Wams chaos game day 5

For your simulated organized crime needs.

Moderators: jestingrabbit, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
moody7277
Posts: 572
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 7:06 pm UTC
Location: Extreme south Texas

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby moody7277 » Sat Sep 08, 2018 1:11 pm UTC

BoomFrog wrote:So why is Sabrar "voteable"?


If Sabrar continues to scumhunt, he won't be. And if mpolo flips scum, I'll consider that another point in Sabrar's favor as I discount theories proposed by scum.
The story of my life in xkcdmafia:

Tigerlion wrote:Well, I imagine as the game progresses, various people will be getting moody.


BoomFrog wrote:I still have no idea what town moody really looks like.

User avatar
somitomi
Posts: 635
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2015 11:21 pm UTC
Location: can be found in Hungary
Contact:

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby somitomi » Sat Sep 08, 2018 1:12 pm UTC

plytho wrote:
somitomi wrote:
plytho wrote: It was unnecessary (I think) and overly defensive. Could you rewrite the entire corrected sentence?

I guess you're right, the point I was trying to make is that the wagon could've happened regardless of mpolo's alignment, so it's null tell. I guess I'd rewrite the sentence like this:
The sudden wagon on him is fairly suspicious, but it could be the "other" mafia going for it, hoping to get some town cred or the "only" mafia going for the mislynch.

So, what do you mean by "The sudden wagon on him is fairly suspicious"?

That people on the wagon are suspicious, since it gained momentum so fast and went so far that mpolo was at L-1 for a bit. As others have pointed out, that sort of consensus is unusal this early in the game.
—◯-◯

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

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby Madge » Sat Sep 08, 2018 2:01 pm UTC

Mark_Cangila wrote:I don't like the Madge "CHAOS"ness. Yes, this game is chaotic, but screaming chaos everywhere doesn't help. If anything, it is a perfect excuse, as was shown when she used it to excuse her sheeping Sabrar.
Vote: Madge



CHAAAAOS

vote: Madge

unvote

vote: Mark_Canglia


aside: when I was younger I went by my full name (Margaret) and whenever I heard the name "Mark" I always thought I was being called on for half a second. So we have that in common, Mark!

CHAOSSSSSSS

RE: Jester, I got my mafia start on epicmafia (how I have NFI), and there, the Jester ends the game as a solo win, so it took me a little while to be comfortable with voting the jester off. that said, I think from a game design, if I was WAM AND I WANTED CHAOS, I wouldn't want to end the game on a jester win because if jester g ets voted off d1 the CHAOS GOES TO WASTE

Sabrar wrote:
Mark_Cangila wrote:I don't like the Madge "CHAOS"ness. Yes, this game is chaotic, but screaming chaos everywhere doesn't help. If anything, it is a perfect excuse, as was shown when she used it to excuse her sheeping Sabrar.
I agree with this. Madge was active D1 in both WoT3 and Meta Mafia, going back to her old meta by being lazy and waiting for N1 results (and blaming it on chaos) feels odd.


Odd, or ODD LIKE A FOX? OK, admittedly, maybe just odd. but i've gotta BE odd, I can't be anyone else. well, I can, if I was copying metas, but I didn't want meta plagiarism to confuse people from the CHAOS

somitomi wrote:
Madge wrote:wasn't actually serious about sheeping sabrar, i was just maintaining the CHAOS as long as I could by doing something silly.

What for?


CHAOS IS FUN, D1 is BOOORING. (does anyone else play DCSS? I'm channelling Xom so hard now!!!).

Anyway, I hate to offer anyone some wine, but since you seem to want some: if I was scum I could play one of the metas i talked about in that gojoe post of mine, act "normal", or maybe pretend to scumhunt. but nope. I'm being chaotic because I am CONFIDENT.

------

seriously though:

I wonder if we should look more closely into mpolo being L-1. How long was he there? How many scum do we think we have on one team, max? Maybe two, if we assume there's lots of factions (far be it from me to go back to the poisoned well, but, chaos)?

If mpolo is town and he was at L-1 for a while, then scum was already voting for him, at least one. Maybe not both, perhaps hammering would look too suspicious, but still. Something to examine.

If mpolo is scum, then the L-1 is nulltell.
I'm writing a supernatural romance novel, it updates the first weekend of every month. You can find it here.

User avatar
Sabrar
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:29 pm UTC

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby Sabrar » Sat Sep 08, 2018 3:01 pm UTC

Madge wrote:I wonder if we should look more closely into mpolo being L-1. How long was he there?
Why don't you take the 20 seconds to look it up? It was 4 minutes.

User avatar
plytho
¡This cheese is burning me!
Posts: 156
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2008 6:23 pm UTC

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby plytho » Sat Sep 08, 2018 3:20 pm UTC

somitomi wrote: I guess I'd rewrite the sentence like this:
The sudden wagon on him is fairly suspicious, but it could be the "other" mafia going for it, hoping to get some town cred or the "only" mafia going for the mislynch.
This sounds like you're saying the same thing twice. "the wagon is suspicious" means "I think the people on the wagon are scum", "but it could be other mafia" means "maybe mpolo is scum too, but the wagon is still scummy in that case", "or the only mafia going for mislynch" means "I think the people on the wagon are scum" it doesn't add anything, does it?
Pronouns: he him his
Avatar: The High Frontier by Angus McKie

User avatar
somitomi
Posts: 635
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2015 11:21 pm UTC
Location: can be found in Hungary
Contact:

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby somitomi » Sat Sep 08, 2018 3:58 pm UTC

plytho wrote:
somitomi wrote: I guess I'd rewrite the sentence like this:
The sudden wagon on him is fairly suspicious, but it could be the "other" mafia going for it, hoping to get some town cred or the "only" mafia going for the mislynch.
This sounds like you're saying the same thing twice. "the wagon is suspicious" means "I think the people on the wagon are scum", "but it could be other mafia" means "maybe mpolo is scum too, but the wagon is still scummy in that case", "or the only mafia going for mislynch" means "I think the people on the wagon are scum" it doesn't add anything, does it?

Yeah, it doesn't. :oops:
—◯-◯

User avatar
plytho
¡This cheese is burning me!
Posts: 156
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2008 6:23 pm UTC

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby plytho » Sat Sep 08, 2018 4:14 pm UTC

And that's why I think it's a weird edit.

Not entirely sure wat to make of it yet.
Pronouns: he him his
Avatar: The High Frontier by Angus McKie

User avatar
bessie
Posts: 20
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2013 8:27 am UTC
Location: California

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby bessie » Sat Sep 08, 2018 5:45 pm UTC

Vicarin wrote:Whoa, a whole 50% accuracy for the WoT gambit? Sign me up, it's as good as flipping a coin :P
No, that’s not how it works. And I think it’s telling that you would make this kind of error, or perhaps even more telling that you would try to twist it this way.

Vicarin wrote: Or you're just reading way too much into this. It's going to be tiresome if I need to die to prove you wrong.
:roll:

Vicarin wrote:I'm not a complete idiot thanks, I know that that sort of game can exist, especially since NNY was 3 scum in 11 people and it was my first game here. I just think it's pretty damn unlikely to fit with what we have here.
And what do you think we have here? And how is a 3 person scum team so unlikely as to be so unequivocally dismissed by you?

@Vicarin, personal note
Spoiler:
Please don’t think I would ever try to accuse you of being a complete idiot, in fact I believe the complete opposite is true.

Pre-post edit re this post:
Vicarin wrote:The whole "the setup isn't guaranteed to be balanced but any faction can win", along with how my role works, are what I'm basing it on.
The first part doesn’t make any sense. The second part would if you could infer from your role that there are two scum teams, which could indicate that you are on a small scum team.

plytho wrote:
bessie wrote:Madge, thank you for sharing your excellent game tips! Mark, really, try some of those in the next game. I’m thinking of following them myself by just tunneling plytho and ignoring everyone else. :P

What made you change your mind? :wink:
Sorry, got distracted. :P But I’ll refocus my efforts on you if you make the same math argument as Vicarin did in this post.

plytho wrote:Hmm, right, onto Vicarin then. I agree that his hesitance to vote mpolo is suspicious as well as him not keeping track of the votes. I don't really have a problem with his gambit vote. His unvote was a bit weird. So, yeah I he's still on the scummy side but not as much as mpolo.
I could almost buy Vicarin's BoomFrog vote as an RVS vote, but the fact that Vicarin kept the vote long after RVS was over, and he defended it, showed he was serious.

somitomi wrote:
BoomFrog wrote:3+ is "significant sized".

Is there room for a 3+ mafia team in a game with 12 people? I'm genuinely asking.
Why oddly enough, I am prepared to answer this question! From the first page (12 players, 3 full mafia on the same team from game start):
Newbie New Year Mafia (9-3)
Monstrous Masquerade Mafia II (7-3-1-1)
Trial of the Pariahs* (TBH I’m not entirely sure what was going on with this game but it looks like it was 8-3-1?)

BoomFrog wrote:Nah, this is just me being enthusiastic and having fun, if I was trying to manipulate you I'd be more subtle.
Hahaha, like change your avatar? :P

mpolo wrote:Reading with a phone and mobile internet, whole being driven very rapidly, so this is brief. Sorry about how much I went into the overly depressed mode. However, when the pressure is this hard on D1, and I have no hope of getting anything except what is in thread, it is pretty clear that I am going to be misslynched sooner or later.
Jeez mpolo, I understand about the real life issue, and appreciate that you’re trying to keep up on your phone, but you’re not a newbie, there were times you have served as mentor to newbie me. I don’t need to tell you that the most important thing a townie can do when facing pressure and the potential lynch is to continue to push and prod and flush out scum, and even if you’re lynched you’ll leave behind information that may lead us to scum. I find this quite odd from you.

moody7277 wrote:Sabrar is not necessarily scummy in the sense of being part of a killing faction. He is potentially a liability endgame and may become a source of confusion for town, although I may have seen something that was him sliding into being helpful recently.
This only makes sense if you believe Sabrar to be jester or other third party, but I thought you had already accepted that he was obviously joking with his early content.

Pre-post edit, somewhat answered here. Hmmm. So what is your read of Sabrar?

Edit again, answered here:
moody7277 wrote:A1) In a lot of games with a jester that I can recall, people have mostly given in and lynched them for their win and gone on with the rest of the game. This included several games from way back, so if you think tactics have changed in this respect, please feel free to correct me.

A2) If Sabrar decides to be a nuisance, then lynching him may be inevitable. On the other hand, if he figures the jig is up and boredom/professionalism/whatever lead him actually scumhunt, then I'd say live and let live.
So you are standing by a jester (town wins jester loses if both make it to endgame) read of Sabrar? Because if he’s scum, we need to lynch him regardless of his helpfulness. And if he’s town,do you really think Sabrar would purposely engage in anti-town behavior?

moody7277 wrote:In conclusion, I've never actually seen Sabrar as scummy per se. The jestery part was mostly because of his early play and how mpolo fit a hypothesis to it. If you take that away, what you get is someone who looks somewhat townie and was playing reeeeealy loose to begin with.
Hmm, but scummy enough to be a bottom-three-votable, and scummier than Vicarin.

Sabrar wrote:@bessie: could you give me your opinion on plytho?
Yes I will try to find time later today to do a comprehensive reads list. Right now I’m still trying to get through a first run of reacting and replying to content. But so far nothing has pinged me about plytho (which perhaps should be a ping because we are usually going at it by now).

moody7277 wrote:If Sabrar continues to scumhunt, he won't be. And if mpolo flips scum, I'll consider that another point in Sabrar's favor as I discount theories proposed by scum.
Interesting because you posted jester setup spec long before mpolo posted his Sabrar could be jester theory.


Re this post by Madge. She claims she’s not copying metas, but I get the feeling she is consciously playing herself.

Sorry for the CHAOTIC post, I don't have time to clean it up right now.

User avatar
moody7277
Posts: 572
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 7:06 pm UTC
Location: Extreme south Texas

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby moody7277 » Sat Sep 08, 2018 6:18 pm UTC

bessie wrote:Hmm, but scummy enough to be a bottom-three-votable, and scummier than Vicarin.


My read of Sabrar at this point has really wide error bars at this point (somewhere between -3i and 6 if you get my drift), whereas my read of Vicarin has smaller error bars but sits closer to zero. I am a bit confused and a little sympathetic that the default read on him by most people seems to be scummy.

Interesting because you posted jester setup spec long before mpolo posted his Sabrar could be jester theory.


A long time being defined as 22 1/2 hours (4sep 1030 to 5sep 0800), which may seem longer if you count in posts (17 to 54). If mpolo were scum, he may have used my setup spec as a basis for his distraction theory. It could also just be post hoc propter hoc and he came up with it independently. Your point also gives a reason why I've been so attached to the idea of jester!Sabrar; mpolo's theory resonated with something I'd already been thinking of, so I just locked on to it.
The story of my life in xkcdmafia:

Tigerlion wrote:Well, I imagine as the game progresses, various people will be getting moody.


BoomFrog wrote:I still have no idea what town moody really looks like.

User avatar
bessie
Posts: 20
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2013 8:27 am UTC
Location: California

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby bessie » Sat Sep 08, 2018 6:51 pm UTC

moody7277 wrote: My read of Sabrar at this point has really wide error bars at this point (somewhere between -3i and 6 if you get my drift), whereas my read of Vicarin has smaller error bars but sits closer to zero. I am a bit confused and a little sympathetic that the default read on him by most people seems to be scummy.
Interesting, I don’t follow how you can dismiss scum reading Vicarin as being “default”. I think Vicarin has posted some suspicious content, and I believe I've presented an argument based on content, and not just an argument that based on the vibe of the thing.



Unofficial votals:

mpolo (3): Vicarin, plytho, moody7277
Vicarin (3): BoomFrog, bessie, Sabrar
Madge (1): Mark_Canigla
Mark_Canigla (1): Madge

Not voting: heuristically_alone, mpolo, somitomi

Not playing day 1: jimbobmacdoodle

6 to lynch.


Observation: The order in which we vote in thread does not seem to be important, see wam’s latest votal post, which doesn’t match the voting order.

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

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby BoomFrog » Sat Sep 08, 2018 7:42 pm UTC

Sabrar wrote:
Madge wrote:I wonder if we should look more closely into mpolo being L-1. How long was he there?
Why don't you take the 20 seconds to look it up? It was 4 minutes.

More importantly hammering would have been super scummy unless it looked convincingly accedental. I doubt most scum players would have risked it.

@Sabrar: I'm surprised you are focusing on the irrelevent details. It seems like you are annoyed at Madge for speculating without gathering data. What is going on here?
"Everything I need to know about parenting I learned from cooking. Don't be afraid to experiment, and eat your mistakes." - Cronos

User avatar
Sabrar
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:29 pm UTC

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby Sabrar » Sat Sep 08, 2018 8:02 pm UTC

I truncated that whole part where Madge suggested that others should examine the situation. It shows a lack of actually wanting to analyze the situation and providing original content. Just asking others to do the work for you allows you to piggyback on their opinion.
Hammering could possibly have come from Jester so I think dismissing the line of inquiry with a simple 'no-one would ever have done it' is incorrect. Not sure why you find it more relevant.

User avatar
mpolo
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:24 pm UTC
Location: Germany

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby mpolo » Sat Sep 08, 2018 8:18 pm UTC

Re multiple scum teams: the townie win condition makes this pretty likely, but there is still the possibility for one large team, as town would still be the only faction left. I do think that this means that town doesn't yet win if there are two townies and a jester on the last day. But I no longer thin no a jester is likely. Survivors are probably also impossible in the set-up.

I am going to have to wait until Monday to do any proper analysis. (Long drive home he tomorrow.) I have a positive feeling about Boomfrog for defending me when I was too despondent to say anything sensible. Bessie seems townie. Don't know if Madge is just generating interest with CHAOS our if that's some kind of restriction-mechanic for her. Sabrar send to decided against me to soon, but he does sometimes get reads that he holds onto tightly. Vicarin will have to be looked at, obviously. I don't have enough for an opinion about Mark. And no more time tonight.
Image <-- Evil experiment

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

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby BoomFrog » Sat Sep 08, 2018 8:23 pm UTC

I'm confident that Madge's behavior is not from a game mechanical restriction. It's very Madge. Whether it's sincere Madge or Madge pretending to be Madge is up for debate.
"Everything I need to know about parenting I learned from cooking. Don't be afraid to experiment, and eat your mistakes." - Cronos

User avatar
Mark_Cangila
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2018 4:34 pm UTC

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby Mark_Cangila » Sat Sep 08, 2018 8:50 pm UTC

Madge has one post with actual content. Her most recent one, which was in reaction to being voted.

Also, can NO ONE spell my name? My name is Mark_Cangila, not Mark_Canigla or Mark_Canglia. (Sorry I'm just really annoyed because everyone everywhere mispells it)

User avatar
somitomi
Posts: 635
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2015 11:21 pm UTC
Location: can be found in Hungary
Contact:

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby somitomi » Sat Sep 08, 2018 9:23 pm UTC

bessie wrote:Why oddly enough, I am prepared to answer this question! From the first page (12 players, 3 full mafia on the same team from game start):
Newbie New Year Mafia (9-3)
Monstrous Masquerade Mafia II (7-3-1-1)
Trial of the Pariahs* (TBH I’m not entirely sure what was going on with this game but it looks like it was 8-3-1?)

Oh, so "3+" means "three or more", not "more than three". My mistake then.
Mark_Cangila wrote:Also, can NO ONE spell my name? My name is Mark_Cangila, not Mark_Canigla or Mark_Canglia. (Sorry I'm just really annoyed because everyone everywhere mispells it)

Typos happen to everyone, don't get too upset.
—◯-◯

User avatar
Mark_Cangila
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2018 4:34 pm UTC

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby Mark_Cangila » Sat Sep 08, 2018 9:33 pm UTC

Sorry. Just a pet pevve.

User avatar
Sabrar
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:29 pm UTC

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby Sabrar » Sat Sep 08, 2018 10:10 pm UTC

BoomFrog wrote:I'm confident that Madge's behavior is not from a game mechanical restriction.
Who said it was?

User avatar
Vicarin
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:45 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby Vicarin » Sat Sep 08, 2018 11:33 pm UTC

@bessie: you don't get to say you think I'm not an idiot in one sentence and then say that I've given myself away as being on a small scum team by my insistence that we're playing some kind of multiball :P give me some credit. I'm sure your powers of setup speculation would allow you to figure out townie roles that I would think this for.

And if you've got a better statistical analysis for how effective the gambits are, by all means make it. Simply saying "you're wrong" isn't an argument. Then again, I wonder why you presented such a weak one in the first place if you're just going to say "that's not how it works" to 1/3 of my rebuttal.


Somitomi's previous response to me feels reasonably genuine, and I think we have many other decent lynch options before him, so I'll file him as town.

@Mark_Cangila: who's your bottom 3? Less complaining, more reads please.

User avatar
Vicarin
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:45 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby Vicarin » Sat Sep 08, 2018 11:42 pm UTC

Can we get a modprod on heuristically_alone?

User avatar
bessie
Posts: 20
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2013 8:27 am UTC
Location: California

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby bessie » Sat Sep 08, 2018 11:49 pm UTC

Vicarin wrote:@bessie: you don't get to say you think I'm not an idiot in one sentence and then say that I've given myself away as being on a small scum team by my insistence that we're playing some kind of multiball :P give me some credit.
I don’t think you’re an idiot. But I think that this argument has potential to become uncomfortably personal, and I need to think about how to respond.

Back in a bit.

User avatar
Vicarin
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:45 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby Vicarin » Sun Sep 09, 2018 12:06 am UTC

Realised I'd not finished answering everything that you'd asked.

I think what we have here is multiball of some kind, as I've said before. A 3+ person team would require a very particular setup here I think, which is why I think it's unlikely.

And if you're worried about the argument getting too personal, just address the substance of the other stuff I replied with first.

User avatar
Mark_Cangila
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2018 4:34 pm UTC

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby Mark_Cangila » Sun Sep 09, 2018 12:08 am UTC

Sabrar wrote:
BoomFrog wrote:I'm confident that Madge's behavior is not from a game mechanical restriction.
Who said it was?

Mpolo did here
mpolo wrote:Don't know if Madge is just generating interest with CHAOS our if that's some kind of restriction-mechanic for her.

User avatar
bessie
Posts: 20
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2013 8:27 am UTC
Location: California

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby bessie » Sun Sep 09, 2018 12:50 am UTC

Vicarin wrote:
bessie wrote:
Vicarin wrote:Mostly because I've been pretty unimpressed by their effectiveness (last game might be a decent example :P), and they act as huge distractions.
I think you need to reread my Newbie New Year and Dark Tower BoomGambit analysis here. As the result of the NNY year gambit, BoomDog was right on 8/11 (2 of 3 on scum). And re the effectiveness of the Wheel of Time 3 gambit, read my analysis here, where my BoomOracle analysis was wrong on moody, right on you. So how can you dismiss the effectiveness?

Whoa, a whole 50% accuracy for the WoT gambit? Sign me up, it's as good as flipping a coin :P

It’s not 50/50. You’re not looking at the problem correctly.

WoT3 was 11 players, so the potential scum pool (from my point of view) was 10 players.

The players who I felt reacted in a way that was contrary to how I thought town!them should have reacted to BoomFrog’s gambit were Vicarin, moody, and Mark. I discarded Mark based on his immediate and townie response when I posted that he was one of my “unexpecteds”.

So if I am considering BoomOracle analysis alone, my scum suspect pool is narrowed to 2/10.

The 50/50 applies to a field where 80% of the options have already been eliminated due to the gambit.

Underlined=gambit predicted correctly.
Italics=gambit predicted incorrectly.

Town: BoomFrog, heury, LaserGuy, Madge, Mark, moody, mpolo
Mafia: Sabrar, Vicarin, wam


Result: Gambit analysis alone (no other factors) predicted 7/10 alignments correctly.


I don’t think you’re an idiot at all. I think hot-headed overly defensive newbie scum Vicarin made this post because he felt he needed to respond quickly and get something out there as soon as possible.

I think that hard-headed, can’t let it drop, can’t lose an argument, must have the last word Vicarin made this post. And I think that you will refuse to let this go, until not only that you believe you have won this argument, but until I publicly concede that you have won the argument.


You are incorrect.


Awaiting the rebuttal that I know is coming.

User avatar
Vicarin
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:45 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby Vicarin » Sun Sep 09, 2018 1:08 am UTC

Again, that argument is not exactly great, because if you assume everyone is town, then you'll get 7/10 alignments correct as well, but that is a better argument than your last one I guess. I'm wondering what you think a bad result for the gambit would look like. Also, have you tried counting the number of type I and type II errors that the gambit made, and compare those to the number that a good scum-hunting analysis would have?

And as I said last game, you're the one projecting the "cannot lose an argument" onto me. I mean, you've even underlined your statement as if that means something. Not expecting you to actually back down considering what happened last game, but oh well.

Actually, come to think of it, why'd you bother linking that 2nd post there?

User avatar
Mark_Cangila
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2018 4:34 pm UTC

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby Mark_Cangila » Sun Sep 09, 2018 1:47 am UTC

Vicarin wrote:@Mark_Cangila: who's your bottom 3? Less complaining, more reads please.

First of all, sorry about using caps when i was mentioning the typo (honestly.) I meant to represent emphasis but it came across as aggressive. For a bottom 3 scum: Madge, Mpolo, Vicarin

User avatar
Vicarin
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:45 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby Vicarin » Sun Sep 09, 2018 2:08 am UTC

Mark_Cangila wrote:For a bottom 3 scum: Madge, Mpolo, Vicarin


Why me and mpolo? You've already explained for Madge at least.

User avatar
Vicarin
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:45 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby Vicarin » Sun Sep 09, 2018 2:15 am UTC

Oh, thought of a better way of explaining it.

@bessie: In WoT3, if you'd selected 2 players at random other than yourself, what's the probability that at least one would be scum? Do you understand now why I'm not terribly impressed by the way your gambit analysis selected a set of 2 players, which had 1 scum in it?

User avatar
Mark_Cangila
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2018 4:34 pm UTC

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby Mark_Cangila » Sun Sep 09, 2018 2:31 am UTC

Mpolo's willingness to die, and your overreaction.

User avatar
Vicarin
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:45 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby Vicarin » Sun Sep 09, 2018 2:36 am UTC

Hmmmmm, do you have any reasons that aren't just copying something someone else has said? What about my "overreaction" did you find scummy? How willing to die do you think mpolo is?

User avatar
bessie
Posts: 20
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2013 8:27 am UTC
Location: California

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby bessie » Sun Sep 09, 2018 4:01 am UTC

Ok, is there anything I still need to respond to?

mpolo wrote: I do think that this means that town doesn't yet win if there are two townies and a jester on the last day.
What? How is this situation supposed to resolve then?

Mark_Cangila wrote: Also, can NO ONE spell my name? My name is Mark_Cangila, not Mark_Canigla or Mark_Canglia. (Sorry I'm just really annoyed because everyone everywhere mispells it)
I’m sorry Mark. I usually am more careful to spell everyone’s correctly (including punctuation and capital letters), or use a nickname that I know is acceptable to them (like jimbob or heury or Most Enlightened Master).

Vicarin wrote: I think what we have here is multiball of some kind, as I've said before. A 3+ person team would require a very particular setup here I think, which is why I think it's unlikely.
The very particular setup of 9-3, which is unlikely how? I know that you have soft claimed that the reason you believe we are in multiball is because of your power, and that I should be able to figure it out. I can’t think of a townie power that would confirm multiball, but meh I’m not the most knowledgeable player, so I will leave it at I’m skeptical at your reasoning.

Vicarin wrote:Again, that argument is not exactly great, because if you assume everyone is town, then you'll get 7/10 alignments correct as well, but that is a better argument than your last one I guess. I'm wondering what you think a bad result for the gambit would look like. Also, have you tried counting the number of type I and type II errors that the gambit made, and compare those to the number that a good scum-hunting analysis would have?
Interesting. Again you’re missing the point. BoomFrog's gambits (and anyone or anything that generates content) is an interesting tool in helping me construct a read. I did not use BoomOracle analysis as the sole basis of my D1 vote in WoT3, and in fact it was a pretty minor factor overall. My read was decided on your scummy behavior consisting of all the following:

1. Secondary win con claim which you appeared to take seriously at first, and that town should have ignored such a scummy win con.
2. Using Secondary win con as an excuse to fish, and for other instances of fishing.
3. Hostility toward BoomFrog for gambit.
4. Lack of scumhunting/reads.
*5. Your insistence that my game in WoT3 was the same as my Stellaris game, but you never provided an example of how it differed from my town gameplay.
6. Your scum read of me, which was “you always read me correctly when you are town, you misread me when you are scum, so since I am town therefore you must be scum.”
7. Asking LaserGuy questions only after you were prodded to do so, and your total disinterest in following up on his reply (especially the setup spec).
*8. Your continuing inability to let an unimportant argument from Stellaris drop, and when I gave you the choice, on the final hours of D1, between (a) Do you want me to spend a few hours revisiting and researching that argument? or (b) Do you want me to analyze the current game? you chose (a), which is the most scummy anti-town behavior of the entire game.

[Primary reasons for my scum read of you were 8 followed by 5, others were secondary, but help complete the picture.]

And if you want gambit comparisons, I find it interesting that my fish bowl gambit led to the whole scum team.

Vicarin wrote:And as I said last game, you're the one projecting the "cannot lose an argument" onto me.
You’re right, I’m the only person that ever noticed this. NOT.


Vicarin wrote: Not expecting you to actually back down considering what happened last game, but oh well.
If you recall, I did back down, and made the decision to spend my last few hours on D1 working toward the town win condition instead of doing the hours of research requited to win a vanity contest.

Vicarin wrote:Actually, come to think of it, why'd you bother linking that 2nd post there?
Which link, this one or this one? (honest question)

Vicarin wrote: @bessie: In WoT3, if you'd selected 2 players at random other than yourself, what's the probability that at least one would be scum? Do you understand now why I'm not terribly impressed by the way your gambit analysis selected a set of 2 players, which had 1 scum in it?
Interesting, you really must get the last word.

User avatar
Vicarin
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:45 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby Vicarin » Sun Sep 09, 2018 4:22 am UTC

The 2nd of those two links, and answer that question I put in the previous post or I'll be forced to conclude you can't.

User avatar
Sabrar
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:29 pm UTC

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby Sabrar » Sun Sep 09, 2018 4:39 am UTC

bessie wrote:Ok, is there anything I still need to respond to?
Plytho-read? Unless you plan on doing that tomorrow along with everyone else.

User avatar
Sabrar
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:29 pm UTC

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby Sabrar » Sun Sep 09, 2018 5:53 am UTC

Townie-group so far is {bessie, somitomi} with {BoomFrog, Mark, plytho} most likely to get an invitation next. moody is looking somewhat townie aside from general scumminess coming from being moody. No data on {heury, jimbob}.

User avatar
Vicarin
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:45 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby Vicarin » Sun Sep 09, 2018 7:08 am UTC

@bessie: I was wondering about why you'd linked that post with regards to my scumminess mainly because you've stated before that you think me arguing repeatedly is actually NAI for me, so I'm not sure why you'd try to support your argument with it. Comes off rather weirdly. Oh well, probably going to have to rely on LaserGuy's judgement of you in Alien Warfare and believe that you're town.

I'd call that fish bowl gambit "votals analysis" myself, but you do you :P

Who's your strongest town reads at the moment?

@Sabrar: what do you like in particular about BoomFrog and Mark? Do you think Mark still has the newbie excuse for putting someone at L-1 so early, especially in a chaos game?

User avatar
bessie
Posts: 20
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2013 8:27 am UTC
Location: California

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby bessie » Sun Sep 09, 2018 7:11 am UTC

Sabrar wrote:
bessie wrote:Ok, is there anything I still need to respond to?
Plytho-read? Unless you plan on doing that tomorrow along with everyone else.
I know. I was working on my reads when I got roped in to a time waster, and I should have known better when I made this post.

WAG: Vicarin’s scum partner(s) are not in the following group: BoomFrog, Sabrar, Mark, somitimi.

Vicarin wrote:The 2nd of those two links, and answer that question I put in the previous post or I'll be forced to conclude you can't.
Ok, sure, if you need to win this one to drop it and post some other content, and not just questioning Mark. Now you have no excuse not to produce reads on everyone else.

I will have something within the next 12 hours. My last opportunity to properly respond to content will be about 24 hours from now.

Ninja'd, will reply later.

User avatar
Sabrar
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:29 pm UTC

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby Sabrar » Sun Sep 09, 2018 8:05 am UTC

Vicarin wrote:@Sabrar: what do you like in particular about BoomFrog and Mark? Do you think Mark still has the newbie excuse for putting someone at L-1 so early, especially in a chaos game?
I feel that BoomFrog is actively scum-hunting on multiple fronts, not getting bogged down on one particular issue or person.
Mark doesn't feel like being coached and it's most likely scum has day-chat. Plus meta-read. Yes I'm giving him the newbie excuse, especially as he came in very late.

User avatar
plytho
¡This cheese is burning me!
Posts: 156
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2008 6:23 pm UTC

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby plytho » Sun Sep 09, 2018 8:38 am UTC

My weekend is turning out busier than expected. I should have some time time tonight to catch up on everyone.
Pronouns: he him his
Avatar: The High Frontier by Angus McKie

User avatar
Vicarin
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:45 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby Vicarin » Sun Sep 09, 2018 9:04 am UTC

Sabrar wrote:
Vicarin wrote:@Sabrar: what do you like in particular about BoomFrog and Mark? Do you think Mark still has the newbie excuse for putting someone at L-1 so early, especially in a chaos game?
I feel that BoomFrog is actively scum-hunting on multiple fronts, not getting bogged down on one particular issue or person.
Mark doesn't feel like being coached and it's most likely scum has day-chat. Plus meta-read. Yes I'm giving him the newbie excuse, especially as he came in very late.


In that case,

1) Why do you think bessie is strong town? Do you think she's getting bogged down on me? :P

2) Why do you think it's likely scum has day-chat?

3) At what point do you stop giving Mark the newbie excuse, seeing as you didn't really say you liked his content?

User avatar
Sabrar
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:29 pm UTC

Re: Wams chaos game day 1

Postby Sabrar » Sun Sep 09, 2018 9:22 am UTC

Vicarin wrote:1) Why do you think bessie is strong town? Do you think she's getting bogged down on me? :P
Yes, this is classic bessie tunneling and reaction. People play this game differently.

Vicarin wrote:2) Why do you think it's likely scum has day-chat?
wam wrote:All chats are for all phases unless stated.


Vicarin wrote:3) At what point do you stop giving Mark the newbie excuse, seeing as you didn't really say you liked his content?
I have no idea. For now this looks like newbie!Mark rather than scum!Mark.


Return to “Mafia”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Sabrar, somitomi and 16 guests