PDA

View Full Version : Mafia II: Space Vampires (or something)



Pages : [1] 2

Kyuri
11-04-2014, 07:38 AM
Date: Friday October 31st, 2014
Time: 7:13pm
Place: Mojave, California

The Cast:
Dirac
Dot
LowIQLogan
Slab_Bulkhead
Utisz
Osito Polar
Light Leak
lethe
Hephaestus
Dr. Ahcir
Noir
Polemarch
Granny Smith
P-O
tele

The INTPs were hanging out in a rented house off I-58 in Mojave. They were way out in the desert, drinking beers on their outdoor furniture and talking about the days events. It was a Halloween party, so they were in costumes.

Dirac was dressed as Jon Snow
Dot was dressed as Little Ninja Orphan Annie
LowIQLogan was dressed as SubZero
Slab_Bulkhead was dressed as Jon Snow
Utisz was dressed as a zombie Captain Jack Sparrow
Osito Polar was dressed as Obi Wan Kenobi
Light Leak was dressed as Trinity
Lethe was dressed as Katness
Hephaestus was dressed as Fred, from Scooby Doo
Dr. Ahcir was dressed as Dexter
Noir was dressed as 80's Hulk Hogan
Polemarch was dressed as a guy from Duck Dynasty
Granny Smith was dressed as Grover
P-O was dressed as Zorro
tele was dressed as The Bride

"Goddammit, Dirac! AGAIN?" said Slab_Bulkhead

Dirac turned wearily and just gave a mostly-defeated shrug. He pouted like a half-drowned puppy.

"Damn, that was good."

Dirac just sighed and the two walked over to the party together in awkward silence.

"WHOA! Check this out, Hulkamaniacs and wrestling fans!" growled Noir as they approached "Looks like we're in for a SNOWstorm!" He carefully arranged his oversized blonde mustache and took a large gulp out of his Solo cup.

Slab almost threw up at his mouth after he got the joke. He looked at Dirac who whispered "No, brother. Our road ahead will be hard, but we've got to press on."

As they got to the front of the house where the main body of the party was gathered, they overheard a conversation about the days events.

"So, why do YOU think SpaceshipTwo really blew up?" asked LowIQLogan.

"Probably a combination of the kinds of mechanical failure you get with early test spacecraft, possibly pilot error and, you know, regular old bad luck." said Light Leak.

"No, that's not how this is done. You can't just blurt out the right answer. You have to overthink it first." said Logan.

"Oh, so like we're supposed to say they were sabotaged by jealous engineers from NASA or something?" asked Light Leak.

"Better in that it's less actually plausible, but it's maybe more of an INTJ answer." piped in tele.

"OH how about this -- it was aliens that did it!" chimed in Lethe.

"GREAT!" said LowIQLogan "But why?"

"It was because they flew too high for humans using a home-grown technology. It was a spacecraft not based on the technologies they originally gave the U.S. government back in Roswell. They're afraid that if we continue researching this technology path, we'll discover secrets the aliens don't want us to have. Something that threatens them." said Hephaestus.

"Holy shit that was good." Logan leaned the top back on his plastic lawn-lounger and stared up at the stars.

"Or it coulda been vampires." said Dr. Ahcir.

"Okay, that's an interesting competing theory, please explain." responded Hephaestus.

"It's because they don't want humans to expand beyond the home planet. It would give them too many opportunities to harness the power of the sun to wield it against their undead masters." said Dr. Ahcir.

"Wait, don't you mean OUR undead masters, like as in humans, you know, like US?" asked Logan.

"Yeah. Of course. I meant like our undead masters, we humans in the unlikely speculative scenario in which these vampires exist." said the Dr.

"He's admitting the weakness of the scenario. Because it's aliens." said Hephaestus and raised his beer towards Lethe.

"Or it could be because the vampires are so very old. They're superstitious and they think if humans travel too far from Earth we'll encounter angels or relics of God that we could use to destroy them." offered Osito Polar.

"Oh someone please kill me, it sounds like another Oso thread about God and the Bible. We get it, you're a stealth-Catholic. Enough, please?" said Polemarch.

"I just meant that undead monsters who were born hundreds of years ago might believe that stuff. Like imagine Dick Cheney and Glenn Beck but who drink the blood of poor people literally." said Osito.

"You have to admit, that does sound plausible." said Hephaestus.

"Yeah." added Dr. Ahcir.

The conversation was interrupted by a loud chorus of "I'M SEXY AND I KNOW IT" followed by the bass beats.

Utisz answered his phone.

"Uh huh. Yeah, dad."

"Who's that?" asked tele.

"MacGuffin." whispered Light Leak.

"He's Utisz's father?" tele followed up.

"Considering what an inbred circle-jerk this community is and how long he's been in it, he could be any of our fathers."

"That must make things awkward for him."

Light Leak chuckled and went back to eavesdropping on Utisz.

"Oh, all right. Yeah, sure, we'll come out and meet you there. Sure. Hang on let me write down the GPS coordinates.

Uh-huh. See you soon."

"What's up, Cap'n Utisz?" asked tele.

"Hey! MacGuffin says he found some debris from the downed SpaceshipTwo! He's going to check it out and we can help him bring it back here, whatever it is. Who wants to drive? I can navigate us out there."

"No. That's a fucking terrible idea." said LowIQLogan.

"Yeah, really bad." said Lethe.

"Why? I think it sounds like fun. We'll take pictures! Maybe we'll get to meet Sir Richard Branson." said Utisz.

"Don't you watch movies? When some guy named MACGUFFIN with a beard goes wandering into the desert ALONE at NIGHT to investigate a DOWNED SPACECRAFT what do you think the odds are that this ends well for us if we investigate his disappearance?" asked Lethe.

"He's not disappeared." said Utisz.

"Call him back."

Utisz did and put it on speakerphone. The INTPs were silent as the phone rang six times, clicked over to a message of

Three long blubbery sobs of gin-soaked self-loathing followed by a long beep.

"Yeah, umm ... dad? Call me back. It's Utisz."

"Right. So. He's disappeared." said Lethe. "Add to my earlier list that he's probably drunk, and in my imagination he pulled a flashlight out of his back pocket in the darkness and when he clicked it on the bulb came on all yellow because he forgot to change the batteries."

"We've ... got to go after him." said Utisz.

"We will avenge him!" said Hephaestus.

"Let's not jump to conclusions." said LowIQLogan.

"Oh, right. We'll investigate his death and then avenge him." said Hephaestus.

"Yeah! Stay positive, brother!" said Noir, slapping him on the back. "WE'RE DOING THIS!"

Kyuri
11-04-2014, 07:40 AM
The game has begun!
Live list:

Dirac
Dot
LowIQLogan
Slab_Bulkhead
Utisz
Osito Polar
Light Leak
lethe
Hephaestus
Dr. Ahcir
Noir
Polemarch
Granny Smith
P-O
tele



Things you might want to know:

I will only count bolded votes made in this thread (and other Day threads I create)
Vote is plurality. You can change your vote at any time during the Day.
Day 1 ends exactly 48 hours from the time of this post regardless of whether I have announced it. After that no changes to your vote will count.
Nights will last 12 hours or until I have received all Night actions.
I consider any role from this list (http://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?title=Category:Normal_Roles) fair game.


Vanilla Townie PM for reasons:

You are Vanilla Townie,

You have no powers to overcome the mafia except your vote and your cunning! You win when the Town has eliminated all threats.
Do not quote my PMs verbatim or use its wording to prove towniness.

Go forth and kill some space vampires!

Kyuri
11-04-2014, 07:54 AM
Uhh please pause while I address technical difficulties. By that I mean reshuffle roles.

Kyuri
11-04-2014, 08:24 AM
Apologies to all for the confusion. I knew PMing would bite me in the ass some day.

Old setup if you were interested:

You are the Town's Innocent Child!
At any point during the game, you can tell me to confirm your alignment publicly. You win when the Town has eliminated all threats.

You are the Town Cop!
Every night, you can check a player's alignment to see if they are guilty or innocent. You win when the Town has eliminated all threats.

You (3) are the Mafia!
Once every night, you can kill one player. One of you should send me a PM with the name of that player — I will take the latest choice. You win when you have eliminated all other parties or when that condition is inevitable.
You will receive an invitation to join the mafia group shortly.

You are the Town Vigilante!
You have 3 kills in total. Every night, you can spend one or more of them to kill other players. You win when the Town has eliminated all threats.

You are the Mafia Jack-of-all-trades!
Each Night, you can target a player to either role-block (prevent that player from using any ability), protect (save that player from a kill targeted at them), or role-check (find out whether the player has any role). You can use each ability exactly once.


Some or all roles have been changed.

Yes, I am trying out mafia group this time.

LowIQLogan
11-04-2014, 08:34 AM
Still born mafia game never had a chance to live.

lethe
11-04-2014, 08:37 AM
2/3 alien babies don't make it

lethe
11-04-2014, 08:47 AM
So here is my thinking:
I am more afraid a clever monster attacking me than a clumsy human fighting beside me.
I don't want some crafty genius propping up evil.

Who would be the most dangerous mafia/monster?

Noir
11-04-2014, 09:26 AM
Wait are the Mafia just scummy humans or are they scummy alien invaders?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hHXtiIm6ug

P-O
11-04-2014, 09:45 AM
Polemarch has to be a mafia one of these times.

jigglypuff
11-04-2014, 10:31 AM
should we take roll?

Dirac
11-04-2014, 11:27 AM
Here we fucking go.

Light Leak
11-04-2014, 12:18 PM
I had to google who I was dressed up as... :unsure: I forgot about her.

Light Leak
11-04-2014, 12:47 PM
So here is my thinking:
I am more afraid a clever monster attacking me than a clumsy human fighting beside me.
I don't want some crafty genius propping up evil.

Who would be the most dangerous mafia/monster?

This is a double edged sword because those who could be the most dangerous could also be great assets. It just depends on what side they're on.

Blorg
11-04-2014, 01:08 PM
So here is my thinking:
I am more afraid a clever monster attacking me than a clumsy human fighting beside me.
I don't want some crafty genius propping up evil.

Who would be the most dangerous mafia/monster?

well, it's classic Polemarch syndrome (clever potential-mafia-monster). Possibly lethe syndrome too. Etc, about half the players' syndrome. I'm scared of everyone already :stupid:

I don't see it as a double-edged sword. The game can have averages of: clumsy townies/clever mafia, or clever townies/clumsy mafia, or clever townies/clever mafia. I view scenario 1 as the most frightening; imo, the potential tragedies of having clever mafia/clumsy townies outweigh the potential triumphs of having clever townies/clumsy mafia. Moreover, clever townies make themselves a mafia target, so they're likely to get killed off either way. If we choose to use "logic" the first round-- which seems kind of pointless because it will be a stab in the dark no matter what-- I think it should be our priority to kill a wily player.

(But I do fall on the clumsy-human-townie side of the scale, so partly I'm just saying this because I want to enjoy the game for a few rounds instead of being target #1 (http://forums.intpcomplex.com/usertag.php?do=list&action=hash&hash=1) .)

I also think it would be sad if we killed Polemarch at the beginning yet again, though I can see P-O's point. My mind is divided about Polemarch. Who else is wily?

I guess there's a sacrificial aspect to your (lethe's) post because you know that you fall on the potential monster side of the scale, which makes me hesitant to bold your name, but it could be reverse-reverse-reverse-reverse-psychology.

~food for thought~

lethe
11-04-2014, 01:17 PM
I believe losing a strong player is more of a loss to the mafia than to a town.

If I were a weak player on the mafia side, I would have access to a clever player I could trust to guide me, and I would likely file his votes for the night kill, effectively giving him even more power. The entire mafia benefits from their strongest player while at the same time his wit is used against the town during the day.

A weak player on the town side cant benefit from strong town players the same way. Yes, the town loses an player they didn't know they could trust if we vote him out now, but the mafia would lose an even greater advantage of we vote out their strongest player.


Losing a weak player doesn't hurt either side too much. Losing a strong player hurts both sides, but hurts the mafia more.

What do you guys think? Is a strong player have more impact for the mafia?

Should we narrow the choices down to the three strongest?

Light Leak
11-04-2014, 01:25 PM
^
I see your point, but I think inactive players are just as harmful because they tend to draw a lot of suspicion on themselves and a lot of times they end up being townies... spacecrew members... or whatever. They draw suspicion away from actual mafia... space vampires.

lethe
11-04-2014, 01:29 PM
Well, we don't have much to go on at this point. No voting clues or even posting frequency. All we really know is meta stuff about new and experienced players.

If we are taking a shot in the dark anyway, shouldn't it be one that has less potential loss for the town and uses what information we have?

LordLatch
11-04-2014, 01:29 PM
And what of inexperienced players?

Blorg
11-04-2014, 01:33 PM
^but it's hard to know who is/will be inactive at this point-- strategies related to inactivity will probably play more of a role in future turns, I assume.

My (very arbitrary) ranking of the top 4:
lethe
Polemarch
Utisz
Osito Polar

But I've only played this game once before so these are kind of random guesses based on lore/etc.

Blorg
11-04-2014, 01:36 PM
(clarification: I wrote a top 4 list instead of top 3 because I think it's sad that Polemarch gets killed right away every time, so I was hesitant to include him.)

lethe
11-04-2014, 01:37 PM
Well... a weak player on mafia side would mostly be a puppet anyway, right? So losing that particular player won't change much for them.

I don't know how losing a weak town player would change the town much, either. Are weak town players more of a hindrance than strong mafia players? With all the influence gained by the secret talks and knowing who they can trust, I find that hard to believe. But then, I really don't know.

lethe
11-04-2014, 01:38 PM
Um... me in top 4? This is my first game ever.

Blorg
11-04-2014, 01:40 PM
^I did say it was arbitrary. I just chose the players who have the wiliest vibes imo.

What's your list?

lethe
11-04-2014, 01:45 PM
I have no idea, I've never played!
That's why I was asking who was the biggest threat. I should have been clear that I was using "inexperienced" and "weak" interchangeably.

I was hoping to get a list of three or four to players, observe who votes for who and just jump on the bandwagon at the end.

My only potentially town friendly idea was to restrict it to top players.

Blorg
11-04-2014, 02:01 PM
^I do think it would be useful if everyone wrote top 3/4 lists, so that the lists can be used for reference in future rounds when we're thinking more seriously about who might be mafia. But if you've never played before, I guess it makes sense for you not to write one (I probably shouldn't have either, according to that logic). I do know that Polemarch has a reputation for being a good player, and I think Osito Polar does too.

Utisz
11-04-2014, 03:12 PM
Let's not fuck around while my father's life is at stake.

I'm wondering would it be a game-breaking faux pas to post screenshots of the PM we got from Kyuri? I guess the answer is yes so let's not do that.

I'm wondering would it also be a game-breaking faux pas to just go off the original CC list that Kyuri sent in the original PM since the best lead we have is that she might have been reluctant to take powers from someone due to her own mistake and she's not as big of a dick as god ... the Kyuri giveth but the Kyuri doth not taketh away. If the list is different, presumably someone here must have changed from mafia to townie and so they should tell us. It's probably the only real concrete asymmetry to chase up on after all.

Utisz
11-04-2014, 03:18 PM
Do not quote my PMs verbatim or use its wording to prove towniness.!

Always one step ahead.

On second thought, I also guess it's extremely unlikely the roles are the same since the good powers would figure that out immediately and that would break the game and Kyuri would know this for sure. So I guess we're back to square one.

Polemarch
11-04-2014, 03:48 PM
Our best strategy is to weed out the inactive players, for two reasons. First, because inactivity is a great cover for the Mafia - there's nothing to get them on. Secondly, because even an inactive townie is a detriment to the chances of a townie victory.

I am a townie. I think everyone else who's also a townie should come out and say so. Before everyone predictably lynches the shit out of me and says "oh sorry, he seemed suspicious".

I don't have anyone to throw suspicion at yet, because we haven't even heard from everyone yet.

jigglypuff
11-04-2014, 04:09 PM
i'm a townie

and i don't think killing the "strongest players" first is a good idea. first of all there's no "strongest" other than the one everybody's listening to, so there's really no such thing if you can draw influence away from that person. then that makes you the "strongest." idk it's been a while but that doesn't make sense to me. i think you should be killing the ones who aren't giving much information at first cuz they're not helping.

Kyuri
11-04-2014, 04:13 PM
Let's not fuck around while my father's life is at stake.

I'm wondering would it be a game-breaking faux pas to post screenshots of the PM we got from Kyuri? I guess the answer is yes so let's not do that.

Like so?
http://i.imgur.com/PtAefjb.png

it's not real

lethe
11-04-2014, 04:17 PM
I'm townie.

I agree that killing strong players after the first day wouldn't make sense.

I also doubt that the first day will give enough evidence of lurking. Isn't there little to no risk for mafia to be vocal on the first day?

jigglypuff
11-04-2014, 04:31 PM
^ i guess there's little risk for anyone to be vocal on the first day, if we just regard the numbers. people who haven't checked in, though, it doesn't make sense to let them go through the game like that, giving us nothing to go by.

are mafia supposed to be aliens??

msg_v2
11-04-2014, 04:35 PM
^ i guess there's little risk for anyone to be vocal on the first day, if we just regard the numbers. people who haven't checked in, though, it doesn't make sense to let them go through the game like that, giving us nothing to go by.

I'd say being vocal on the first day is risky, whether you are a space vampire or a human. Usually the vocal people are the ones who get offed first, townspeople or not. I've observed that in previous games.

Dirac
11-04-2014, 04:43 PM
I'm townie.


I'd say being vocal on the first day is risky, whether you are a space vampire or a human. Usually the vocal people are the ones who get offed first, townspeople or not. I've observed that in previous games.
I think in the last game we killed inactive people near the beginning. I don't really remember though. Also, I can't believe we're wearing the same costume, you knew I was coming as Jon Snow. pfft.

jigglypuff
11-04-2014, 04:46 PM
I'd say being vocal on the first day is risky, whether you are a space vampire or a human. Usually the vocal people are the ones who get offed first, townspeople or not. I've observed that in previous games.
so look at the people who aren't talking? that makes it risky to not say anything.

out of the people who are, there's eventually a post history and such to refer to if/when they're killed.

Utisz
11-04-2014, 05:07 PM
Like so?

Yup but I'm guessing not everyone would have the patience or the skill to do a decent Photoshop job and stuff though I guess maybe the Mafia could appoint a Photoshop expert or something.


^I do think it would be useful if everyone wrote top 3/4 lists, so that the lists can be used for reference in future rounds when we're thinking more seriously about who might be mafia. But if you've never played before, I guess it makes sense for you not to write one (I probably shouldn't have either, according to that logic). I do know that Polemarch has a reputation for being a good player, and I think Osito Polar does too.

I don't really know that top 3 or 4 lists would be all that useful as information since Mafia folks can often vote for Mafia folks with little (or even) no risk at times. So majority-based voting yields very little information. I was only involved in one game before and it really was a bit of a mess ... so this time I was thinking about a system.

Okay so clearly the game is more about psychology and intuition and smelling something funny and all that soft stuff, but assuming good Mafia players who won't make blunders (or early rounds where there's not much to go on), I think a better system for gathering information – rather than going with simple majority based on top k lists – would be a system where every person votes for whichever player they wish. Once all the votes are in, we "randomly" pick a player and whoever they vote for is picked. This always makes it costly for a Mafia voter to vote Mafia since by doing so, they are always increasing the likelihood of reducing their party by a non-trivial amount (1/n for n voters in that round): in other words, there's no free bluffs. This puts the Mafia under more pressure. If they do decide to bluff then it's more likely we'll kill us some Mafia. If they don't bluff, a pattern will emerge.

Now in every round, the person who voted the most times thus far for folks found to be Townies should be under the most scrutiny. At the very worst, we would be getting rid of Townies who have been most wrong about the Mafia.

The only reasonably balanced strategy for Mafia would be to act like a Townie, voting Mafia very occasionally. This breaks the Mafia advantage of being able to co-ordinate in manipulating the mob.

Of course the system is not perfect and having a random selection part admits that the town needs some luck to win out, but in my mind, it's a better system (esp. in the early rounds) than top-k voting and it's better to leverage randomness than to try justify it as someone smelling funny.


The practical problem with the system is that it would require more co-ordination (like a 2 phase commit).

The proposal would be as follows:


Information is summarised from previous rounds
Every player makes an initial pick of the person they personally want to vote for (in italics)
One voter is randomly picked (based on a seed from the order of initial votes so no one person needs to be trusted)
Everyone (in theory) votes for the same person selected by the random voter (in bold)


We would need at least a majority of players to support and follow the system in each round for it to work. I don't know if others would support the idea but I hope they would ... mostly because I'd be really curious to see how it works out.

msg_v2
11-04-2014, 05:08 PM
I'm townie.


I think in the last game we killed inactive people near the beginning. I don't really remember though. Also, I can't believe we're wearing the same costume, you knew I was coming as Jon Snow. pfft.

I don't remember, exactly. I was dead set on stealing your thunder about the costume thing, though.

Oh, and I'm townie.


so look at the people who aren't talking? that makes it risky to not say anything.

out of the people who are, there's eventually a post history and such to refer to if/when they're killed.

I don't really know who it is best to kill, but I don't think whether they post or not is really a good way to judge. It's a sensible move for both space vampires and humans.

Utisz
11-04-2014, 05:10 PM
^^ If we were to go ahead with this, to simplify the co-ordination, maybe Kyuri would agree that a vote in italic automatically changes to a vote for the random selection?

I guess the first step would be to see if folks were generally interested in trying it or not.

jigglypuff
11-04-2014, 05:18 PM
^ i'm for it, utisz. some coordination and organization among the townies is better than nothing and would make the info gathering process much neater.

Utisz
11-04-2014, 05:26 PM
^^ Great!


Utisz
tele


We just need (at least) eight to give it a go.

jigglypuff
11-04-2014, 05:31 PM
We just need (at least) eight to give it a go.
it should be mandatory for every player, though, IMO. if you're a townie you've got nothing to hide and there's no reason you wouldn't be involved and be a help to what's in the townies' best interest.

Kyuri
11-04-2014, 05:33 PM
Yup but I'm guessing not everyone would have the patience or the skill to do a decent Photoshop job and stuff though I guess maybe the Mafia could appoint a Photoshop expert or something.
I used Chrome. Right click -> inspect element. ^^


^^ If we were to go ahead with this, to simplify the co-ordination, maybe Kyuri would agree that a vote in italic automatically changes to a vote for the random selection?

I guess the first step would be to see if folks were generally interested in trying it or not.

Sorry. If you were to set this up by yourselves, by all means go for it. I will not facilitate it (eg randomly pick someone to guarantee partiality), as it's not fair to the mafia for me to remove some elements of mistrust.

msg_v2
11-04-2014, 05:36 PM
^ i'm for it, utisz. some coordination and organization among the townies is better than nothing and would make the info gathering process much neater.

Me too.

I think it might help minimize the number of townie casualties.... However, I would recommend doing it through PM.

jigglypuff
11-04-2014, 05:40 PM
not sure about the random selection, yet. seeing who supports whom can be good info.

Blorg
11-04-2014, 05:44 PM
I'm good with Utisz's strategy too.

LordLatch
11-04-2014, 05:49 PM
I'm a townie and I think Dot is aggressive.

jigglypuff
11-04-2014, 05:54 PM
I think it might help minimize the number of townie casualties.... However, I would recommend doing it through PM.
iirc pm isn't allowed, but it seems like part of the point to have all the info public, organized and accessible for record-keeping purposes

Utisz
11-04-2014, 06:00 PM
it should be mandatory for every player, though, IMO. if you're a townie you've got nothing to hide and there's no reason you wouldn't be involved and be a help to what's in the townies' best interest.

Yep, it would be great to get everyone involved and I hope all townies will see the benefit and participate.

In any case though, once we get a majority (in this case eight) agreeing to vote together based on the system, the folks not in the system would effectively have zero say. So once we have eight there's a strong incentive to be in the system for everyone. If we get a majority and someone doesn't take part in the system, that's also useful information ... either they're inactive or suspicious.


Sorry. If you were to set this up by yourselves, by all means go for it. I will not facilitate it (eg randomly pick someone to guarantee partiality), as it's not fair to the mafia for me to remove some elements of mistrust.

No worries, the "randomness" can be done in a distributed way. I can make up an algorithm (based, e.g., on voting order) that makes it hard for any one player to control while being easy to compute/verify (i.e., that the result is not being gamed).

What I'm asking is just that you consider that a vote in italics is intended to be a block vote. Once everyone is clear on this, it would just streamline the process, saving users the bother of having to vote twice (having to wait to see who gets selected and then voting in bold a second time). If users want, they can still vote bold directly. But if you say no, that's fine.


Me too.

I think it might help minimize the number of townie casualties.... However, I would recommend doing it through PM.

In that case we're up to three:


Utisz
tele
Slab_Bulkhead


I'm not sure how a PM system would work or why it would be useful. Could you elaborate a bit? To me it seems important for the townies that the whole system is transparent for everyone, no (^^ what tele said)?


not sure about the random selection, yet. seeing who supports whom can be good info.

The person who gets the most initial votes will still be the most likely to be randomly selected. But the real value of adding randomness is that it removes all free bluffs for the Mafia. With the element of randomness, every vote is valuable (unlike in a landslide majority) and so every vote contains more information.

What I like is that the system makes the randomness explicit and makes use of it to remove the incentive of Mafia to bluff.


I'm good with Utisz's strategy too.

Cool! We just need four more for a majority:


Utisz
tele
Slab_Bulkhead
Dot

msg_v2
11-04-2014, 06:00 PM
iirc pm isn't allowed, but it seems like part of the point to have all the info public, organized and accessible for record-keeping purposes

Don't the mafia communicate by PM? If not, then I suppose it's not necessary.

Kyuri
11-04-2014, 06:00 PM
PM is allowed since I realized people don't read rules and I can't enforce it.

msg_v2
11-04-2014, 06:06 PM
I'm not sure how a PM system would work or why it would be useful. Could you elaborate a bit? To me it seems important for the townies that the whole system is transparent for everyone, no (^^ what tele said)?



It might prevent the Mafia from detecting threats and make it harder for the Mafia to muck things up.

It would also prevent a bandwagon effect. The idea is that the results would be announced. Of course, you'd have to assign someone a specific role as a tabulator, and then, I suppose, if they are bumped off, we would have to pick someone else. But I suppose most of us have no way of knowing whose side the tabulator is one.

msg_v2
11-04-2014, 06:08 PM
* on

I suppose I do have a question as to how the results are randomly picked. It seems that regardless of whether it's a secret ballot or totally transparent, someone has to pick someone from that list. I wonder who that would be. I suppose the easiest would include Kyuri acting in that role.

Kyuri
11-04-2014, 06:14 PM
What I'm asking is just that you consider that a vote in italics is intended to be a block vote. Once everyone is clear on this, it would just streamline the process, saving users the bother of having to vote twice (having to wait to see who gets selected and then voting in bold a second time). If users want, they can still vote bold directly. But if you say no, that's fine.

That's reasonable. I can still see some objections regarding saving time for the Town, so if the mafia agrees to it (by PMing me), it's no problem.

Hephaestus
11-04-2014, 06:15 PM
So here is my thinking:
I am more afraid a clever monster attacking me than a clumsy human fighting beside me.
I don't want some crafty genius propping up evil.

Who would be the most dangerous mafia/monster?

Followed by "kill the strong players". Really?

You're my top pick. Yeah, you backed off when the idea was poked, but nonetheless, the logic flow smells mafia friendly to me.

Utisz:

No. No. That's a pro-mafia strategy in it's bones.

On the surface, you are adding randomness back in. At most, complete (psuedo) randomness if everyone picks a different player. That might well happen in the scenario you've outlined simply because people don't recognize the weight of plurality anymore. But that also means a bad scenario for the town because the game is rigged to favor mafia in a random kill. That's part of it's balance. You've made too many games not to know that.

Furthermore, it eliminates the need for the mafia to struggle even when there is a plurality. You say "no free bluffs". I say your mechanic eliminates the need for bluffs. As long as anyone is voting otherwise, even if there is a plurality on a mafia, they can wriggle out the back door without any of their scummy buddies lifting a finger. Clever, but not pro-Town.

My current picks:

Utisz
lethe


At the very least, you're dangerous to the town.

Hephaestus
11-04-2014, 06:16 PM
^^^Not listed in order of suspicion but by cognitive propinquity while writing.

Hephaestus
11-04-2014, 06:21 PM
Don't the mafia communicate by PM? If not, then I suppose it's not necessary.

No smart coordinated group will communicate by PM in this game any longer than they absolutely have to. Not that that ever stopped anyone.

jigglypuff
11-04-2014, 06:21 PM
who hasn't checked in yet? don't forget about those.

maybe everybody should be required to share their thoughts / analysis at every turn, even if it's not much.

jigglypuff
11-04-2014, 06:24 PM
^ the point is to build up a history to refer to when players are killed. everybody will be leaving "tracks" of some kind.

lethe
11-04-2014, 06:25 PM
How is it mafia friendly to make the first pick a strong player?

Is it not true that losing that player would hinder the mafia/ monsters more than the humans?

We have no other information to go on yet. Do you hold the view that a poor townie does more damage than a skilled monster? I did ask for opinions.

It hardly seems mafia to me to suggest using the only information we have (player experience) to advantage the townie instead of picking randomly.

Hephaestus
11-04-2014, 06:27 PM
Now in every round, the person who voted the most times thus far for folks found to be Townies should be under the most scrutiny. At the very worst, we would be getting rid of Townies who have been most wrong about the Mafia.

Sorry, I'd addressed this in a post that got eaten, and realized when I re-did it, I forgot to address this:

:facepalm:

The common scenario is picking townies. That just is how things go. Everyone will do it. If you try to find a pattern based on that, the game will be over and the mafia will win before it happens.

I said lethe was my top pick, but it isn't by much--and that was before you added your offer to "create an algorithm" to further muddy the waters. Gee, sure, lets all just hand over all our decision making power to a machine Utisz created that we don't have complete access too and will have no full public record of how it behaves, only what he says it did.

If you want to make a computational engine of bad guy destruction, it must be transparent, or there can be no trust. It also has to be better made and not pro-mafia.

Hephaestus
11-04-2014, 06:27 PM
Is it not true that losing that player would hinder the mafia/ monsters more than the humans?

Correct. It is not true.

Hephaestus
11-04-2014, 06:29 PM
I'm a townie.

Osito Polar
11-04-2014, 06:31 PM
The practical problem with the system is that it would require more co-ordination (like a 2 phase commit).

The other problem I see with this system -- Record-keeping of vote switches is gonna be key. If you only record the final votes, once a Mafia lynch is "locked in", they could all just switch to voting for that person and get a Free Pass like you mentioned. So you'd have to track every vote switch, and there will likely be lots. Does a vote you later switched count the same as a regular old vote? Personally, that would change my play-strategy considerably. You couldn't just lob an accusation at someone and see what they do to casually probe their Mafianess.

Other than that, it's a great idea. Count me as for it.

Using PMs for anything in this would be massively stupid though, so the whole thing needs to work transparently from end-to-end.

I'm a townie.


No smart coordinated group will communicate by PM in this game any longer than they absolutely have to. Not that that ever stopped anyone.

Actually, 100% of the winning Mafia teams have communicated by PM or through similar side-channels. Trust me, I'd know.

Reason: this is because they have to in order to actually play

jigglypuff
11-04-2014, 06:32 PM
i'm against using pms cuz mafia who's good at this could use that to sneak their influence around, and we'd have no record.

lethe
11-04-2014, 06:36 PM
Correct. It is not true.

Hmm. It doesn't make much sense yet. Could you explain more? Particularly were I was wrong/misunderstood in my earlier post? (I think 15)

Trying to understand the game.

Blorg
11-04-2014, 06:38 PM
Followed by "kill the strong players". Really?

You're my top pick. Yeah, you backed off when the idea was poked, but nonetheless, the logic flow smells mafia friendly to me.

to be fair, "kill the strong players" is a very common strategy for townies-- polemarch syndrome.


Utisz:

No. No. That's a pro-mafia strategy in it's bones.

On the surface, you are adding randomness back in. At most, complete (psuedo) randomness if everyone picks a different player. That might well happen in the scenario you've outlined simply because people don't recognize the weight of plurality anymore. But that also means a bad scenario for the town because the game is rigged to favor mafia in a random kill. That's part of it's balance. You've made too many games not to know that.

Furthermore, it eliminates the need for the mafia to struggle even when there is a plurality. You say "no free bluffs". I say your mechanic eliminates the need for bluffs. As long as anyone is voting otherwise, even if there is a plurality on a mafia, they can wriggle out the back door without any of their scummy buddies lifting a finger. Clever, but not pro-Town.

My current picks:

Utisz
lethe


At the very least, you're dangerous to the town.

I'll try to digest your perspective more fully later on but thinking ahead, if a majority does decide to go with Utisz's plan, it's probably best if we kill him halfway through the game. If the mafia hasn't killed him by that point and his strategies appear to be working, that's a solid sign that he's an imposter, and we can continue using the strategies he came up with-- win-win.

Blorg
11-04-2014, 06:40 PM
And yes, I disagree with the pm's strategy-- way too much potential for mafia infiltration.

lethe
11-04-2014, 06:45 PM
Dot, they keep that strategy after the first round? That makes even less sense to me. After the first round isn't there more information to work with?

jigglypuff
11-04-2014, 06:47 PM
is post-editing turned off for forum mods who are playing? cuz it should be.

Hephaestus
11-04-2014, 06:50 PM
I believe losing a strong player is more of a loss to the mafia than to a town.

If I were a weak player on the mafia side, I would have access to a clever player I could trust to guide me, and I would likely file his votes for the night kill, effectively giving him even more power. The entire mafia benefits from their strongest player while at the same time his wit is used against the town during the day.

A weak player on the town side cant benefit from strong town players the same way. Yes, the town loses an player they didn't know they could trust if we vote him out now, but the mafia would lose an even greater advantage of we vote out their strongest player.


Losing a weak player doesn't hurt either side too much. Losing a strong player hurts both sides, but hurts the mafia more.

What do you guys think? Is a strong player have more impact for the mafia?

Should we narrow the choices down to the three strongest?

Ok, there are a few bits here that make problems.

The first, and most obvious is: how do you identify a strong player?

The second is: consider your opening argument: you'd rather face a clever monster than fight alongside a clumsy human, and then you conclude we should kill the strongest, which is a handy way of reducing the pool of people to only weak players, which in turn means you are fighting alongside clumsy humans.

The third is: you know what happens when all the strong players are gone? The weak players accomplish nothing, because they are weak players, and a pattern has been established that playing strongly results in a shortened lifespan. The strongest mafia often looks like a weak player.

The last leads to a meta narrative: Long run, you just kill the game. Who wants to play a game where the biggest threat is being good at it? Other than Polemarch who just likes to see if he's killed on the first or second day.

There are others, but those are the main problems.

Blorg
11-04-2014, 06:52 PM
lethe if I read it correctly, it wouldn't really be useful if we only applied it to the first round-- it seems like it would mostly be useful for the early stages of the game.

Hephaestus
11-04-2014, 06:57 PM
Dot, they keep that strategy after the first round? That makes even less sense to me. After the first round isn't there more information to work with?

The strong (town) players, are the ones that get noticed. They keep saying shit. They keep arguing and reasoning, so they are the ones in mind when other players go to vote. There is also a paranoia that the mafia has managed to create a charismatic leader persona--like Utisz is trying to do--and it's not an unreasonable fear. They often do. It works. Like Utisz.

I agree with Dot about killing Utisz, though I don't agree with using his strategies. I think he'll just be getting the mafia two decisions on who to kill a day.

Hephaestus
11-04-2014, 06:58 PM
lethe if I read it correctly, it wouldn't really be useful if we only applied it to the first round-- it seems like it would mostly be useful for the early stages of the game.

How do you establish a pattern of behavior in picking only townies if you only use it the first round? That doesn't seem to be his intent.

Hephaestus
11-04-2014, 06:59 PM
Oops. Sorry, I think I misread your intent. I'm not sure which strategy you were referring to.

Blorg
11-04-2014, 07:00 PM
How do you establish a pattern of behavior in picking only townies if you only use it the first round? That doesn't seem to be his intent.

I think I agree-- isn't that what I said? I said that it wouldn't be useful if we only use it in the first round.

lethe
11-04-2014, 07:01 PM
To identify strong players I would assume new ones were less skilled and ask the opinions of those who knew and had played with each other before.

Second my statement was that I was more AFRAID of a clever monster.

I also wouldn't suggest continuing the strategy after we had real information to work with. That seems silly.


As it seems to me: the only info we have to go on first day is meta, like player experience. How can we use that to benefit town?

We could pick random/not considering experience and get a wild card result.

We could pick a weak/new player which wouldn't have a different effect for each side.

Or we could pick a strong player, which would hurt both sides but also inpact the monster mafia side more strongly. It really seems to me that a strong mafia player has greater opportunity to bolster his team than a strong townie does

Hephaestus
11-04-2014, 07:03 PM
I think I agree-- isn't that what I said? I said that it wouldn't be useful if we only use it in the first round.

Yeah, I had a mental collision on the first read through--there were two different strategies being discussed "kill the strong" and "trust Utisz" and they're both strategies I'm against, so... there ya go.

jigglypuff
11-04-2014, 07:03 PM
And what of inexperienced players?
inexperienced players shouldn't be afraid of sharing what they think. silence, generally, doesn't help the townies.

Hephaestus
11-04-2014, 07:08 PM
To identify strong players I would assume new ones were less skilled and ask the opinions of those who knew and had played with each other before.

Second my statement was that I was more AFRAID of a clever monster.

Oops. You're right. Reading compression on that one. That moves you to number two on my list.

Utisz just got promoted!

msg_v2
11-04-2014, 07:11 PM
The common scenario is picking townies. That just is how things go. Everyone will do it. If you try to find a pattern based on that, the game will be over and the mafia will win before it happens.

If you want to make a computational engine of bad guy destruction, it must be transparent, or there can be no trust. It also has to be better made and not pro-mafia.

Your argument is that the greater number of humans vs. space vampires (trying to stick with the theme, here!) means that statistically, random kills are more likely to kill a human than a vampire? I can't argue with that.

What say you Utisz?

lethe
11-04-2014, 07:11 PM
Esentially I'm suggesting that for the first round we use meta from past games. It's the only info we have. Past experience.

After that, we will have fresh info so can make judgements on that instead. There would probably not be a need to identify the strongest/experienced players when we have more pertinent in game behavior to act as clues to what's happening in this game

Osito Polar
11-04-2014, 07:14 PM
is post-editing turned off for forum mods who are playing? cuz it should be.

It isn't because it basically can't be. It's tamper-evident though so you'd see an edit timestamp and the identity of the mod who performed the edit.

Blorg
11-04-2014, 07:19 PM
Regardless of the math, I suspect that if Hephaestus isn't mafia then Utisz is, and vice versa (unless they're pulling off a really complicated scheme).

I don't know how Hephaestus normally acts as a townie, but in the last game, when he was mafia, he had a similar tone. His exaggerated "thinking aloud" and his meta-commentary on his "thinking aloud" behavior, plus his emotionality.

I'm not sure who's at the top of my list right now but the main members are: Hephaestus, Utisz (? not sure. I'll give this option more thought later), lethe.

Hephaestus
11-04-2014, 07:22 PM
Esentially I'm suggesting that for the first round we use meta from past games. It's the only info we have. Past experience.

Dice have no memory.

msg_v2
11-04-2014, 07:31 PM
There are four or five people who are pretty quiet, but I doubt all of them are space vampires. Some of the space vampires are being active, I suspect. It doesn't seem likely that every quiet person would be a space vampire. Deception is part of the game, and if everyone is being quiet, that aspect of it is absent. I mean, where's the fun for the space vampires in that? Space vampires get their rocks off through manipulation.

However, we should keep in mind the fact that just because someone has what sounds like a bad strategy, that doesn't make them space vampires. Crappy strategy might be deliberate, or it might be accidental.

Anyway, I should probably shut up, because I'm just putting a big Mafia target on my back.

lethe
11-04-2014, 07:41 PM
No, but skills usually build with experience and can be observed by others. It's not about who won, but who are the most likely to give a skilled, experienced advantage to the monsters.

I can understand not wanting to play a game using meta. If that is the case here, I will be most suspicious of the lurkers and target them for the same reasons others have earlier.


Unlike dot, I will not instantly point fingers at the most vocal ones who give the most potential info to examine.

Polemarch
11-04-2014, 07:54 PM
You don't want to penalize vocal members. The mafia benefits from vocal townies killing each other off while they quietly watch. The best strategy is to get as many people to go on record as possible as much of the time.

Meta-gaming is a natural place to look, but probably a misleading one. I don't expect us to get much insight in the first round no matter what we do, but I think we need to pay attention to what people say in THIS game, and encourage everyone to say as much as possible.

I really don't think Utisz OR Heph is Mafia; Heph has a tendency to over-think in any role, so there's nothing particularly unusual about his degree of overthink here. And Utisz is doing precisely what a skilled townie would and should do - trying to organize the others. My suspicions are directed at the quieter ones.

LordLatch
11-04-2014, 07:54 PM
inexperienced players shouldn't be afraid of sharing what they think. silence, generally, doesn't help the townies.

This is what I think. The first day is a shot in the dark. As a noob, I'm naturally distrustful of anyone who knows more of what to do than I do.

I see a lot of folk voting for lethe and I'm inclined to agree as she's a noob also but knee deep in this thread. Not knowing what to do wouldn't stop me form being very vocal if I was of the spacey undead because I would be obligated to act since there are only two. As a townie, I can rest on my laurels and wait for my fellow townfolk to weed out this evil.

She's talking too much to be new and benign. Especially since this is day one and any vote is a shot in the dark.

How many times in the past has killing Polemarch day yielded a 50% reduction in mafia?

msg_v2
11-04-2014, 07:55 PM
This is what I think. The first day is a shot in the dark. As a noob, I'm naturally distrustful of anyone who knows more of what to do than I do.

I see a lot of folk voting for lethe and I'm inclined to agree as she's a noob also but knee deep in this thread. Not knowing what to do wouldn't stop me form being very vocal if I was of the spacey undead because I would be obligated to act since there are only two. As a townie, I can rest on my laurels and wait for my fellow townfolk to weed out this evil.

She's talking too much to be new and benign. Especially since this is day one and any vote is a shot in the dark.

How many times in the past has killing Polemarch day yielded a 50% reduction in mafia?

There are four mafia members, not two.

LordLatch
11-04-2014, 07:56 PM
There are four mafia members, not two.

Are you telling me this to scare me?

msg_v2
11-04-2014, 07:59 PM
Are you telling me this to scare me?

No, I'm telling you this because it's the case. Three are regular mafia, and one is a special role. Out of 15, that leaves 11 townies, two of whom are special roles (the other nine are vanilla).

Otherwise, I don't disagree with you.

Blorg
11-04-2014, 08:00 PM
This is what I think. The first day is a shot in the dark. As a noob, I'm naturally distrustful of anyone who knows more of what to do than I do.

I see a lot of folk voting for lethe and I'm inclined to agree as she's a noob also but knee deep in this thread. Not knowing what to do wouldn't stop me form being very vocal if I was of the spacey undead because I would be obligated to act since there are only two. As a townie, I can rest on my laurels and wait for my fellow townfolk to weed out this evil.

She's talking too much to be new and benign. Especially since this is day one and any vote is a shot in the dark.

This doesn't make sense to me. Townies tend to be less guarded than mafia-- a noob mafia would probably keep quiet or say uncontroversial things.

I'm not actually voting for lethe at this point. She's just given more material to "work with" at this stage than most members. lethe-- imo it's best to be open and communicative about our suspicions. I guess 'pointing fingers' is a valid cause for suspicion too, though.

As far as actually voting, I agree with Polemarch that we might want to go with one of the less vocal members.

Can we get 8 members to go with Utisz's approach?

lethe
11-04-2014, 08:02 PM
I don't understand this "obligated to act" idea. Explain?
Also, wouldn't acting involve pointing fingers?

msg_v2
11-04-2014, 08:07 PM
Can we get 8 members to go with Utisz's approach?

I'm going to hold off on my vote until I hear how the randomization will work. I'm not saying that I think Utisz is guilty (I'm undecided), but I need more information before going along with it.

LordLatch
11-04-2014, 08:10 PM
I don't understand this "obligated to act" idea. Explain?
Also, wouldn't acting involve pointing fingers?

I'm ex military so the fulfill-your-duty thing is deeply ingrained and I can't stand freeloaders. I wasn't saying I was right. I was saying what I would be thinking/doing if I was a noob assigned mafia. I'm not even pointing per se. I was doing what tele told me too.

LordLatch
11-04-2014, 08:11 PM
Can we get 8 members to go with Utisz's approach?

Which post was that?

Noir
11-04-2014, 08:13 PM
There are four mafia members, not two.

Hey now. Last time there were 16 players and only 3 Mafia. Heph/Sage/Works. Unless I missed one. Anyway, with 15 players I don't think we'll have more than 2-3 + specials.

As to the whole block voting thing....it makes me a little uneasy. Unless Kyuri could guarantee a truly random selection than it requires way to much trust is a dubiously non-partisan system. What if the "random" number generator keeps "randomly" giving the Mafia an extra kill?

lethe
11-04-2014, 08:16 PM
Lol. :-)
I just don't get the strategy, why it would be needed, etc.

Also I vote no on utiszs idea. It seems like it would significantly change the game and I know I don't fully understand how.

Blorg
11-04-2014, 08:16 PM
@Dr.Ahcir, #36 (http://forums.intpcomplex.com/usertag.php?do=list&action=hash&hash=36) :


...We would need at least a majority of players to support and follow the system in each round for it to work. I don't know if others would support the idea but I hope they would ... mostly because I'd be really curious to see how it works out.

Noir
11-04-2014, 08:18 PM
Oh wait. Slab_Bulkhead you're talking about Kyuri's spoiler post. There are potentially 4 mafia aligned players, you are correct.

LordLatch
11-04-2014, 08:20 PM
@Dr.Ahcir, #36 (http://forums.intpcomplex.com/usertag.php?do=list&action=hash&hash=36) :

Thank you! :wub:

Are you evil?

msg_v2
11-04-2014, 08:26 PM
Hey now. Last time there were 16 players and only 3 Mafia. Heph/Sage/Works. Unless I missed one. Anyway, with 15 players I don't think we'll have more than 2-3 + specials.


There's an additional Mafia member, the Mafia Jack-of-All Trades, bringing the total to four.

Noir
11-04-2014, 08:29 PM
There's an additional Mafia member, the Mafia Jack-of-All Trades, bringing the total to four.



Some or all roles have been changed.

Yes, I am trying out mafia group this time.

Not necessarily. But yeah, it looks like there will probs be a Mafia special this game. I am Town by the way.

Blorg
11-04-2014, 08:30 PM
I'm having second thoughts about the system. I think the key idea is to have a record of everyone's lists and mafia people will be very reluctant to write the names of fellow mafia members at the top of their lists, because if one of their lists is chosen, they'd be sacrificing way too much.

On the other hand, if a mafia member did choose to list a fellow member at the top of their list-- especially on a regular basis-- the townies would view that list-creator as vindicated. It seems like a valuable sacrifice-- it would be hard for townies to shake their positive impression of that member, even if that person voted for townies consistently afterwards. So the mafia doesn't really have as much to lose from this system as I originally thought; it seems like it just makes the game predictable and unpredictable in new ways.

Blorg
11-04-2014, 08:33 PM
*would have revised the last sentence.

And no Dr. Ahcir I already said I'm a townie! I think the townie-naming thing is a pointless exercise :dont:

Dirac
11-04-2014, 08:38 PM
I'm confused, I'm not even sure exactly what it is Utisz is proposing. Randomising the vote? Wouldn't that just reduce the info you have on everyone and make it easier for the mafia to hide in a big group? I thought the whole point of the game was to try and generate drama and noise and use those data to try and figure stuff out.

There's 11 pages and I just got in from work. Me too lazy to read it all.

Dirac
11-04-2014, 08:38 PM
Nvm, I misunderstood.

Polemarch
11-04-2014, 08:42 PM
What Utisz is proposing is coordinating our votes in such a way as to increase the risk/penalty for a Mafia to propose one of their own. One of the Mafia advantages at this early stage is the fact that there's no voting history to rely on - the block vote enforces coordination in a way that wouldn't otherwise be possible. It's basically a cartel, with incentives that favor the majority (i.e. the town). The only trouble is that it's opt-in.

I think if Utisz can better elucidate the method by which the randomization will occur, then it could be a viable strategy I'd be on board with.

Osito Polar
11-04-2014, 08:59 PM
I think if Utisz can better elucidate the method by which the randomization will occur, then it could be a viable strategy I'd be on board with.

We could use an independently-verifiable online dice roller platform.

Noir
11-04-2014, 09:02 PM
We could use an independently-verifiable online dice roller platform.

Right. But again, what's to stop someone from just running the sim multiple times until the dice roll lands on a Mafia member?

Osito Polar
11-04-2014, 09:05 PM
Right. But again, what's to stop someone from just running the sim multiple times until the dice roll lands on a Mafia member?

You mean on a Townie member? How would we know if it landed on a Mafia member?

msg_v2
11-04-2014, 09:08 PM
You mean on a Townie member? How would we know if it landed on a Mafia member?

The only real solution that I can think of would be to have Kyuri do it, but I'm not sure if she'd be game for that.

jigglypuff
11-04-2014, 09:10 PM
The only real solution that I can think of would be to have Kyuri do it, but I'm not sure if she'd be game for that.
she said earlier that she won't

Noir
11-04-2014, 09:12 PM
No. I'm saying there is this preconception that a non-biased party will be administering the dice roll. That is not the case. A Mafia member could be in-charge of the dice-roll. Which means we have no way of knowing if the dice-roll is actually random or simply appears to be random.

Kyuri
11-04-2014, 09:15 PM
The only real solution that I can think of would be to have Kyuri do it, but I'm not sure if she'd be game for that.

To reiterate (http://forums.intpcomplex.com/showthread.php?1783-Mafia-II-Space-Vampires-(or-something)&p=70926&viewfull=1#post70926), I will not facilitate randomization.

Osito Polar
11-04-2014, 09:23 PM
No. I'm saying there is this preconception that a non-biased party will be administering the dice roll. That is not the case. A Mafia member could be in-charge of the dice-roll. Which means we have no way of knowing if the dice-roll is actually random or simply appears to be random.

Yep. This is a definite weakness in the plan. Like, unless we all VNC into Utisz's laptop and watch him perform the dice roll live.

I think we should be given root access to the system as well so that I and others can perform logfile analysis for Utisz shenanigans.

Installation of key-logging software might also be a good idea.

Utisz, it was really nice of you to volunteer for this.

msg_v2
11-04-2014, 09:26 PM
To reiterate (http://forums.intpcomplex.com/showthread.php?1783-Mafia-II-Space-Vampires-(or-something)&p=70926&viewfull=1#post70926), I will not facilitate randomization.

Then, uh, unless Utisz has an alternative randomization that seems like it could work, I rescind my vote for his proposal.

Utisz
11-04-2014, 09:48 PM
I can't actually physically keep up with all the stuff I have to respond to. :)

To avoid tl;dr, parts in bold are the main arguments.


It might prevent the Mafia from detecting threats and make it harder for the Mafia to muck things up.

It would also prevent a bandwagon effect. The idea is that the results would be announced. Of course, you'd have to assign someone a specific role as a tabulator, and then, I suppose, if they are bumped off, we would have to pick someone else. But I suppose most of us have no way of knowing whose side the tabulator is one.

How to trust the tabulator? Likewise voting information is the currency of Townies and should definitely be public. I would be against the PM idea and for full transparency.


I suppose I do have a question as to how the results are randomly picked. It seems that regardless of whether it's a secret ballot or totally transparent, someone has to pick someone from that list. I wonder who that would be. I suppose the easiest would include Kyuri acting in that role.

Kyuri mentioned she wouldn't do it but that's not necessary. Here's a fully transparent deterministic solution that would work better:

I would propose using this system (http://stattrek.com/statistics/random-number-generator.aspx) with a seed based initially on the order of voting.

Someone is in charge of computing the selection: we will call them the coordinator. In theory it could be anyone.

First, every player is assigned a number based on the player list:


Dirac
Dot
LowIQLogan
Slab_Bulkhead
Utisz
Osito Polar
Light Leak
lethe
Hephaestus
Dr. Ahcir
Noir
Polemarch
Granny Smith
P-O
tele


These numbers are concatenated in the order of first initial votes to make the fixed seed number, which we'll call m [SIZE=1(this will not be evenly distributed, but since it's just used as a seed, it doesn't matter)[/SIZE].

But there is still a vulnerability in that the last person to vote could compute m and could influence the result at the very end by voting or abstaining. So we need to avoid that.

So when a person votes, to help secure the randomness, they can simply PM a random number between 1 and r[I] inclusive to the coordinator (the more people that do this, the better). The number [I]r is simply half the number of players in the block rounded up. The coordinator does not pick a number when they vote. Once the deadline for initial votes is in, the coordinator removes the random number sent by the last voter, picks the most frequent number largest number from what remains (which we'll call n) and adds it to m, creating the final seed.

The coordinator then uses the random number generator with seed n + m to generate a random number between 1 and k, where k is the number of initial votes. The kth vote is chosen.

For repeatability, the coordinator posts the random numbers picked by everyone, as well as the computed values for m and n. Anyone can verify m. Everyone can collectively verify the number they sent to make n. Anyone can add m and n and stick it in as seed to verify the result. Everything is transparent.



Assume the coordinator is townie: the only real way to game the system is if the last person to vote knows they are the last to vote and somehow knows the value of n, in which case there are two set voters they can pick between by either abstaining or voting. Their random number is not counted so they cannot influence n themselves. However, some Mafia could coordinate to vote a common random number to game the system, making a given value of n a bit more likely (they can never make it certain since they'll never be in majority). In this case, by going last, the remaining Mafia member might know that a given value for n is slightly more likely, and that one of two possible voters would be more likely. But for this slight chance of weakly gaming the system, the Mafia risk everything: if they are found out, the last to vote will be Mafia, at least some of those who voted for the final value of n will be Mafia, and the person saved would also be a Mafia suspect. In other words, trying to game the system for such a slight advantage would be the end of the Mafia if they were caught.

Another possibility is that the Mafia accuse the townie coordinator of lying about the random number they picked. In this case, there's two options: either the coordinator is lying or the accuser is lying and both would be lynched in due course.

Assume the coordinator is mafia: they can provide Mafia about the values for n and so if the last person is Mafia, they may be able to choose between one of two options (assuming the computed voters vote for different players). But again, if gaming is suspected, then the coordinator and the final voter will be outed. Again, trying to game the system would be very stupid.

They can also lie about what random numbers players picked. But doing so will inevitably out them as Mafia to at least the folks who picked those numbers, and probably to more people if the accused speak up.

The system cannot be gamed by Mafia without leaving a very clear trail. Once the first Mafia is outed, anyone who voted for the same random numbers as them where one of them was the last to vote or abstained to avoid voting for a Mafia member will be suspicious as hell. Likewise, if that Mafia was coordinator, anyone who voted last or abstained in that round to avoid selecting Mafia would be suspicious as hell. In summary, gaming the system is really hard and would be really really stupid, even for Mafia.


That might all sound complicated but it's pretty straightforward in the end:


Information is posted
Everyone makes an initial vote in italics and sends a random number to the coordinator before a deadline
The coordinator computes the pick
(Everyone votes in bold for the pick)


Anyone who wants can verify the coordinators work.



That's reasonable. I can still see some objections regarding saving time for the Town, so if the mafia agrees to it (by PMing me), it's no problem.

That sounds reasonable, yep, thanks! Could you ask them and let us know how it goes?


Utisz:

No. No. That's a pro-mafia strategy in it's bones.

On the surface, you are adding randomness back in.

On the surface, the randomness was never removed in the first place. Picking players because they smell funny is equally random. All the system is doing is acknowledging the randomness and using it to improve the quality of the voting information available to the town by making every vote count.


At most, complete (psuedo) randomness if everyone picks a different player. That might well happen in the scenario you've outlined simply because people don't recognize the weight of plurality anymore.

Nonsense. Taking what you say literally, even if every player picked their initial vote completely randomly, the odds of everyone picking a different player would be \frac{n!}{n^n}. For 15 players, that would be p = 0.00000298. Hence folks would need to do that deliberately and why would they?

Taking the spirit of what you say, folks are obviously going to have hunches and information and vote initially based on those hunches and pieces of informations. For townies, the system of initial voting would be the same as usual: vote for the folks you think are most likely to be Mafia. Those with more initial votes will still be more likely to be picked. Who is selected is not perfectly random (that would be useless since it would not take into account past information). Instead it is a weighted probabilistic system.


But that also means a bad scenario for the town because the game is rigged to favor mafia in a random kill. That's part of it's balance.

I'm not convinced that a completely random game favour the mafia. Could you back that up?

In any case, it's a straw-man because the system clearly is not random in the sense you mean. Again, suspicious players will get higher initial votes and will be more likely to be outed. The trade-off is that another player might also be outed, with a probability based on the distribution of votes. But this probability is no worse than the probability that the crowd is wrong or has been influenced by Mafia. The gain is that every single vote counts and there's no place to hide.

If the town are quite certain that they know who a Mafia player is, they can still opt to vote bold. The block system will only work while a majority think it's favourable for that round.


Furthermore, it eliminates the need for the mafia to struggle even when there is a plurality. You say "no free bluffs". I say your mechanic eliminates the need for bluffs. As long as anyone is voting otherwise, even if there is a plurality on a mafia, they can wriggle out the back door without any of their scummy buddies lifting a finger. Clever, but not pro-Town.

Now we're at the core of this. If a Mafia type finds themselves in trouble with lots of initial votes in the block and a high probability of being outed, their scrummy buddies have two options: vote for their Mafia buddy and increase the likelihood that they'll be kicked, or vote for someone else or abstain thus drawing suspicion towards themselves if their Mafia pal is outed. No freebies. No free bluffs. They can no longer vote Mafia on a foregone conclusion just for appearances; every vote counts.


My current picks:

Utisz
lethe


At the very least, you're dangerous to the town.

^^^Not listed in order of suspicion but by cognitive propinquity while writing.

Pretty random if you ask me.


^ the point is to build up a history to refer to when players are killed. everybody will be leaving "tracks" of some kind.

Yes, in short, this!!!


Sorry, I'd addressed this in a post that got eaten, and realized when I re-did it, I forgot to address this:

:facepalm:

The common scenario is picking townies. That just is how things go. Everyone will do it. If you try to find a pattern based on that, the game will be over and the mafia will win before it happens.

Of course the common scenario is picking townies. But even a random monkey bashing their keyboard will pick a Mafia every now and again. Yes a lots of innocent Townies will pick lots of other Townies. But on average, the Mafia are incentivised to knowingly pick Townies at a higher rate. This information cuts that incentive and precisely forces Mafia to vote Mafia every now and again (which they cannot do for free).

Put another way: without this information (in some form), Mafia could never be held accountable for voting Townie every time. This sort of voting information is crucial for the Town!

Of course there is no way of figuring out who is Mafia and who isn't but this system tries to exploit voting histories to incentivise everyone (including Mafia) to try vote Mafia. Likewise it is not mandatory for players to pick the top from the list. I'm suggesting it's information that should be provided before the round, proving a rational, organised way for the town to exploit/control the voting asymmetries of the game. If you don't have a better concrete idea of who to vote for, you might as well pick the folks who vote Townies most the time, even if they might be Townies ... at the very least you'll incentivise everyone (including Mafia) to try vote Mafia.


I said lethe was my top pick, but it isn't by much--and that was before you added your offer to "create an algorithm" to further muddy the waters. Gee, sure, lets all just hand over all our decision making power to a machine Utisz created that we don't have complete access too and will have no full public record of how it behaves, only what he says it did.

If you want to make a computational engine of bad guy destruction, it must be transparent, or there can be no trust. It also has to be better made and not pro-mafia.

Sure. See the algorithm above.


The other problem I see with this system -- Record-keeping of vote switches is gonna be key. If you only record the final votes, once a Mafia lynch is "locked in", they could all just switch to voting for that person and get a Free Pass like you mentioned. So you'd have to track every vote switch, and there will likely be lots. Does a vote you later switched count the same as a regular old vote? Personally, that would change my play-strategy considerably. You couldn't just lob an accusation at someone and see what they do to casually probe their Mafianess.

Not sure I follow? You mean switching between initial and the result of block vote for the final?

I would say we should agree to not allow vote switches in the initial vote. Folks voting against the block (other than not to vote for themselves) should be considered suspicious.


Other than that, it's a great idea. Count me as for it.

Great! We're up to five and need at least three more:


Utisz
tele
Slab_Bulkhead
Dot
Oso



Using PMs for anything in this would be massively stupid though, so the whole thing needs to work transparently from end-to-end.

Transparency is key, agreed!


I'll try to digest your perspective more fully later on but thinking ahead, if a majority does decide to go with Utisz's plan, it's probably best if we kill him halfway through the game. If the mafia hasn't killed him by that point and his strategies appear to be working, that's a solid sign that he's an imposter, and we can continue using the strategies he came up with-- win-win.

I wouldn't mind so much getting lynched early on if the system helped the town to a victory. I'm really swell like that.

One question would be if Kyuri would be okay with me doing the random algorithm once I'm a dead townie (who wants to see the system work). Probably it would not be fair but that bridge can be crossed later. Again, anyone can follow the algorithm.


Dot, they keep that strategy after the first round? That makes even less sense to me. After the first round isn't there more information to work with?

I say we keep the system as long as a majority is in favour. I think it might not be so useful very late on.


How do you establish a pattern of behavior in picking only townies if you only use it the first round? That doesn't seem to be his intent.

Nope, it's not.


Your argument is that the greater number of humans vs. space vampires (trying to stick with the theme, here!) means that statistically, random kills are more likely to kill a human than a vampire? I can't argue with that.

What say you Utisz?

See above. The fact that there are more Townies than Mafia indeed means that barring some gaffe, yes, we are more likely to kill Townie than Mafia in almost every round. Let's be clear: this is not a perfect system for finding out who's Mafia. But it is an organised system where the Town can minimise the influence of Mafia and can maximise voting information from each round.


I'm not sure who's at the top of my list right now but the main members are: Hephaestus, Utisz (? not sure. I'll give this option more thought later), lethe.

Just be careful of sticking with vocal players. It's a natural bias to fixate on folks who say a lot. Clever Mafia can exploit that natural bias by staying quiet.


Dice have no memory.

The system I propose has a little bit more to it than a dice roll in fairness.


You don't want to penalize vocal members. The mafia benefits from vocal townies killing each other off while they quietly watch. The best strategy is to get as many people to go on record as possible as much of the time.

You beat me to the punch.


Meta-gaming is a natural place to look, but probably a misleading one. I don't expect us to get much insight in the first round no matter what we do, but I think we need to pay attention to what people say in THIS game, and encourage everyone to say as much as possible.

I really don't think Utisz OR Heph is Mafia; Heph has a tendency to over-think in any role, so there's nothing particularly unusual about his degree of overthink here. And Utisz is doing precisely what a skilled townie would and should do - trying to organize the others. My suspicions are directed at the quieter ones.

Yep! So would you like to join? :)


I'm going to hold off on my vote until I hear how the randomization will work. I'm not saying that I think Utisz is guilty (I'm undecided), but I need more information before going along with it.

See above. Let me know what you think.

P-O
11-04-2014, 10:15 PM
Skimming the thread:
There are probably only 3 mafia members, not 4.
The jack of all trades, if in play, is counted as one of the three mafia members.
The 4th is likely the psychopath role we saw last time that wins when everybody is dead.

I think we should vote on quiet players first.
That said, usitz' plan is interesting. Maybe we can have 2 parties for the random rolling scenario. Party 1 is in charge of randomly rolling a number, party 2 is in charge of organizing the list of players that decides who the number picks. These two objects are delivered independently to a third party who reveals the chosen player along with the list and number.

This way, the only way the mafia gets to choose is if 2 or more of these people are mafia.... still not fool proof, but maybe an improvement in that we'd have most of the mafia linked on paper in the worst case scenario.

Utisz
11-04-2014, 10:21 PM
Okay you know what, seriously you guys, fuck my tl;dr random generator thing. Just took a step back, went out for a smoke and realised that was too complicated.

We just need a seed based on something external on the internet that changes every day that we have no control over.

Take Merriam Webster's word of the day (http://www.merriam-webster.com/word-of-the-day/) (or something similarly well-defined that changes every day at a convenient time; maybe someone could offer suggestions). Today it's "demagogue".

Stick it into this hashing system (http://www.fileformat.info/tool/hash.htm) and take the Adler32 hash ("123903af").

Convert the hex value to decimal using this system (http://www.binaryhexconverter.com/hex-to-decimal-converter) ("305726383").

Use this system (http://stattrek.com/statistics/random-number-generator.aspx) with the decimal number above as seed to pick one random number between 1 and the number of votes (inclusive). So say we had fifteen votes, the result would be:

http://i.imgur.com/e66hjq3.png

Zero gaming possible. Anyone can compute and announce. Anyone can verify. No random numbers need to be PM'ed.

The deadline for initial votes would be five minutes before the word of the day (or whatever we use) changes.

msg_v2
11-04-2014, 10:21 PM
See above. Let me know what you think.

I think I'm out. I'm not big on the idea of one person acting as a coordinator.

Utisz
11-04-2014, 10:22 PM
Skimming the thread:
There are probably only 3 mafia members, not 4.
The jack of all trades, if in play, is counted as one of the three mafia members.
The 4th is likely the psychopath role we saw last time that wins when everybody is dead.

I think we should vote on quiet players first.
That said, usitz' plan is interesting. Maybe we can have 2 parties for the random rolling scenario. Party 1 is in charge of randomly rolling a number, party 2 is in charge of organizing the list of players that decides who the number picks. These two objects are delivered independently to a third party who reveals the chosen player along with the list and number.

This way, the only way the mafia gets to choose is if 2 or more of these people are mafia.... still not fool proof, but maybe an improvement in that we'd have most of the mafia linked on paper in the worst case scenario.

I think the new algorithm removes all gaming. Would you join our block voting scheme? :)

msg_v2
11-04-2014, 10:23 PM
I'm not sure it would make that big of a difference anyway.

Utisz
11-04-2014, 10:23 PM
I think I'm out. I'm not big on the idea of one person acting as a coordinator.

Have a look above (http://forums.intpcomplex.com/showthread.php?1783-Mafia-II-Space-Vampires-(or-something)&p=71048&viewfull=1#post71048): much simpler without any need for a coordinator.

msg_v2
11-04-2014, 10:25 PM
I'm also not convinced that zero gaming is possible. Someone could say they ran the number generator thing you linked to, and then lie.

msg_v2
11-04-2014, 10:26 PM
Also, as Hepahestus said, random voting does not favor the townies, it favors the mafia, since there are more townies than mafia, and the townies are more likely to be picked.

msg_v2
11-04-2014, 10:27 PM
Er Hephaestus. Not editing is killing me.

msg_v2
11-04-2014, 10:29 PM
Have a look above (http://forums.intpcomplex.com/showthread.php?1783-Mafia-II-Space-Vampires-(or-something)&p=71048&viewfull=1#post71048): much simpler without any need for a coordinator.

I'm scampering away from this. I don't like it.

P-O
11-04-2014, 10:37 PM
Would you join our block voting scheme?

I'm on the fence. I need to think about it some more.

Utisz
11-04-2014, 10:40 PM
I'm also not convinced that zero gaming is possible. Someone could say they ran the number generator thing you linked to, and then lie.

It takes two minutes for anyone to verify by following the steps. Anyone can do it. You'd really want to be suicidal to lie or to think that someone in the town won't take two minutes to check it.


Also, as Hepahestus said, random voting does not favor the townies, it favors the mafia, since there are more townies than mafia, and the townies are more likely to be picked.

I've pretty much already addressed this ... I think this argument is a strawman.

The fact that there are fewer Mafia is true no matter what system we use.

The system proposed is not random in the sense of picking a player at random to lynch. The system is weighted to favour folks with more votes in the initial pick.

The system favours the town since Mafia can no longer cover their tracks by voting Mafia for free. Everything leaves a trail of information that the Townies can use.

It seems that the alternative is the usual disorganised mess of witch-hunts, hunches, bandwagons and so on ... essentially the town waits around for the mafia to make a gaffe or hopes some vigilante will save them or something. I'm simply proposing we organise a voting system that the Mafia cannot exploit.


I'm scampering away from this. I don't like it.

Final answer? :)

Blorg
11-04-2014, 10:41 PM
This thread is a mess :P Polemarch, lethe, Utisz-- I wasn't tring to kill people for being vocal (I'm one of the most vocal ones, after all)-- just trying to digest individual snippets/paranoias as they come. Probably not a good idea at this stage of the game though, so I'll stop.

I guess I'm still in favor of the system. I do have qualms related to how the mafia might be able to manipulate it (as I mentioned earlier) but those suspicions aren't fully formed yet so I'll support the system for this round at least.

Noir
11-04-2014, 10:44 PM
Well if the seed is based on a non-biased third party like word-of-the-day, and the means of calculating the random number is such that anyone with two brain cells to rub together can arrive at the same figure independently, then I don't have a problem with it. That said, it still looks pretty complicated.

Dirac
11-04-2014, 10:46 PM
I'm still not sure where I stand on Utisz's idea but provisionally it sounds good. It isn't random random, it's more akin to the difference between proportional representation and first-past-the-post voting in elections. Somehow. I'm not sure if that analogy holds up but that's the association I draw. If you had PR, you might be less likely to vote for the Monster Raving Loony party, because then they might actually get in. Or something.

Also, I think we should start by killing off some quiet people. The could be mafia hiding. At best they are unhelpful townies. I know it's early still though, some people might still be in bed or whatever.

Noir
11-04-2014, 10:50 PM
Ok you know what? I just followed the steps Utisz laid out and independently arrived at #12 (http://forums.intpcomplex.com/usertag.php?do=list&action=hash&hash=12) as well, so, huzzah. I have no qualms.

msg_v2
11-04-2014, 10:52 PM
Final answer? :)

Yes. The way we were voting gives the votes of the townspeople a greater weight, (even if they may be incorrect), due to there being more of them. With this system, while the townspeople's votes are still favored because of probability (assuming everything is legit), there may be occasions when the townspeople have no influence at all. Things are evened out a little bit. So, no.

Also, I agree with whoever said that there are probably three mafia members, giving us 12 townspeople. In retrospect, that seems like a better interpretation of the roles. So, when we get down to five players left, the game is effectively over. We have basically 7 rounds.

I think whoever is the cop should do some investigating.

msg_v2
11-04-2014, 10:53 PM
The cop could get bumped off, and then the townspeople would lose their advantage.

Hephaestus
11-04-2014, 10:53 PM
On the surface, the randomness was never removed in the first place. Picking players because they smell funny is equally random. All the system is doing is acknowledging the randomness and using it to improve the quality of the voting information available to the town by making every vote count.

You make every vote count by making plurality a "probably"? Why not go whole hog and propose an electoral college? Oh wait, you kinda did, but you voted for an RNG as the electorate.



Nonsense. Taking what you say literally, even if every player picked their initial vote completely randomly, the odds of everyone picking a different player would be \frac{n!}{n^n}. For 15 players, that would be p = 0.00000298. Hence folks would need to do that deliberately and why would they?

Because increasing the spread increases the likelihood that a Vamp was up for staking. Also because of a sense of voter disenfranchisement.

I didn't say it wouldn't be deliberate, I just said that was a worst case but plausible scenario that well could happen.



Taking the spirit of what you say, folks are obviously going to have hunches and information and vote initially based on those hunches and pieces of informations. For townies, the system of initial voting would be the same as usual: vote for the folks you think are most likely to be Mafia. Those with more initial votes will still be more likely to be picked. Who is selected is not perfectly random (that would be useless since it would not take into account past information). Instead it is a weighted probabilistic system.

Yes, but the hunches in the long run aren't random while your outcomes remain randomized. You are inserting a nigh automatic chance at reprieve for any mafia on the block. You're exchanging error types, not eliminating them.




I'm not convinced that a completely random game favour the mafia. Could you back that up?

Lazily (http://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?title=Numbers,_Part_1).



In any case, it's a straw-man because the system clearly is not random in the sense you mean. Again, suspicious players will get higher initial votes and will be more likely to be outed. The trade-off is that another player might also be outed, with a probability based on the distribution of votes. But this probability is no worse than the probability that the crowd is wrong or has been influenced by Mafia. The gain is that every single vote counts and there's no place to hide.
And the loss is that even when there is a plurality, whoever is on the horns has a chance to get out.



If the town are quite certain that they know who a Mafia player is, they can still opt to vote bold. The block system will only work while a majority think it's favourable for that round.
Always true of block voting strategies, even without random selection.




Now we're at the core of this. If a Mafia type finds themselves in trouble with lots of initial votes in the block and a high probability of being outed, their scrummy buddies have two options: vote for their Mafia buddy and increase the likelihood that they'll be kicked, or vote for someone else or abstain thus drawing suspicion towards themselves if their Mafia pal is outed. No freebies. No free bluffs. They can no longer vote Mafia on a foregone conclusion just for appearances; every vote counts.


The parts of this that are true were always true. When a Vamp finds himself with lots of votes for staking, his buddies have two options: throw their pal under the bus for vindication, or try to vote for someone else (or abstain, but abstaining is generally a death sentence), and potentially draw suspicion on themselves.

It's exactly the same, except for one thing: I think your system, if used by people who think it works as you've presented will backfire horrifically on innocent townies who don't want to engage in total mob rule. Any dissent will look suspicious because every dissent will mean opening an opportunity for whoever has the plurality to survive.

I think your system actually makes it easier to dislodge an apparent dogpile and reduces exposure because there isn't enough time to kill whoever some Vamp chose to give that relief valve, and then kill the alleged Vamp, assuming that the vote against them doesn't get hijacked by observance of the RNG system. In normal play, a simple off-vote wouldn't be sufficient because a simple off-vote could never work. Under your plan, it can, which makes it safer. It may be true there are no free bluffs, but that's because you're removing the need to bluff.




Put another way: without this information (in some form), Mafia could never be held accountable for voting Townie every time. This sort of voting information is crucial for the Town!

You're counting on a consistent off vote of townie to uncover the Vamps. You realize we have approximately three tries? If we don't find one within about three tries, we run out of room. How much townie off-voting can you uncover in that time? What we need is voting that makes them squirm, or we're kacked. I believe your system introduces too much slippage in the wrong direction.

msg_v2
11-04-2014, 10:59 PM
The cop should investigate someone. I think there are a few candidates, about whom it would be useful to know concrete information. Then, perhaps the first vote will not be so random.

msg_v2
11-04-2014, 11:00 PM
Random votes that bump off townies also cause a snowball effect, because they breed suspicion.

LowIQLogan
11-04-2014, 11:10 PM
Firstly, I am townie.

There are few issues I have with block voting. As I understand it the benefit comes from the idea that mafia voting for another mafia is a risk and that by doing block votes the risk of every single vote for a mafia member is higher because a single vote could end up being the randomized one selected to kill.



I think this is a flawed benefit. The reliable source of information by killing people and being told their role is too valuable. If we assume the townies are smart and we try to kill someone every turn that would give us the most information based on who they voted for/supported regardless of if they are townie or mafia then any chance that this kill is not made is bad for the townies. For example if the majority vote for Polemarch, but the randomizer chooses Utisz to be killed I think this is bad because we wanted information on polemarch and got information on Utisz. Of course it would be good if Utisz was mafia but removing that control from the townies is not a good or winning strategy imo. If Utisz's solution to this problem of townies knowing who they want to kill (ie every time there is a majority) then why the fuck are we doing block voting anyways?



To reiterate, I think removing the guarantee that the person the majority wants killed is the one who actually gets killed is bad for townies.



This is in addition to other logistical problems with this block voting strategy. The obvious one of the person doing the administrating is not trustable like kyuri. But also the fact that the mafia have more warning to mount defenses and espionage. In the time between block vote is randomized and the actual vote is made the mafia have an extra chance where they know who is going to be killed and can decide to release new information or create more discusison that they wouldn't have during a normal voting strategy.





Statistical analysis of voting habits is risky because only mafia have perfect information of roles and can skew data whenever it seems safe.



I think PM's benefit townies in games where there is a cop. The cop can slowly make a network of relatively trusted townies which will easily win a game. Any PMs and trust not based on role power guarantees is stupid.



I would much rather kill a non-vocal player first than a 'strong player'. While I don't agree with block voting I do think organization and team work is the path to victory. Non contributers are also less fun. I'll make my first vote for Granny Smith for this reason.

msg_v2
11-04-2014, 11:17 PM
Oh, the cop can only do it every night. The cop can't do it during the day. Damn.

msg_v2
11-04-2014, 11:23 PM
I'm against either killing "strong players" or "nonvocal" players. I think we have a little more information to make a non-random guess. It might be off, but it's better than completely random. At least one of the vocal people are probably mafia members, too. That's the way this game usually works. The people who aren't vocal are probably just pre-occupied. Besides, it equally benefits townspeople to stay quiet as well, as long as nobody decides to single them out for staying quiet. If they, for instance, accuse someone, and are incorrect, people will immediately suspect them of being a mafia.

The first round needn't be totally random. We have a little bit of information.

P-O
11-04-2014, 11:26 PM
I'm against either killing "strong players" or "nonvocal" players. I think we have a little more information to make a non-random guess. It might be off, but it's better than completely random. At least one of the vocal people are probably mafia members, too. That's the way this game usually works. The people who aren't vocal are probably just pre-occupied. Besides, it equally benefits townspeople to stay quiet as well, as long as nobody decides to single them out for staying quiet. If they, for instance, accuse someone, and are incorrect, people will immediately suspect them of being a mafia.

The first round needn't be totally random. We have a little bit of information.

We don't want it to be beneficial for townies to remain quiet. We don't want it to be beneficial for mafias to remain quiet. We need to be sure that everyone is giving us information by speaking. We need the history of interaction to make informed decisions. If there's no interaction, we're blind to them.

msg_v2
11-04-2014, 11:31 PM
We don't want it to be beneficial for townies to remain quiet. We don't want it to be beneficial for mafias to remain quiet. We need to be sure that everyone is giving us information by speaking. We need the history of interaction to make informed decisions. If there's no interaction, we're blind to them.

I don't think that's worth the risk of helping potentially helping to do the Mafia's risk for them.

I'm going to go with Hephaestus and Dot. I am going to go with Utisz being a space vampire from hell.

msg_v2
11-04-2014, 11:32 PM
That is I support the vote of Hephaestus and Dot. I think Utisz is a space vampire mafia.

Utisz
11-04-2014, 11:36 PM
Lazily (http://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?title=Numbers,_Part_1).

Heh, well it seems we're damned if we do and we're damned if we don't.


Firstly, I am townie.

There are few issues I have with block voting. As I understand it the benefit comes from the idea that mafia voting for another mafia is a risk and that by doing block votes the risk of every single vote for a mafia member is higher because a single vote could end up being the randomized one selected to kill.

Yup.


I think this is a flawed benefit. The reliable source of information by killing people and being told their role is too valuable. If we assume the townies are smart and we try to kill someone every turn that would give us the most information based on who they voted for/supported regardless of if they are townie or mafia then any chance that this kill is not made is bad for the townies. For example if the majority vote for Polemarch, but the randomizer chooses Utisz to be killed I think this is bad because we wanted information on polemarch and got information on Utisz. Of course it would be good if Utisz was mafia but removing that control from the townies is not a good or winning strategy imo. If Utisz's solution to this problem of townies knowing who they want to kill (ie every time there is a majority) then why the fuck are we doing block voting anyways?

That's a clear and valid criticism folks should consider. In defence of the block system, I would say that if there is a clear consensus that some information is to be gained by lynching someone for information, folks can vote bold. I'm not saying the block system is always the best choice in every round. I'm saying it should only be used when no clear option is available: it should only be used when a majority feel it's favourable.


This is in addition to other logistical problems with this block voting strategy. The obvious one of the person doing the administrating is not trustable like kyuri.

There would be nobody administering it. Anyone can compute and equally verify the selection.


But also the fact that the mafia have more warning to mount defenses and espionage. In the time between block vote is randomized and the actual vote is made the mafia have an extra chance where they know who is going to be killed and can decide to release new information or create more discusison that they wouldn't have during a normal voting strategy.

If we need two deadlines to implement the block, I indeed could foresee some logistical problems such as users not having enough time to vote pro-block after the selection is made. A lot of that would come down to whether or not Kyuri will count initial votes marked as block as intended to follow the block. If she agrees to that, the block would just require posting votes a little earlier.


Statistical analysis of voting habits is risky because only mafia have perfect information of roles and can skew data whenever it seems safe.

But this always holds: Mafia can always use their information advantage to skew voting patterns. I would argue that the whole principle of the block is that it costs Mafia to skew data and that this system is more robust than any other system from Mafia attempts to skew data.

Noir
11-04-2014, 11:37 PM
Err no one said Utisz was Mafia. We just said his random voting scheme was variously flawed. I'm with Logan actually, I'd rather go after the non-participants. I'll vote Granny Smith as well for now, unless he shows.

msg_v2
11-04-2014, 11:40 PM
There would be nobody administering it. Anyone can compute and equally verify the selection.



I don't see how.Also, this is overly complicated and makes it more likely that a townsperson will be bumped off, and that a mafia player will escape judgement. At worst, it doesn't make much of a difference.

Kyuri
11-04-2014, 11:41 PM
If we need two deadlines to implement the block, I indeed could foresee some logistical problems such as users not having enough time to vote pro-block after the selection is made. A lot of that would come down to whether or not Kyuri will count initial votes marked as block as intended to follow the block. If she agrees to that, the block would just require posting votes a little earlier.

I have asked the mafia, but they will need time to consider it.

Utisz
11-04-2014, 11:42 PM
Let me consolidate my proposal a little bit just to clarify before I get back to life in general.

The proposal is:


We agree on a deadline for initial votes (before the word of the day changes).
Before the deadline is reached, we make an initial vote in italics. Any votes after the word changes are disregarded.
After the deadline, we use the system (http://forums.intpcomplex.com/showthread.php?1783-Mafia-II-Space-Vampires-(or-something)&p=71048&viewfull=1#post71048) here to pick a voter at "random". It doesn't really matter who does this since anyone can verify.
The block agrees to vote the same as whoever that voter is.
(Either we update our bold vote or Kyuri agrees to consider the italic votes as intended to vote with the bloc.)


The timing of the deadline will depend on whether or not Kyuri will consider the intent of an italic vote as a block vote or not. Kyuri, what do you say?


The selection of the initial voter to support is random and can be computed/verified by any player.

Though this selection is random, the system does not randomly pick someone to lynch: the system is weighted according to initial votes, which should be based on whatever information is available at the time. The more initial votes a player has against them, the more likely they will be lynched.

The core goal of the system is to organise voting in a manner that maximises information for the town in the absence of any solid leads. In particular, Mafia cannot vote for Mafia without potentially increasing the probability that a Mafia type will be lynched.

The bloc should only be run if a majority are in favour of it for that round.


So far we have in support:


Utisz
tele
Dot
Oso


We also have a few users on the fence. We need eight voters for the first round.

I hope my proposal is clear. This system does not guarantee town victory – no system does – but this system is, in my eyes, preferable to resorting to the usual blind witchhunts and bandwagons. Probably it's only slightly preferable to witchhunts and bandwagons ... I don't know ... but again I would be curious to see how it works out. I get the sense though that the general consensus seems to be leaning against.

msg_v2
11-04-2014, 11:44 PM
Err no one said Utisz was Mafia. We just said his random voting scheme was variously flawed. I'm with Logan actually, I'd rather go after the non-participants. I'll vote Granny Smith as well for now, unless he shows.

Three people said that. If it's not him, the cop can investigate Hephaestus or Dot overnight, and then we know something. At least then, if we are wrong, we stand a greater chance of learning something. If we bump off someone just for not speaking, and they turn out to be a townsperson, I'm guessing we just have a lot of innocent townspeople who are now under suspicion.

Utisz
11-04-2014, 11:44 PM
I have asked the mafia, but they will need time to consider it.

Okay, thanks.

LowIQLogan
11-04-2014, 11:46 PM
I am usually self concious of my weak ability to read people in these games and question the soundness of my reasoning so its always nice to see someone like slab fail so miserably. I mean it is a game of baseless paranoia and slab is already p susceptible to that so I guess he never really have a chance.

Noir
11-04-2014, 11:55 PM
Three people said that. If it's not him, the cop can investigate Hephaestus or Dot overnight, and then we know something. At least then, if we are wrong, we stand a greater chance of learning something. If we bump off someone just for not speaking, and they turn out to be a townsperson, I'm guessing we just have a lot of innocent townspeople who are now under suspicion.

Well killing non-participants doesn't actually net you any actionable information, since no one is suggesting they're actually Mafia. They are deadweight though, and they're not giving us the information we need to establish their guilt or innocence. It's the rhetorical equivalent of a plea of "no-contest" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nolo_contendere), which is a de facto declaration of guilt.

Blorg
11-05-2014, 12:01 AM
In favor of Granny Smith so far:

Dot
LowIQLogan
Noir

-------

Trying to clarify the qualms I wrote about earlier:

I feel like it will devolve into witch hunting anyway. If we follow this system, there's a chance that at least a few members of the mafia will vote for other mafia members.

Say A and B are mafia members. A makes a list with B at the top. A's list get's chosen; B gets lynched. Now A is free of suspicion, neutralizing the effect of B's lynch by decreasing the likelihood that we'll suspect A in the future.
If A makes a list with B at the top and A's list doesn't get chosen, they neither lose nor gain anything. If A makes a list with B at the top and A's list doesn't get chosen but a townie's list that has B at the top does get chosen-- so B gets lynched anyway-- A still gets to free themselves of suspicion.

The mafia may or may not use this strategy, but my point is that they may use it, ie, there's still plenty of room for witch hunts, manipulation, and paranoia if we use this system.

So basically, the mafia doesn't have much to lose or gain from it, nor do the townies.

Does this make any sense? What am I missing?

Utisz
11-05-2014, 12:03 AM
I am usually self concious of my weak ability to read people in these games and question the soundness of my reasoning so its always nice to see someone like slab fail so miserably. I mean it is a game of baseless paranoia and slab is already p susceptible to that so I guess he never really have a chance.

On my side I'm starting to realise that I've wasted quite a lot of time trying to create a system that would try to bring order to a game that doesn't have any but largely relies on either blind luck or the Mafia fucking up but still there is something in the struggle of trying to find a rigorous system that is somehow quietly reassuring to me in the absence of not knowing what the fuck else I'm supposed to do to avoid the Mafia smugly fucking us all over. I can sort of say at least I tried or something like that.

And I think the system would at least give the Mafia something to think about when voting and the idea that their brows might furrow even just for a second gives me a warm feeling inside.

The only other option I can see is having to believe my own bullshit.

Utisz
11-05-2014, 12:06 AM
Trying to clarify the qualms I wrote about earlier:

I feel like it will devolve into witch hunting anyway. If we follow this system, there's a chance that at least a few members of the mafia will vote for other mafia members.

Say A and B are mafia members. A makes a list with B at the top. A's list get's chosen; B gets lynched. Now A is free of suspicion, neutralizing the effect of B's lynch by decreasing the likelihood that we'll suspect A in the future.
If A makes a list with B at the top and A's list doesn't get chosen, they neither lose nor gain anything. If A makes a list with B at the top and A's list doesn't get chosen but a townie's list that has B at the top does get chosen-- so B gets lynched anyway-- A still gets to free themselves of suspicion.

The mafia may or may not use this strategy, but my point is that they may use it, ie, there's still plenty of room for witch hunts, manipulation, and paranoia if we use this system.

So basically, the mafia doesn't have much to lose or gain from it, nor do the townies.

Does this make any sense? What am I missing?

They may vote for Mafia in the usual scenario to throw us off the scent (esp. in cases where it doesn't matter). But every time they vote Mafia in the block, it costs them: it makes it more likely that the Mafia will be outed.

Thus every bluff on their part makes it more likely that a Mafia member will be outed.

Utisz
11-05-2014, 12:07 AM
... in other words, it doesn't remove the possibility of bluffing, but it does add a significant cost to bluffing.

LowIQLogan
11-05-2014, 12:14 AM
I don't know which system you are picking apart Dot but IMO lists are often superfluous information that benefit the mafia by adding confusion. All that really matters is the top name on your list ie who you vote for. Of course voting itself is not proof of innocence or guilt it is only information. mafia voting for another mafia is a very risky move in every situation. Every time we force that situation is a huge win IMO regardless of the nominal trust the voting mafia gets. It is a desperation move that can be telegraphed by timing and back fire on the mafia.

Blorg
11-05-2014, 12:25 AM
^my brain's not working right now-- I'm just trying to work my way through it. I'm sure it makes sense. I know that only the top name on the list matters-- I wrote about that in my previous post. Was that unclear?

I feel like after that A/B scenario happens (assuming it does), the mafia wouldn't have to worry about A being a high-level suspect in the future, and they would be able to blend in by listing townies at the tops of their lists that point on.

of course, the situation changes dramatically if one of the townies' lists happens to result in the lynch of B. But, assuming that the mafia follows the townies' footsteps when the townies are fairly unanimous about A, the likelihood that A will get lynched is much higher.

So maybe a good strategy for the townies would be to split their votes between two highly-ranked members each turn. That might put the mafia in a mildly stickier situation.

(it would be A, B ,C, and/or D irl...I don't think that affects much, just lengthens the process.)

I guess I'm not really disagreeing, just thinking through potential mafia strategies (and trying to wrap my brain around this stuff).

Anyway, what would be the first step in this plan? Should we get started/use it this round?

LordLatch
11-05-2014, 12:26 AM
Lists mean nothing to me. I need a chart.

Blorg
11-05-2014, 12:31 AM
I feel like after that A/B scenario happens (assuming it does), the mafia wouldn't have to worry about A being a high-level suspect in the future, and they would be able to blend in by listing townies at the tops of their lists that point on.

(Sorry for rambling, but to unpack this a bit more, I feel like there will always be enough discord that they'll be able to get away with listing fairly-suspicious townies at the tops of their lists after the A/B event happens. A won't feel obligated/pressured to list a mafia member in order to blend in at that point.)

msg_v2
11-05-2014, 12:31 AM
Well killing non-participants doesn't actually net you any actionable information, since no one is suggesting they're actually Mafia. They are deadweight though, and they're not giving us the information we need to establish their guilt or innocence. It's the rhetorical equivalent of a plea of "no-contest" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nolo_contendere), which is a de facto declaration of guilt.

If the vigilante fucks things up, the game can be over for the townies in essentially 4 rounds, with the fifth being a foregone conclusion. People don't have as many chances as they think.

Without the vigilante, a loss is unavoidable after five rounds of the townies guessing wrong.

msg_v2
11-05-2014, 12:45 AM
Well killing non-participants doesn't actually net you any actionable information, since no one is suggesting they're actually Mafia. They are deadweight though, and they're not giving us the information we need to establish their guilt or innocence. It's the rhetorical equivalent of a plea of "no-contest" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nolo_contendere), which is a de facto declaration of guilt.

We should be trying to get information, or else we waste a turn, unless we happen to pick Mafia.

How can getting rid of dead weight be good for the townies?

Polemarch
11-05-2014, 12:47 AM
How can getting rid of dead weight be good for the townies?

If they're Mafia, and staying quiet to avoid suspicion, then the benefit of killing them is obvious.

If they're townies, and aren't going to participate much (or at all) in the game, then the damage is still less than killing off an active/contributing townie.

Light Leak
11-05-2014, 12:50 AM
I'm a townie.

That's all I have to say for now until I catch up on all this stuff that has seemed to happen since this morning.

LowIQLogan
11-05-2014, 12:53 AM
Dot is slowly coming to the conclusion that no one can be trusted. Don't worry, without any luck we will all feel betrayed by the end if the game.

Noir
11-05-2014, 12:58 AM
If they're Mafia, and staying quiet to avoid suspicion, then the benefit of killing them is obvious.

If they're townies, and aren't going to participate much (or at all) in the game, then the damage is still less than killing off an active/contributing townie.

Precisely. It's Day 1, so it's more than likely that we're going to hit a Townie no matter what we do, since a) there is an overwhelming majority of Townies, and b) we have very limited information.

If we have limited information, we should be eliminating those who are limiting our information. =P (Say that three times fast)

Blorg
11-05-2014, 01:04 AM
LowIQLogan-- since you didn't read my original post before replying, it was hard for me to think about the content of your response, but I do agree with this:


It is a desperation move that can be telegraphed by timing and back fire on the mafia.

So it seems like it will boil down to this:

A selected B after it was clear that many members were voting for B. +mafia likelihood

On the other hand, it would be highly risky for A to vote for B, knowing that B is mafia. -mafia likelihood


I guess different members would prioritize these factors differently. So maybe we would want to prioritize the timing factor when we use this system. idk.

msg_v2
11-05-2014, 01:07 AM
If they're Mafia, and staying quiet to avoid suspicion, then the benefit of killing them is obvious.

If they're townies, and aren't going to participate much (or at all) in the game, then the damage is still less than killing off an active/contributing townie.

Perhaps, but we learn nothing and probably cause a lot of destructive paranoia.

I think we should pick an active player (I'm leaning towards Utisz, for reasons I'll be happy to explain, although there are other people I could be persuaded to go against), and then form a posse against them. Then, upon nighttime, the cop can investigate the ringleader of the posse, and determine whether or not they or mafia. This give us the opportunity to know for sure about the status of two players. If the ringleader of the posse is just a mafia member posing as a townsperson, we can know that for certain. If they are innocent and just a shitty player, we can determine that as well.

If we want to get rid of some other player with the goal of minimizing damage, I would also be willing to compromise and vote for a player that has medium levels of involvement. I think the moderately involved players are more likely to be mafia than either the heavily involved ones or the minimally involved ones. Using this criteria, some of the people who would not be chosen would include Hephaestus, Dot, Tele, Lethe, Utisz and LowIQLogan.

But picking off Granny Smith is dumb, because she could just be away from her computer and not able to participate at the moment.

I think Polemarch, Hephaestus, and Dot are probably safe, but I don't know that for certain.

Blorg
11-05-2014, 01:08 AM
Dot is slowly coming to the conclusion that no one can be trusted. Don't worry, without any luck we will all feel betrayed by the end if the game.

And yes, this was my original point: either way, whether we use the system or not, it will end up as the same old witch hunt. Possibly a witch hunt with some logic thrown in, but I'm still trying to convince myself of that.

msg_v2
11-05-2014, 01:10 AM
Does this make any sense? What am I missing?

It gives someone a greater degree of control and power over who gets lynched. If they're trustworthy, it's not a bad thing. If not ....

msg_v2
11-05-2014, 01:13 AM
I'm still pretty hazy as to what the actual benefits of it are.

P-O
11-05-2014, 01:24 AM
@Slab

So at what point would you say it's a good idea to kill the people who aren't talking? 2nd round? 3rd round? never?

As the game progresses, it becomes harder and harder to justify attacking the people who don't participate because our feet are in the fire and the fact that they don't participate means it's a shot in the dark.

msg_v2
11-05-2014, 01:28 AM
@Slab

So at what point would you say it's a good idea to kill the people who aren't talking? 2nd round? 3rd round? never?

As the game progresses, it becomes harder and harder to justify attacking the people who don't participate because our feet are in the fire and the fact that they don't participate means it's a shot in the dark.

We can cross that bridge when we come to it, if I'm still around, and I think I won't be. Maybe if it's the third round, and we still have no clue, we should go for it. But it seems stupid to do it at the beginning just because we don't know what else to do.

People who I think are probably townies are myself (obviously), Dot, Hephaestus, and Polemarch. There are two people I think are probably Mafia, and everyone else, I'm not sure about.

Blorg
11-05-2014, 01:38 AM
It gives someone a greater degree of control and power over who gets lynched. If they're trustworthy, it's not a bad thing. If not ....

idk-- in both versions of the game, the odds are that the suspect who tops the most lists will get chosen. For the first few turns, it's unlikely that we'll have much to work with. The 'system' doesn't change that or give us more control at that stage, but we most likely wouldn't target a correct suspect the traditional way either. But it will have a cumulative effect over a series of turns-- it will give us useful data to look at after we do catch a mafia member. That's why I'm pretty much in favor of it.

There's also a chance that a deviant vote will get picked. If that's the case, and it turns out that this member picked a townie, we won't have much to work with. If they chose a mafia member-- which I think it would make sense for mafia members to do-- that would be one instance in which the system starts to feel unwieldy/possibly detrimental to me for the following reasons (condensed/edited version of previous post fragments):

If we follow this system, there's a chance that at least a few members of the mafia will vote for other mafia members. Say A and B are mafia members. A makes a list with B at the top. A's list get's chosen; B gets lynched. Now A is free of suspicion, neutralizing the effect of B's lynch by decreasing the likelihood that we'll suspect A in the future. If A makes a list with B at the top and A's list doesn't get chosen, they neither lose nor gain anything. If A makes a list with B at the top and A's list doesn't get chosen but a townie's list that has B at the top does get chosen-- so B gets lynched anyway-- A still gets to free themselves of suspicion. The mafia may or may not use this strategy, but my point is that they may use it, ie, there's still plenty of room for witch hunts, manipulation, and paranoia if we use this system.

(it would be A, B ,C, and/or D irl...I don't think that affects much, just lengthens the process.)

I feel like after that A/B scenario happens (assuming it does), the mafia wouldn't have to worry about A being a high-level suspect in the future, and they would be able to blend in by listing townies at the tops of their lists from that point on; I feel like there will always be enough discord that they'll be able to get away with listing fairly-suspicious townies at the tops of their lists after the A/B event happens. Of course, the situation changes dramatically if one of the townies' lists happens to result in the lynch of B. But, assuming that the mafia follows the townies' footsteps when the townies are fairly unanimous about A, the likelihood that A will get lynched is much higher. So maybe a good strategy for the townies would be to split their votes between two highly-ranked members each turn. That might put the mafia in a mildly stickier situation.

So it seems like it will boil down to this:

A selected B after it was clear that many members were voting for B. +mafia likelihood

On the other hand, it would be highly risky for A to vote for B, knowing that B is mafia. -mafia likelihood

I guess different members would prioritize these factors differently. So maybe we would want to prioritize the timing factor when we use this system. idk. Either way, whether we use the system or not, it will end up as the same old witch hunt. Possibly a witch hunt with some logic thrown in, but I'm still trying to convince myself of that.

P-O
11-05-2014, 01:42 AM
There are two people I think are probably Mafia, Are these people listed in a previous post?

Light Leak
11-05-2014, 01:42 AM
Lists mean nothing to me. I need a chart.

You could make a chart if it helps. If you do, share it with us.


Ok, so the proposed block voting thing seems a little complicated. I don't quite understand how it works... the randomness equation part and all that and it makes me uneasy that I don't understand it.

We did a simpler block voting system in one of the past games, but I guess that system was easier for mafia to manipulate because it was all based on votes. We all voted on who we were going to block vote for. I'm not sure if the system helped find mafia or not.

The point I'm trying to get at. I'm not against block voting in rounds where we have nothing else to go on. I'm not sure if it helps or not, but it's a plan and it's better than nothing. I also can't really judge if Utisz's system is any better or not.

Blorg
11-05-2014, 01:43 AM
*"If that's the case, and it turns out that this member picked a townie, we won't have much to work with."

clarification: we won't have much to work with in terms of the system's benefits. I guess we'd drop the system the next turn and vote for the previous consensus or something.

msg_v2
11-05-2014, 01:57 AM
Another thing to keep in mind is the roles. The Mafia can investigate and find out which townies have which role, and bump them off, eliminating an important advantage of the townies. Because of this, in most games I've played, the roles tend to disappear pretty quickly. Therefore, we want to make decisions that maximize the use of the roles early on, since we will not have them for very long. So, we should keep in mind that we have a cop out there who has the ability to investigate people at night. We have the option to know for sure if someone is guilty if they lead the charge on a bad call. If we just say, "fuck it, let's pick someone who isn't saying anything, I can't think of anything else to do," (A popular option among townspeople in mafia games), who does the cop investigate? They have less leads. The decision to bump off a quiet player is one that happens out of desperation, not because someone wants to convince other people that a specific player needs to go based on specific statements and behaviors. If the quiet player turns out to be innocent, and the cop investigates (the cop cannot be blocked this turn, either, because the mafia can only know who the cop is if the Jack Of All trades used up an option) , there is no specific player among the people who voted for the quiet innocent people for the cop to pursue. The cop is stabbing in the dark, rather than confirming or denying people's suspicions. (Which is how the cop can help the townspeople. )


Are these people listed in a previous post?

It's Utisz and Lethe. I second Hephaestus on that.

Osito Polar
11-05-2014, 02:13 AM
slab is already p susceptible.

Oh, like your mom!


It's Utisz and Lethe. I second Hephaestus on that.

I was thinking Hephaestus was sounding a little shrill so far this game. The others, I don't know.

However, at this point I am going to officially withdraw my support from the voting system known as Utisz's Folly.

LordLatch
11-05-2014, 02:38 AM
You could make a chart if it helps. If you do, share it with us.

I'm not making a chart. I don't understand his system because I don't understand the game. He's making a lot of nonsense words.

lethe
11-05-2014, 02:44 AM
With so little information first round, I don't think we have any hope of using that information to narrow the choice towards alien-vampires. Any criteria/hunches we use might as well be random in regards to catching monsters. Better to simply accept that the first vote is a shot-in-the-dark that will likely hit a human.

If the vote isn't useful to eliminate monsters, we should pick targets whose loss will give advantage to the humans in some other way.

I only see two "target types" that do that:

- A strong/experienced character loss would (I think) hurt monsters more than humans, so is a better gamble (they have more to lose than us)
- A quiet character loss would benefit the town, as the more vocal the characters the easier time humans have of reading clues/get more to work with. Even quiet humans help hide monsters.


Targeting a strong player simply isn't going to happen. Deducing monsters first day simply isn't going to happen. Maybe we will get lucky with our guess. If not, I'm willing to accept the consolation prize of knowing at least the human we lost wasn't helping the human cause much.

It is too soon in the "day" for me to pick who is too quiet, but will likely be granny.

LowIQLogan
11-05-2014, 02:49 AM
Slab your criticisms are not very well thought out. The cop has the same amount of people to investigate no matter what, any person he investigates will be worth his time. The cop can only hope that the person he investigates is not killed by the mafia during the night. The cop wants everyone he investigates to stay alive in the game (if they die his special knowledge becomes public), for that reason he shouldn't investigate high profile people (anyone he thinks has a good chance of being killed anyways, I think this includes 'strong players' , non-contributors, and people already in the crosshairs of the townies for whatever reason) as his power was wasted if they die. Nothing we do can change the fact that the cop only has shots in the dark. The cop can't even confirm or deny people's suspicions until he outs himself which he wouldn't do until he already found a mafia and at that point it doesn't matter if we suspected that person as a mafia or not.

If the cop is really lucky he investigates a townie and a mafia the first two nights and on the third day tells the townie to pretend to be the cop and out the mafia. Then tries starts over with shots in the dark.

Anyways the point is that I don't think killing a non-contributor would hurt the cop's strategy at all and I'd rather kill a non-contributor than a 'strong player' first round. It is not an act of desperation, just insurance that the mafia are talking and giving us clues (however obfuscated and indecipherable those clues may be).

LowIQLogan
11-05-2014, 02:52 AM
I only see two "target types" that do that:

- A strong/experienced character
- A quiet character


agreed

msg_v2
11-05-2014, 02:57 AM
Slab your criticisms are not very well thought out. The cop has the same amount of people to investigate no matter what, any person he investigates will be worth his time. The cop can only hope that the person he investigates is not killed by the mafia during the night. The cop wants everyone he investigates to stay alive in the game (if they die his special knowledge becomes public), for that reason he shouldn't investigate high profile people (anyone he thinks has a good chance of being killed anyways, I think this includes 'strong players' , non-contributors, and people already in the crosshairs of the townies for whatever reason) as his power was wasted if they die. Nothing we do can change the fact that the cop only has shots in the dark. The cop can't even confirm or deny people's suspicions until he outs himself which he wouldn't do until he already found a mafia and at that point it doesn't matter if we suspected that person as a mafia or not.


I admit that I'm not entirely clear on how the cop works, because I've never been a cop, but they usually don't last long. I think high profile people are as likely to be mafia as quiet people. The logic that someone is a townsperson just because they are active doesn't hold water. People always mistrust the quiet players, and a smart member of the mafia would know that, and thus, not be quiet. So targeting a quiet player is a waste of time. If we pick an active player, and it's wrong, we have a new lead in one of the people organizing the posse, like Hephaestus or myself.




Anyways the point is that I don't think killing a non-contributor would hurt the cop's strategy at all and I'd rather kill a non-contributor than a 'strong player' first round. It is not an act of desperation, just insurance that the mafia are talking and giving us clues (however obfuscated and indecipherable those clues may be).

Correct, I'm certain that at least some mafia are talking, and already given us clues. Maybe I'm way off with my selections, but what are the alternatives?

I don't think everyone proposing to off a quiet person is mafia, but I think, if the quiet person is a townsperson, which the mafia would know, it makes sense for the mafia to go along with it.

Usually what happens when a quiet person is offed is that it turns out they were quiet for a totally stupid reason, like "oh, I had a busy day at work and i had to bathe my cat."

Noir
11-05-2014, 03:01 AM
Another thing to keep in mind is the roles. The Mafia can investigate and find out which townies have which role, and bump them off, eliminating an important advantage of the townies. Because of this, in most games I've played, the roles tend to disappear pretty quickly. Therefore, we want to make decisions that maximize the use of the roles early on, since we will not have them for very long. So, we should keep in mind that we have a cop out there who has the ability to investigate people at night. We have the option to know for sure if someone is guilty if they lead the charge on a bad call. If we just say, "fuck it, let's pick someone who isn't saying anything, I can't think of anything else to do," (A popular option among townspeople in mafia games), who does the cop investigate? They have less leads. The decision to bump off a quiet player is one that happens out of desperation, not because someone wants to convince other people that a specific player needs to go based on specific statements and behaviors. If the quiet player turns out to be innocent, and the cop investigates (the cop cannot be blocked this turn, either, because the mafia can only know who the cop is if the Jack Of All trades used up an option) , there is no specific player among the people who voted for the quiet innocent people for the cop to pursue. The cop is stabbing in the dark, rather than confirming or denying people's suspicions. (Which is how the cop can help the townspeople. )


You're exactly right, and exactly wrong. I think Town-aligned specials are very unlikely to be non-vocal players, as they have a vested interest in staying alive. THEREFORE we should MINIMIZE the chances of killing a special on the first day so that we can MAXIMIZE the utility of our specials. Not only does offing the non-participants relieve us of a potential liability, it also significantly obviates the chances of killing a special inadvertently among the more active players.

Kyuri
11-05-2014, 03:22 AM
Dear all,

Please note:

Slab_Bulkhead is the Innocent Child. That is, he is Town aligned.

(At any point during the game, the Innocent Child can tell me to confirm its alignment publicly.)

Utisz
11-05-2014, 03:23 AM
Well onto folly number 2. I did up a quick and dirty simulator which says that in 10,000 runs with 3 vanilla mafia and 12 vanilla townies where:


It starts with a day vote
Mafia randomly vote only from townies in day and night
Townies agree on a random pick from the players who have day-voted the most times for known townie in the past


... in this setup, Mafia wins 86.7% of the time. This doesn't include special roles but I don't think they can do that much to level this particular playing field. Unless very careful or very well informed or very lucky, the vigilante will probably end up just speeding the town towards inevitable doom. The innocent is basically a self-preserving damp squib that would be lucky to survive a night after using the ability. An adept cop might help a little bit by investigating for as long as possible and revealing all before they die (hopefully giving the vigilante a chance to survive) but they have a long way to go to close a 7:1 disadvantage. The jack-of-all-trades gives a slight nudge back again to the Mafia.

That said, I don't know what the special roles actually are in this reincarnation.

The simulation also doesn't include townies picking up on voting patterns by the Mafia, but so long as the Mafia don't leave an obvious trail and basically act dumb (i.e., clever dumb not dumb dumb), it's seems pretty clear to me the town needs a lot of luck.

Utisz
11-05-2014, 03:25 AM
Dear all,

Please note:

Slab_Bulkhead is the Innocent Child. That is, he is Town aligned.

(At any point during the game, the Innocent Child can tell me to confirm its alignment publicly.)


The innocent is basically a self-preserving damp squib that would be lucky to survive a night after using the ability.

Heh. :)

Noir
11-05-2014, 03:26 AM
:facepalm:

Dude why? Now you're just an outed Townie. You were in no danger of being lynched. You're not an obvious threat to the Mafia. There's is probably no Doctor. If there is a Town-aligned Jack-of-all-Trades, then he can only save you once. You're as good as dead. Why didn't you wait for the Endgame??? This doesn't help us at all.

msg_v2
11-05-2014, 03:26 AM
You're exactly right, and exactly wrong. I think Town-aligned specials are very unlikely to be non-vocal players, as they have a vested interest in staying alive. THEREFORE we should MINIMIZE the chances of killing a special on the first day so that we can MAXIMIZE the utility of our specials. Not only does offing the non-participants relieve us of a potential liability, it also significantly obviates the chances of killing a special inadvertently among the more active players.

Well, why would a cop come up with Utisz's schemes? A cop would have the ability to investigate people, and that scheme would also lessen the influence of the cop, since, even if most people get behind his choices, someone else could still get picked anyway.

Therefore, while there is doubt in my mind as to the guilt of Utisz, I do not think it is possible that he could be a cop.

msg_v2
11-05-2014, 03:27 AM
:facepalm:

Dude why? Now you're just an outed Townie. You were in no danger of being lynched. You're not an obvious threat to the Mafia. There's is probably no Doctor. If there is a Town-aligned Jack-of-all-Trades, then he can only save you once. You're as good as dead. Why didn't you wait for the Endgame??? This doesn't help us at all.

So that I can influence the outcome of the first vote, and also remain safe from an idiot vigilante.

msg_v2
11-05-2014, 03:30 AM
Also, people now at least know something for sure. I suspect I am almost certain to be dead now, but at least it's not by a vigilante. Now, if I was correct in my guesses, and I had also stayed silent, there was a good change the mafia would have picked me off anyway.

msg_v2
11-05-2014, 03:32 AM
Heh. :)

That's the second weird smile you've given me. Hmm.

Noir
11-05-2014, 03:41 AM
Well, why would a cop come up with Utisz's schemes? A cop would have the ability to investigate people, and that scheme would also lessen the influence of the cop, since, even if most people get behind his choices, someone else could still get picked anyway.

Therefore, while there is doubt in my mind as to the guilt of Utisz, I do not think it is possible that he could be a cop.

I didn't think Utisz was the Cop. I thought YOU were the Cop. Utisz is just trying to tip the scales in the Town's favor by coming up with novel voting schemas. Is it a bad idea? Probably. Is it Mafia behavior? I don't think so.


So that I can influence the outcome of the first vote, and also remain safe from an idiot vigilante.

Okay, great. I trust you now. So does everyone else. Congratulations on becoming mafia enemy #1 (http://forums.intpcomplex.com/usertag.php?do=list&action=hash&hash=1) . What can you tell us about the guilt/innocence of everyone else? Oh, you're in the dark too? Well I guess that kind of makes the knowledge of your trustworthiness completely fucking useless.


Also, people now at least know something for sure. I suspect I am almost certain to be dead now, but at least it's not by a vigilante. Now, if I was correct in my guesses, and I had also stayed silent, there was a good change the mafia would have picked me off anyway.

NO! There wasn't!! There is no way in HELL the Mafia would've killed you. I would have been SHOCKED if they had, in fact.

msg_v2
11-05-2014, 03:43 AM
NO! There wasn't!! There is no way in HELL the Mafia would've killed you. I would have been SHOCKED if they had, in fact.

If I was right, they might have. If I was wrong, that implicates some of the players who also suspected Utisz, so we have that as a lead.

Also, we now know that you are a townie. I'm pretty confident in that. I don't think your irritation is feigned.

Osito Polar
11-05-2014, 03:55 AM
Also, people now at least know something for sure. I suspect I am almost certain to be dead now, but at least it's not by a vigilante. Now, if I was correct in my guesses, and I had also stayed silent, there was a good change the mafia would have picked me off anyway.

That was one of the stupidest things I've ever seen someone do in a Mafia game.

Why are you worried about an idiot vigilante. You're not playing the vigilante too, are you? Kyuri say it isn't so. That would be so cruel of you.

msg_v2
11-05-2014, 03:56 AM
That was one of the stupidest things I've ever seen someone do in a Mafia game.

I'm glad to have provided that entertainment for you.

Noir
11-05-2014, 03:57 AM
@Slab how do I explain this to you? Being confirmed Townie is almost as bad as being confirmed Mafia. I have no desire of being confirmed Townie. In fact, your vote of confidence is perhaps the most dickish thing anyone's said to me all game. Please take it back.

msg_v2
11-05-2014, 03:58 AM
@Slab how do I explain this to you? Being confirmed Townie is almost as bad as being confirmed Mafia. I have no desire of being confirmed Townie. In fact, your vote of confidence is perhaps the most dickish thing anyone's said to me all game. Please take it back.

OK, you are mafia.

Kyuri
11-05-2014, 04:01 AM
is post-editing turned off for forum mods who are playing? cuz it should be.

That's a valid point. If any mod is able to edit can you please refrain? IIRC we couldn't prevent mods from editing in the previous game but I think we can take them at their words.

Noir
11-05-2014, 04:04 AM
OK, you are mafia.

Thank you kindly sir. A little mistrust goes a long way. You have no way of knowing this, since you'll be dead in the morning.

msg_v2
11-05-2014, 04:04 AM
That was one of the stupidest things I've ever seen someone do in a Mafia game.

Why are you worried about an idiot vigilante. You're not playing the vigilante too, are you? Kyuri say it isn't so. That would be so cruel of you.

Did you just edit your post? I swear you originally just had "that was one of the stupidest things I've ever seen someone do in a Mafia game." In fact, it's in my response. I would almost certainly have responded to the second section after the break if it had originally been included. So you do have the ability to edit posts.... Hmmm. Why would you lie about that?

msg_v2
11-05-2014, 04:05 AM
That's a valid point. If any mod is able to edit can you please refrain? IIRC we couldn't prevent mods from editing in the previous game but I think we can take them at their words.

Yes, mods are clearly editing, and they also said earlier that they couldn't.

Light Leak
11-05-2014, 04:05 AM
I'm not making a chart. I don't understand his system because I don't understand the game. He's making a lot of nonsense words.

Nevermind. Didn't realize you were talking about charts in reference to the system Utisz came up with. I thought you were talking about charts being useful in general. There's nothing to chart yet anyway.

msg_v2
11-05-2014, 04:11 AM
Thank you kindly sir. A little mistrust goes a long way. You have no way of knowing this, since you'll be dead in the morning.

I'm getting a little irritated with you now. I had a strategy and reasoning behind my decision, and yes, the fact that I wouldn't last the round was part of it. It was very much a calculated decision. Maybe it was wrong choice, but at least I'm not wafting like a breeze in the wind.

I also have a leg up over you in that I actually know the roles, through reading the first page. There is no Town Jack of All Trades or Doctor. I suppose there could be secret roles, but that seems unfair, and it's already hard enough for the townspeople to win as it is. Please read the first page before acting condescending. Thanks.

Noir
11-05-2014, 04:17 AM
Apologies to all for the confusion. I knew PMing would bite me in the ass some day.

Old setup if you were interested:

You are the Town's Innocent Child!
At any point during the game, you can tell me to confirm your alignment publicly. You win when the Town has eliminated all threats.

You are the Town Cop!
Every night, you can check a player's alignment to see if they are guilty or innocent. You win when the Town has eliminated all threats.

You (3) are the Mafia!
Once every night, you can kill one player. One of you should send me a PM with the name of that player — I will take the latest choice. You win when you have eliminated all other parties or when that condition is inevitable.
You will receive an invitation to join the mafia group shortly.

You are the Town Vigilante!
You have 3 kills in total. Every night, you can spend one or more of them to kill other players. You win when the Town has eliminated all threats.

You are the Mafia Jack-of-all-trades!
Each Night, you can target a player to either role-block (prevent that player from using any ability), protect (save that player from a kill targeted at them), or role-check (find out whether the player has any role). You can use each ability exactly once.


Some or all roles have been changed.

Yes, I am trying out mafia group this time.

Oh, you must be referring to this little gem. The one where Kyuri explicitly stated that Some or all roles have been changed. Meaning that we have no idea what the make-up of this game is, because it's a different game.

Hephaestus
11-05-2014, 04:21 AM
Also, we now know that you are a townie. I'm pretty confident in that. I don't think your irritation is feigned.
No. Don't go down that road. Not so.

Meta-moment: In a game I epicly fucked up, it was one of the mafia that gave me the biggest earful about it.


That was one of the stupidest things I've ever seen someone do in a Mafia game.

Whew. I might be out of the winner's seat.


And yes, I remember...:ph34r:

msg_v2
11-05-2014, 04:22 AM
Oh, you must be referring to this little gem. The one where Kyuri explicitly stated that Some or all roles have been changed. Meaning that we have no idea what the make-up of this game is, because it's a different game.

You know what, to hell with it. Good evening, mister townsperson.

msg_v2
11-05-2014, 04:23 AM
You would have been delighted if I called you a townsperson, and you were a mafia. It only makes sense to get irritated if you are a townsperson. I'm done being nice. Stop being selfish.

Hephaestus
11-05-2014, 04:25 AM
I also have a leg up over you in that I actually know the roles, through reading the first page. There is no Town Jack of All Trades or Doctor. I suppose there could be secret roles, but that seems unfair, and it's already hard enough for the townspeople to win as it is. Please read the first page before acting condescending. Thanks.
Usually, the roles are secret. Kyuri only revealed the roles because of a PM fuckup. It's unsafe to count on those being the real thing just because you drew a match with one of the previous roles.

Generally speaking, we only know the probable mix of mafia and specials by inference as we go along, and established guidelines for ratios on sites like mafiascum.

msg_v2
11-05-2014, 04:26 AM
Usually, the roles are secret. Kyuri only revealed the roles because of a PM fuckup. It's unsafe to count on those being the real thing just because you drew a match with one of the previous roles.

Generally speaking, we only know the probable mix of mafia and specials by inference as we go along, and established guidelines for ratios on sites like mafiascum.

Well, she had me as a vanilla townsperson first, and then changed it. I assumed that was what she was referring when she said she changed the roles.

Kyuri
11-05-2014, 04:26 AM
Please no bully, I might faint.


Oh, you must be referring to this little gem. The one where Kyuri explicitly stated that Some or all roles have been changed. Meaning that we have no idea what the make-up of this game is, because it's a different game.

Yes.

Hephaestus
11-05-2014, 04:29 AM
Please no bully, I might faint.

PM's... they almost always bite you in this game. Shame they're required at various points.

Noir
11-05-2014, 04:30 AM
I'm going to go smoke something.

Kyuri
11-05-2014, 04:31 AM
PM's... they almost always bite you in this game. Shame they're required at various points.

I meant the innocent child reveal, but that works too. ^^

msg_v2
11-05-2014, 04:31 AM
I'm going to go smoke something.

That's probably your answer to everything.

Noir
11-05-2014, 04:50 AM
That's probably your answer to everything.

I'm taking a leaf out of Thumper's book. Bambi is just ripe with solid life advice. Like don't wander into an open pasture unprotected when there are people who want your fuzzy pelt lurking in woods.

msg_v2
11-05-2014, 04:52 AM
I'm taking a leaf out of Thumper's book. Bambi is just ripe with solid life advice. Like don't wander into an open pasture unprotected when there are people who want your fuzzy pelt lurking in woods.

Great job, Mr. Townie.

msg_v2
11-05-2014, 04:56 AM
Wow, i wouldn't have joined if I thought the game was that intense.

Blorg
11-05-2014, 05:01 AM
I'm trying to verbalize how this game has made me feel so far and I can't.

https://38.media.tumblr.com/4592b727f0c9ec048fe5f8f9b2e112d3/tumblr_nebq6cgAKE1qav5oho1_500.jpg

I feel like the dog, the game warden, the hunter, the little gun, and the duck.

Blorg
11-05-2014, 05:02 AM
^the dead/dying duck i mean.

msg_v2
11-05-2014, 05:03 AM
^the dead/dying duck i mean.

Just be careful. It's serious business.

msg_v2
11-05-2014, 05:09 AM
By the way, I still suspect Utisz.

Osito Polar
11-05-2014, 05:10 AM
Yes, mods are clearly editing, and they also said earlier that they couldn't.

I said specifically that I CAN edit posts. I in fact can. However, they are tamper-evident in that they bear the timestamp/name of the person who edited them.

msg_v2
11-05-2014, 05:21 AM
I said specifically that I CAN edit posts. I in fact can. However, they are tamper-evident in that they bear the timestamp/name of the person who edited them.

I didn't see that on the post you edited. I saw no timestamp. Curious. You are beginning to replace Utisz as suspect number one.

Osito Polar
11-05-2014, 05:24 AM
I didn't see that on the post you edited. I saw no timestamp. Curious. You are beginning to replace Utisz as suspect number one.

Sigh.

The only reason there could be no timestamp is if I edited and you replied within one minute of my initial post. I often DO edit my posts within that timeframe after posting them, so if you want to go nuts over it feel free.

msg_v2
11-05-2014, 05:30 AM
Sigh.

The only reason there could be no timestamp is if I edited and you replied within one minute of my initial post. I often DO edit my posts within that timeframe after posting them, so if you want to go nuts over it feel free.


Then why didn't you say that at first. You said there would be a timestamp. Odd that you did not mention it.
I think I'll use some of my vigilante abilities this round.

Osito Polar
11-05-2014, 05:36 AM
Then why didn't you say that at first.

Because it almost never happens.

Kyuri
11-05-2014, 05:40 AM
Sigh.

The only reason there could be no timestamp is if I edited and you replied within one minute of my initial post. I often DO edit my posts within that timeframe after posting them, so if you want to go nuts over it feel free.

Since this rule is primarily for record purposes, I don't believe it'd be a huge problem to edit within that time (which is actually 10 minutes I believe). However, for the sake of transparency and fairness -- normal users can't edit at all, especially when this game can become very fast-paced, can you stop editing?

Apologies to all, I should have settled this issue in the beginning to avoid the current miscommunication. However, please consider this the last say on this matter.

Osito Polar
11-05-2014, 05:54 AM
Agreed. I won't do that from now on.

Kyuri
11-05-2014, 05:58 AM
<3

P-O
11-05-2014, 07:49 AM
Interesting evening. Lots of space drama.

P-O
11-05-2014, 08:02 AM
Primary suspect: Dirac.

LowIQLogan
11-05-2014, 08:14 AM
Lol slab, you have as firm of a grasp on how this game works as you have on the real world.

Light Leak
11-05-2014, 12:48 PM
Wow... you would think we were dealing with some sort of space mind control creature instead of space vampires with all this drama.

We need to decide what we're doing today. Those of us who haven't voted yet at least. I OK with going with Granny Smith as she has yet to appear this round, but it seems highly possible that she may have not logged in recently enough to realize this had started.

Still we have to go with someone.


Primary suspect: Dirac.

Any particular reason?

Utisz
11-05-2014, 01:40 PM
On the Granny Smith side of things, in my mind she is Mafia with only the initial probability. It might make sense to get rid of her but the catch is that we won't get much information from that. There's nothing to follow up on.


Sticking with the whole hunches thing, the only player that has made my spidey senses tingle a little was Dr. Ahcir. They started tingling with this post:


This is what I think. The first day is a shot in the dark. As a noob, I'm naturally distrustful of anyone who knows more of what to do than I do.

I see a lot of folk voting for lethe and I'm inclined to agree as she's a noob also but knee deep in this thread. Not knowing what to do wouldn't stop me form being very vocal if I was of the spacey undead because I would be obligated to act since there are only two. As a townie, I can rest on my laurels and wait for my fellow townfolk to weed out this evil.

She's talking too much to be new and benign. Especially since this is day one and any vote is a shot in the dark.

How many times in the past has killing Polemarch day yielded a 50% reduction in mafia?

It just feels like a strange way to put things and a forced way of saying "look at me fellow townfolk, I think there are only two Mafia because I am not in the Mafia". It's the sort of dumb-clever have-a-little-fun-with-the-town ploy a noob Mafia might use. In particular, I don't know where the confident presumption that there would be just two Mafia could have come from. In particular, if I were a noob, I would at least read the opening posts with the instructions and I would have seen that there were at least three mafia in the stillborn game (4 if the jack of all trades wasn't inclusive). Neither statement really needs the fact that there are only two Mafia but rather in both cases it's strapped on. The repetition also feels weird ... it really feels like someone deliberately set out to post that there are only two Mafia.



And what of inexperienced players?


I'm a townie and I think Dot is aggressive.



There are four mafia members, not two.

Are you telling me this to scare me?


I'm ex military so the fulfill-your-duty thing is deeply ingrained and I can't stand freeloaders. I wasn't saying I was right. I was saying what I would be thinking/doing if I was a noob assigned mafia. I'm not even pointing per se. I was doing what tele told me too.


Which post was that?



@Dr.Ahcir, #36 (http://forums.intpcomplex.com/usertag.php?do=list&action=hash&hash=36) :

Thank you! :wub:

Are you evil?


Lists mean nothing to me. I need a chart.


I'm not making a chart. I don't understand his system because I don't understand the game. He's making a lot of nonsense words.


Adjusting for confirmation bias, it is still slightly fishy perhaps? Like when you fry a fish and then you wash the pan and the next day you make eggs and you can taste fish off them so then the next time you fry a fish and wash the pan more and the next day you make eggs again and you're not sure if the taste of fish is merely because you're asking yourself if the eggs taste of fish again or if they actually taste of fish so this is like that second serving of eggs basically.

On the plus side, if Dr. Ahcir turns out to be Mafia, I think Dot would be worth looking up afterwards since some of the posts of Dr. Ahcir in reply to Dot came across in that messing-around-with-the-town-sort-of-way.

I know it's far from concrete, but for sure my curiosity would be most satisfied by looking up Dr. Ahcir.

What do y'all think?

LordLatch
11-05-2014, 01:55 PM
I was waking up today thinking who I was going to vote for and your name came to mind. Now I log in and see this:

On the Granny Smith side of things, in my mind she is Mafia with only the initial probability. It might make sense to get rid of her but the catch is that we won't get much information from that. There's nothing to follow up on.


Sticking with the whole hunches thing, the only player that has made my spidey senses tingle a little was Dr. Ahcir. They started tingling with this post:



It just feels like a strange way to put things and a forced way of saying "look at me fellow townfolk, I think there are only two Mafia because I am not in the Mafia". It's the sort of dumb-clever have-a-little-fun-with-the-town ploy a noob Mafia might use. In particular, I don't know where the confident presumption that there would be just two Mafia could have come from. In particular, if I were a noob, I would at least read the opening posts with the instructions and I would have seen that there were at least three mafia in the stillborn game (4 if the jack of all trades wasn't inclusive). Neither statement really needs the fact that there are only two Mafia but rather in both cases it's strapped on. The repetition also feels weird ... it really feels like someone deliberately set out to post that there are only two Mafia.



















Adjusting for confirmation bias, it is still slightly fishy perhaps? Like when you fry a fish and then you wash the pan and the next day you make eggs and you can taste fish off them so then the next time you fry a fish and wash the pan more and the next day you make eggs again and you're not sure if the taste of fish is merely because you're asking yourself if the eggs taste of fish again or if they actually taste of fish so this is like that second serving of eggs basically.

On the plus side, if Dr. Ahcir turns out to be Mafia, I think Dot would be worth looking up afterwards since some of the posts of Dr. Ahcir in reply to Dot came across in that messing-around-with-the-town-sort-of-way.

I know it's far from concrete, but for sure my curiosity would be most satisfied by looking up Dr. Ahcir.

What do y'all think?

My question is: What does this have to do with fish?

Utisz
11-05-2014, 02:00 PM
My question is: What does this have to do with fish?

fishy
adjective

relating to or resembling fish or a fish. "a fishy smell"
informal arousing feelings of doubt or suspicion. "I'm convinced there is something fishy going on"


Number 2 there.

LordLatch
11-05-2014, 02:00 PM
Why did your name come to mind? It stands to reason you could cover your guilt by yammering constantly about your Half Baked Alien Revealing System™ running Monte Carlo simulations with 10000 iterations and such like you REALLY want the town folk to win. I'm not buying it.

Take your snake oil to the other side of town.

Utisz
11-05-2014, 02:05 PM
Why did your name come to mind? It stands to reason you could cover your guilt by yammering constantly about your Half Baked Alien Revealing System™ running Monte Carlo simulations with 10000 iterations and such like you REALLY want the town folk to win. I'm not buying it.

Take your snake oil to the other side of town.

Or I could just really want the town to win.

How did you become so sure that there were only two mafia? As a noob, did you read the opening posts or not?

LordLatch
11-05-2014, 02:15 PM
Or I could just really want the town to win.

How did you become so sure that there were only two mafia? As a noob, did you read the opening posts or not?

I glanced at the opening post but I read the story and saw the dig the op made at me by putting words in my mouth that I would never say. I thought there were two because I watched a video about playing Mafia and didn't do the math for adjusting for how many players there are in this game. I'm not embarrassed the mistake- it's common for me to only skim long posts.

I just want to town to win also but and unsure as to how to proceed but I do know it's appropriate for me to stay true to the Dr. Ahcir persona which is subset of the character of actual meatspace unit.

Blorg
11-05-2014, 02:33 PM
well it's hard for me to respond without providing 'evidence' since you suggest that Dr. Ahcir and I are both mafia... but he really doesn't seem like mafia to me. I mean, several other players (including you Utisz, I think) missed information in the opening posts.

But I agree with your last point-- it's strange he jumped to the conclusion that there are only two mafia.
Dr. Ahcir, could you provide a link to the video you watched about playing mafia?

LordLatch
11-05-2014, 02:35 PM
well it's hard for me to respond without providing 'evidence' since you suggest that Dr. Ahcir and I are both mafia... but he really doesn't seem like mafia to me. I mean, several other players (including you Utisz, I think) missed information in the opening posts.

But I agree with your last point-- it's strange he jumped to the conclusion that there are only two mafia.
Dr. Ahcir, could you provide a link to the video you watched about playing mafia?


Yes I can but it'll have to wait till I get back home in a few hours.

Utisz
11-05-2014, 02:40 PM
I glanced at the opening post but I read the story and saw the dig the op made at me by putting words in my mouth that I would never say. I thought there were two because I watched a video about playing Mafia and didn't do the math for adjusting for how many players there are in this game. I'm not embarrassed the mistake- it's common for me to only skim long posts.

I just want to town to win also but and unsure as to how to proceed but I do know it's appropriate for me to stay true to the Dr. Ahcir persona which is subset of the character of actual meatspace unit.

That's a fairly reasonable explanation, but based on having pretty much nothing else to go on, and the fact that if you're Mafia we might learn something about Dot, and that the post I highlighted above still comes across as staged, and that the town can only and thus must rely on signals like this, and that I am by far and away most curious about you, you're still topping my list.


well it's hard for me to respond without providing 'evidence' since you suggest that Dr. Ahcir and I are both mafia... but he really doesn't seem like mafia to me. I mean, several other players (including you Utisz, I think) missed information in the opening posts.

But I agree with your last point-- it's strange he jumped to the conclusion that there are only two mafia.
Dr. Ahcir, could you provide a link to the video you watched about playing mafia?

I'm just suggesting that it's something. And something for me is better than nothing (or voting for Granny). My curiosity is piqued.

I second the call to see the video. :)

msg_v2
11-05-2014, 03:04 PM
My thinking was to try to influence the voting early on, and hopefully build up some momentum, or at least persuade people from making what I think is a bad choice. (If I had been a vigilante, I probably wouldn't use my powers at all.)


On the Granny Smith side of things, in my mind she is Mafia with only the initial probability. It might make sense to get rid of her but the catch is that we won't get much information from that. There's nothing to follow up on.


Agreed.



Sticking with the whole hunches thing, the only player that has made my spidey senses tingle a little was Dr. Ahcir. They started tingling with this post:

It just feels like a strange way to put things and a forced way of saying "look at me fellow townfolk, I think there are only two Mafia because I am not in the Mafia". It's the sort of dumb-clever have-a-little-fun-with-the-town ploy a noob Mafia might use. In particular, I don't know where the confident presumption that there would be just two Mafia could have come from.

I thought this was strange, too. I've also had more doubts about your Mafiahood than I've let on. I think it's more and more likely that you just enjoy spitballing elaborate ideas ( a tendency by no means unique to you.)

He's also one of the people keeping a medium profile, which I think is more suspicious than either being active or keeping quiet. Smart mafia players are aware of having to walk a tightrope.



I'll drop you from my suspicions for the time being, and go with Dr. Ahcir. I'll vote for Dr. Ahcir as a space vampire.

Blorg
11-05-2014, 03:18 PM
The reason I'm still leaning towards Granny Smith is that it becomes more and more costly to vote for inactive players as the game progresses and we have stronger suspicions about active players. So I think it's good to kill off inactive ones sooner rather than later.

I'm still voting for Granny Smith at this point. (It seems like the system would be useful this turn, since we won't reach a strong consensus. Is that not going to happen?)

Utisz
11-05-2014, 04:22 PM
I thought this was strange, too. I've also had more doubts about your Mafiahood than I've let on. I think it's more and more likely that you just enjoy spitballing elaborate ideas ( a tendency by no means unique to you.)

He's also one of the people keeping a medium profile, which I think is more suspicious than either being active or keeping quiet. Smart mafia players are aware of having to walk a tightrope.

I'll drop you from my suspicions for the time being, and go with Dr. Ahcir. I'll vote for Dr. Ahcir as a space vampire.

Okay great!


The reason I'm still leaning towards Granny Smith is that it becomes more and more costly to vote for inactive players as the game progresses and we have stronger suspicions about active players. So I think it's good to kill off inactive ones sooner rather than later.

I'm still voting for Granny Smith at this point.

Well that would sort of fit with my possible theory that you're both Mafia, heh. But maybe let's see what Dr. Ahcir is first before casting premature aspersions.


(It seems like the system would be useful this turn, since we won't reach a strong consensus. Is that not going to happen?)

I don't think so. There's only three in favour at the moment: me, you and tele. I still think it's an interesting system, but I sort of messed up by initially overcomplicating it and I think Logan made some good points: in particular, the logistics of it without Kyuri's help would be difficult and I understand why Kyuri doesn't want to get involved.

And at the moment, my priority is to confirm/deny my suspicions about Dr. Ahcir. If he is Mafia, it could be a great lead to work on! So ...



I would really like to hear as many other thoughts on Dr. Ahcir as possible (esp. based on this post (http://forums.intpcomplex.com/showthread.php?1783-Mafia-II-Space-Vampires-(or-something)&p=71225&viewfull=1#post71225)). If he does turn out to be Mafia, these opinions will be great info for the town!

Blorg
11-05-2014, 04:44 PM
I thought you were opposed to pointing fingers. This isn't based on real evidence* and I don't trust your spidey senses because your spidey senses implied that I'm mafia, which I'm not. Dr. Ahcir and lethe (and me) are new players and they're still getting used to the game, which I think is why they both caused so much suspicion early on. If I were a noob mafia I would keep quiet and let the professional(s) talk; noob townies are more likely to test the waters and think aloud, like lethe and Dr. Ahcir.

I just feel that it makes more sense to vote for an inactive player at this stage of the game, for the reasons I listed above. Pressuring people into voting for Dr. Ahcir based on instincts and simultaneously accusing non-supporters of being mafia is a bad strategy for a townie; the manipulation prevents us from seeing and acting on the situation clearly.

*If Dr. Ahcir fails to come up with a video link in the next few hours, that will change the story, obviously.

(if we do decide to go with Dr. Ahcir this round and he turns out to be mafia, I guess I'm done for. But I guess if that situation happens, I won't have been a very useful townie anyway so it won't be so much of a loss.)