Ace wrote:I would challenge that if you aren't thinking about possible game scenarios, then you aren't fully considering the consequences of the actions you perform in the game. I apologise for saying my thoughts outloud.
Well it sure looks like speculation to me. Right now, we don't have enough information to be guessing at the setup.
Ace wrote:But it's not speculation. It was simply speaking in hypotheticals. "If X then Y". I could have just as easily said "If we lynch the panda then the serpents will kill the DVD player tonight".
No where did I say or imply that I thought X was the case or any specifics about the game or roles involved. Well, I did say that there were 4ish scum, but I think that's a given in this type of game.
I'm not a dictionary, and I don't want to argue as such, but speculation in my book Isn't necessarily 'saything somthing must be true'. The point is that you are guessing around at the setup with no information, or scummy information. Nothing is a given in mafia. There is no way you can map out a setup on day 1, or even a hypothetical one.
AddyMuyo: lesbians love their dogs
lordgurgi: I'm more of a cat guy.
Eteocles wrote:There is no way you can map out a setup on day 1, or even a hypothetical one.
Actually I can map out a large number of hypothetical setups on day 1. I could create a list of them right here. It would include everything from 1 red, to 6 red, with some number of power roles thrown in for flavor. I was only choosing one of the worst-case hypothetical scenarios to try to figure out why Remus jumped on my L-3. Since he didn't seem inclined to answer my "L-3 question" at that point of the game, I was trying to answer it myself.
Ace wrote:Although, if he was was bandwagoned, and happened to be vig; and mafia and SK didn't crossfire the whole game, then it does get down to 1 town, 1 mafia and 1 SK on day 4. But this situation requires quite a few improbable events to occur all at once.
How does this explain anything?
Ace wrote:Actually I can map out a large number of hypothetical setups on day 1. I could create a list of them right here. It would include everything from 1 red, to 6 red, with some number of power roles thrown in for flavor.
And how does this help us at all?
AddyMuyo: lesbians love their dogs
lordgurgi: I'm more of a cat guy.
Ace wrote:Although, if he was was bandwagoned, and happened to be vig; and mafia and SK didn't crossfire the whole game, then it does get down to 1 town, 1 mafia and 1 SK on day 4. But this situation requires quite a few improbable events to occur all at once.
How does this explain anything?
Let me run through the sequence of events and my thought process real quick. I put TG at L-3, and Remus said that L-3 was too far, which didn't make much sense to me. So I started wondering what would happen if 3 scum managed to hammer him real quick. I assumed only scum would vote since if L-3 was too far, then L-2, L-1 and hammer would be as well. So the town would know who 3 scum were with only a sacrifice of 1 townie. Which seems like a pretty good deal, but if the events I described above exist and occur, then it results in a game the town can't win. Which I guess means that L-3 really is too far, but only if this worst-case scenario is what exists; which is the point I was trying to make.
Instead of proposing the killed player was a vig, I should have generalized it into "the town only has one method of killing scum and doesn't stop any night kill". Essentially, my worst-case was that town were killed at 2 per night and only killed reds at 1 per night.
Eteocles wrote:
Ace wrote:Actually I can map out a large number of hypothetical setups on day 1. I could create a list of them right here. It would include everything from 1 red, to 6 red, with some number of power roles thrown in for flavor.
And how does this help us at all?
It doesn't really. You just stated that I couldn't map out a hypothetical setup on day 1, and I was pointing out that mafia games branch from a finite list of possible setups. I still maintain that if you should consider what consequences your actions bring in worst-case scenarios. Which is what I was considering earlier this game.
TrustGossip wrote:Not really holding my breath, it's called summer classes and a typically asinine start of Day One (this is only half-sarcasm, I would prefer not to be labeled counterproductive).
In the interests of renewing productivity, would it be too early to make little behavioral analyses on everyone? I find that even if scum use it to slander innocents, it generally provides good information from intelligent townspeople.
TrustGossip wrote:I just got prodded.
Nothing important or significant has really happened since I last posted.
*rapidly grows bored again and leaves*
1. Why are you relying on others to provide content to comment on? Where are your thoughts on all of this?
2. Viewing your posts from recently in this thread, calling you counterproductive would probably be accurate.
I'll wait for you to get unbored and come back. I'm not feeling all the lurking in this thread, but singled you out since you were the only one that didn't promise to come back and post something.
Remus wrote:Random voting helps scum because the longer the game is random, the longer they can hide behind it being random when cases are built against them, and difuse problems FOR THE SCUM more easily.
One thing about random voting, is that it's only random when you do it for no reason. If people jumped on your bandwagon to put pressure, to start discussion, and so on, the votes are not random. In fact, in the next day, these votes may be used as evidence again people, so they do have usefulness for the town.
The only useless vote, is one generated by dice or random.org.
And for all your talking of random voting being bad, your random vote of yours truly, from that start of the game, several pages back, is still on me.
Actually, Yellowbounder, by your very definition of random, my vote is not random. I gave a reason for it, I didn't role a die or go to random.org.
That being said, you are the most experienced player on my bandwagon. You should know that the speed of which I was gathering votes verse the amount of discussion happening by the town could never result in an effective day 1 for the town. Thus, my vote, whilst initially placed with no in-game reasoning, now stays because of the decisive untown play.
Now, life is civilized. Once there was a city, barbaric in its ways. Yet, they were an empire. But even before that, they were two brothers. They fought. Remus said ow, and it all began.
Aceiks wrote:I repost this question I asked of Qman on the previous page:
But as a relief of the "attack Remus" monotony I would like to ask a question of Qman of why you completely misrepresented Remus in post 117
He will not claim no matter what
This isn't even close to what he said, as even a casual glance of his posts would indicate.
See my post #120
No, I saw that post. You are saying that the meaning that you got from his post was something that he didn't say at all. I'm confused as to why you say the meaning you got from his post in no way related to the wording.
Ok, so I have a few things to discuss/state. Six people (me included) voted to lynch Remu on Day 1. The reasons were various, but that's not the point of this post. I'd like to shed light on the fact that we can probably assume there's anywhere between 3-5 mafia. Once Remu hit 6, there was PLENTY of time for the scum to throw in one more vote. This leads to two pronounced possiblities.
1. All of the mafia were already on Remu.
2. Remu is scum and they didn't want to see him die.
If Remu had proved to be a townsperson, we could have blamed no one but ourselves. Depending on the mafia numbers (the more there are, the better it would have been for them), it makes more or less sense for them to have "revealed" (the last vote) one of their numbers at the beginning in order to go ahead and kill a townsperson.
The mafia's goal is never to kill all the townspeople, rather it's to get an appropriate ratio that damn near guarantees a win for them assuming none or few of the specialized roles exist in this game. Once that ratio is hit, they win. If you don't understand this paragraph, I can expand upon it further.
Thus, we're left with deciding which of the two scenarios is most likely. I seriously doubt all or most of the mafia were already on Remu and that they were sparing his life to help keep themselves hidden. I find it much more likely that Remu is indeed scum and he wasn't lynched because of it.
My vote stands.
"Truth and Falsehood were bathing. Falsehood came out of the water first and dressed herself in Truth's clothes. Truth, unwilling to put on the garments of Falsehood, went naked." - Unknown
you realize that, your reasoning excepted purely because you'll never believe that you're wrong, there was no actual reason to vote for me, thus, whoever hammered me was sure to be in serious question tomorrow, and thus the scum wouldn't want to do it. Sure, this is wifom, but what the hell, since I have/had 6 votes on me because I said a random wagon to the point of lynch -3 wasn't random anymore and shouldn't be called as such, but did so in not as plain lnaguage, what else is there to fall back on.
Now, life is civilized. Once there was a city, barbaric in its ways. Yet, they were an empire. But even before that, they were two brothers. They fought. Remus said ow, and it all began.
Remu, I think you misunderstand me. My reasoning for voting for you has now changed. Before it was more random bandwagoning than anything else. Now I vote for you not for anything you have said, but for what others have done and not done. It no longer really matters "how" you got to L-1, only that you did and what that speaks of other people.
"Truth and Falsehood were bathing. Falsehood came out of the water first and dressed herself in Truth's clothes. Truth, unwilling to put on the garments of Falsehood, went naked." - Unknown
If there was any reason at all behind the votes, then a scum could have dropped the hammer without exess notice. But, with the more or less randomness of the bandwagon, a hammer from would draw undue attention to said scum.
Would you, as a scum player, want to draw undue attention to yourself?
And the name is Remus.
Now, life is civilized. Once there was a city, barbaric in its ways. Yet, they were an empire. But even before that, they were two brothers. They fought. Remus said ow, and it all began.
Sonicpulsar wrote:Depending on the mafia numbers (the more there are, the better it would have been for them), it makes more or less sense for them to have "revealed" (the last vote) one of their numbers at the beginning in order to go ahead and kill a townsperson.
You obviously aren't reading everything I'm writing. Depending upon the number of mafia, they may not care to "sacrifice" one of their own to ultimately win.
Suppose we had killed you and you were a townsperson, then they kill another townie at night. The "best" case scenario is that we wind up killing the scum who cast the last vote to kill you. Assuming we don't screw that up, that'd leave 3 townies dead and 1 scum dead at the end of Night 2. That leaves only 8 people in the game, with probably 2+ (my guess is there are at least 4 in the game, possibly 5). If we assume the worst case scenario for the mafia (only having 3 people at the beginning) is less likely. That means they've gone from 4/12 or 5/12 down to 3/8 or 4/8. Which is very MUCH to their advantage. Even if they started with 3/12, having 2/8 by the end of night 2, their ratio hasn't changed.
I state all of this because it seems to me that it was a wise move for the mafia to kill you if you're a townie, even if it reveals one of them, but you were not killed when I "think" they had the chance. This leads me to believe that we're sitting on my second scenario. You're scum.
My vote stands.
"Truth and Falsehood were bathing. Falsehood came out of the water first and dressed herself in Truth's clothes. Truth, unwilling to put on the garments of Falsehood, went naked." - Unknown
You're an idiot. No, sorry, I'll leave the ad hominem attacks out of it. Your argument is false. Reread your last statement. Where you prove that the scums best interest is to lynch me. Because, as you'll see, you state that we lynch the hammer. And then you prove that if he is scum, they're no worse off. So then, you use this to claim that I'm not dead, thus I must be a scum. What you, however, are missing is that this entire argument is WIFOM, in that you are attempting to determine statistically what a scum would do, however, the nature of this game states very clearly that if you act as you should, you will lose. So, you're basing your entire argument begining on the assumption that the scum are not playing to win, but, are, indeed playing to lose.
Now, life is civilized. Once there was a city, barbaric in its ways. Yet, they were an empire. But even before that, they were two brothers. They fought. Remus said ow, and it all began.
Wow. You're still missing my point. I was providing evidence for why I think 1 of my 2 scenarios exist. After that, I lend evidence to why I think it's scenario 2 over scenario 1. The entire reason why I think these scenarios exist is because I assume the mafia are playing to win.
I can't think of a good reason for why you weren't lynched when only one more vote needed to be cast unless you're scum. Can you provide me a REASONABLE and PROBABLE scenario that exists for why you weren't lynched under the assumption you're not scum?
"Truth and Falsehood were bathing. Falsehood came out of the water first and dressed herself in Truth's clothes. Truth, unwilling to put on the garments of Falsehood, went naked." - Unknown
I'd suggest that since the mafia DID NOT lynch you on the first day, they are "playing to lose" as you so eloquently put it or that you're scum. I wasn't attempting to show any real "statistics". I was purely stating the outcomes from 3 different starting conditions. All 3 outcomes spoke for the fact that it (seems to me) it would have been wise for the mafia to lynch you unless you're one of them. I am (and was) the first to admit that my statements are based on a few assumptions.
As I stated in my previous post. Show me why it was wise for the mafia to not lynch you if you are NOT one of them.
"Truth and Falsehood were bathing. Falsehood came out of the water first and dressed herself in Truth's clothes. Truth, unwilling to put on the garments of Falsehood, went naked." - Unknown
because the attention in an early lynch goes immeadiately to the hammerer.
I also claimed. And was not a power role. Scum don't want me, they want to out said power roles so that they can remove the town's helpers.
So, again, show me how your scenarios aren't using statistics?
If we assume the worst case scenario for the mafia (only having 3 people at the beginning) is less likely. That means they've gone from 4/12 or 5/12 down to 3/8 or 4/8. Which is very MUCH to their advantage. Even if they started with 3/12, having 2/8 by the end of night 2, their ratio hasn't changed.
Because, while not raw percentages that are the form of stats that the populace are used to seeing, it does still look a damn lot like my stats homework. Except it makes less sense.
Now, life is civilized. Once there was a city, barbaric in its ways. Yet, they were an empire. But even before that, they were two brothers. They fought. Remus said ow, and it all began.
All I did was state a few scenarios that exist. I never really took it any further, I never fleshed out my own personal views of the percentages, etc. I gave a QUALITATIVE analysis, not a QUANTITATIVE analysis (generally associated with statistics). But this is really a moot point. In fact, I'm getting fairly tired of having any sort of discussion with you because you don't seem to pay attention or listen to details.
To answer the first part of your list post, I already discussed that even in the town's best case scenario and we can 100% guarantee a death of a mafia after Day 1 (the scum revealed himself as the hammerer), it'd still be to the advantage of the mafia, with the small caveat that we'd still be relatively in the dark about the rest of the mafia. While I know that's not exactly the case, it shouldn't have been such a strong motivation as to warrant NOT lynching you when they had the chance.
You still have not attempted to refute my above claim. Even if a hammerer was lynched on Day 2, they'd still be at an advantage (most likely) or on par with where they were before, but with less people (less likely, requires there are only 3 mafia to begin with).
Did I miss anything about the existence or non-existence of specialized roles in this game? As far as I know, it's still up in the air but with it being a mini game, I've been going with the assumption that there are not.
"Truth and Falsehood were bathing. Falsehood came out of the water first and dressed herself in Truth's clothes. Truth, unwilling to put on the garments of Falsehood, went naked." - Unknown
I have never been in a game without at least a cop or a doctor.
Ace, comment on the discussion between sonic and myself, if you're still around.
Or anyone else.`
Now, life is civilized. Once there was a city, barbaric in its ways. Yet, they were an empire. But even before that, they were two brothers. They fought. Remus said ow, and it all began.
