowledging that is a good thing, because it lets us move to where we would be if we didn't have lie detectors at all, except with the added information gleaned from this discussion. And that's most likely an eminently reasonable (and winnable) position for the town to be in. Also, the scum knowing our abilities could easily improve their N2 strategy, either in choice of NK or in target for some additional power they have (e.g. roleblock).

For what it's worth, going along with my "plan", I am beginning to suspect Boomfrog. His actions are entirely consistent with that of a scum who has abilities such that his plan is either useless (in which case we waste time and effort on a fruitless path) or harmful to town, as long as he believes he can convince the town it's a good, or neutral, idea (at least to the degree such that we don't automatically suspect him if it doesn't turn out useful). Claiming it's not worth investigating the vanilla is also suspicious to me. It's, to me, quite obvious that such a path cannot be a good equilibrium course for the town. Which means he either made a serious analytic error, an easily seen-through attempt to trick a scum who shouldn't claim vanilla into doing so (so easily seen-through I don't consider it a problem to say this aloud), or is testing the waters for his own vanilla claim.

[Mavketl]

Silknor. It is a good idea for everyone to use their truthifies today. You're a smart player, you must realize what I'm getting at here.

Postpone your arguments.

[BoomFrog]

Also, I believe you are wrong in saying that slbub's statements are not worth checking because they claimed vanilla. Saying "lets not bother checking vanilla" makes it obvious, if people took you at your word, that scum should claim vanilla if they lack the ability to distort the results of lie detectors beyond that which is publicly known. Which of course means that vanilla still has to be a valid target for checking.

This I agree with. I didn't consider a powerscum claiming vanilla would then have three statements that need truthifing. I was thinking that only vanilla scum or actual vanilla town would claim vanilla. I agree that we should strongly consider using our detects in unexpected ways.

Everything else I disagree with but I think the fundemental difference is simply that you and I have different guesses at what powers are remaining in town and scum's hands.