Open 850: Democrabilities (Postgame)

[MalcolmTucker]

Greeting the game. Unforgiveable.

VOTE: MalcolmTucker

My first post was a joke. I also think the greeting tell is is pretty stupid. "Hello All" wouldn't even qualify as an example. It was just a bit of meaningless content I came up with for us to read alignment into later.

Reading back first page, Furtive's clarficiation re making a joke feels a little bit overly defensive to me? I know there was a vote for him afterwards but I feel like just about everyone would have been aware that it was a joke, and the follow-up afterwards feels slightly panicky.

Nice try but no. Goldfish's 11 clearly took it seriously and voted me for it. So I clarified. Let me anticipate your response. 'Oh furtiveglance clarifying once again, this is clearly scum on the back foot getting so defensive. Besides, even if he is town, let's get some info'.

Goldfish's vote didn't really read like much of a scumread though but more of a tongue-in-cheek annoyed policy vote early on - indeed quite frankly anyone who claims on page one of a game they reckon they've caught mafia is generally always going to be lying because at that point it's all gut reads.

I don't think your response is particularly scummy for what it's worth, albeit it's quite defensive, but 16 pinged me precisely because it felt like such an overblown response to a daft early policy vote.

[MalcolmTucker]

Let me just say, I am very cautious of anyone peddling the holy grail of 'info'. It's become a buzzword that scum (and town for some reason) love to hold up as the key to town winning the game. The fact is, we aren't robots. Town push town, scum push town, town defend town, scum defend town. So the idea of just voting someone at random for 'info' is inherently stupid and pointless. I'm pretty sure that if we end up double eliminating today two townies will die, and people will use the VCA as a tool to further their own scum agenda/town tunneling anyway. A much better idea is to no eliminate first, then agree on one vote.

Well...yeah, this is just describing how mafia works and is a bit of a nothing statement. I certainly don't think we should blindly go all-out on two eliminations to gain info but by the same token I don't think it's necessarily a horrible idea to play around with some wagons if we're interested in them to see how players react when under pressure. 'Info' may not be a holy grail but ultimately the only way we have a good chance of solving any game beyond mere chance is by pressing players for info and seeing what we get back from that, no?

[MalcolmTucker]

I say this as someone who tends not to be a huge in-game voter for what it's worth - I'll generally only switch around two/three times a turn at most unless a game gets particularly chaotic. But I feel like the first part of Furtive's post there isn't saying anything at all and shows a certain caginess at the idea of major pushes this early on.

[Flea The Magician]

Nope. We are eliminating. Eliminations are information. That's a load of hogwash from scum looking to deny information.

VOTE: furtiveglance

Try me.
You're also voting the wrong person.

9 -> 1+1:1 -> 6 Misyeet and Lose.
6 -> 1:1 > 4 Scum Partity win -or- Misyeet and lose.
4 -> 1:1 > 2 Scum Parity win.

9 -> 1:1 -> 7
7 -> 1:1 -> 5 Potential YOLO.
5 -> 1:1 -> 3 YOLO.


I much, much prefer the second option.

[Radical Rat]

Let me just say, I am very cautious of anyone peddling the holy grail of 'info'. It's become a buzzword that scum (and town for some reason) love to hold up as the key to town winning the game. The fact is, we aren't robots. Town push town, scum push town, town defend town, scum defend town. So the idea of just voting someone at random for 'info' is inherently stupid and pointless. I'm pretty sure that if we end up double eliminating today two townies will die, and people will use the VCA as a tool to further their own scum agenda/town tunneling anyway. A much better idea is to no eliminate first, then agree on one vote.

Are you actually suggesting that there's no difference between town and scum voting behavior?

[furtiveglance]

Given the response post 98 got, I'm guessing some of you guys love your info votes. My point actually specifically applies to this situation. If we do go for 2 eliminations (bad idea), scum will be more than prepared to adapt to this situation - probably by not pushing anyone that hard and setting up miscondemns. This feels obvious to me. Can anyone who is demanding we use the extra kill actually convince me of their certainty we'll get mafia day 1? I think that's a really far-fetched notion.

[furtiveglance]

Let me just say, I am very cautious of anyone peddling the holy grail of 'info'. It's become a buzzword that scum (and town for some reason) love to hold up as the key to town winning the game. The fact is, we aren't robots. Town push town, scum push town, town defend town, scum defend town. So the idea of just voting someone at random for 'info' is inherently stupid and pointless. I'm pretty sure that if we end up double eliminating today two townies will die, and people will use the VCA as a tool to further their own scum agenda/town tunneling anyway. A much better idea is to no eliminate first, then agree on one vote.

Are you actually suggesting that there's no difference between town and scum voting behavior?

My point is there is no set way that mafia plays.

[Dunnstral]

This also stops mafia from shooting at the informed player twice later with no consequence.

I don't understand what you mean here. The only situation in which they would shoot the same slot twice is if we used Imprison, and they didn't change their minds on the kill the next night. But I don't see what double eliminating today has to do with that.

Not using the double elim lets the mafia shoot at the imprisoned person twice and bring the game to evens, which we then can't fix. So at the end we end up with 4 person alive and the clear is dead

[Dunnstral]

Let me give an example to counter Flea above:

Day 1/night 1 no elim and then elim:
9 -> 1:1 -> 7
Day 2/night 2 imprison is used and fails:
7 -> 1:1 -> 5
Day 3/night 3 mafia makes a player bulletproof and shoots at them:
5 -> 1:0 > 4
Day 4/night 4:
4 -> 1:1 > 2

-Inform

, the mafia chooses a player to gain bulletproof. The first vote of the day will tell the voted player what alignment the chosen player is at the start of the night phase.

[Alianna]

Nope. We are eliminating. Eliminations are information. That's a load of hogwash from scum looking to deny information.

VOTE: furtiveglance

Try me.
You're also voting the wrong person.

9 -> 1+1:1 -> 6 Misyeet and Lose.
6 -> 1:1 > 4 Scum Partity win -or- Misyeet and lose.
4 -> 1:1 > 2 Scum Parity win.

9 -> 1:1 -> 7
7 -> 1:1 -> 5 Potential YOLO.
5 -> 1:1 -> 3 YOLO.


I much, much prefer the second option.

So do I. If we disregard the possibilities of eliminating the NK target or power role shenanigans, the second option is mathematically better. Since the regular elimination is mandatory, 4 player MeLo is basically the same situation as 3 player ELo (same goes for 6p vs. 5p) - just with an extra person. It is still a game-ending situation in which the town has to vote. The extra person is a disadvantage because it brings down the town's chance of voting correctly. Assuming town vote randomly and do not vote themselves, the chance of any individual townie voting for scum is 50% in 3 or 5 player ELo, 40% in 6 player MeLo, and only 33% in 4 player MeLo. Of course, town do not vote randomly and occasionally vote themselves, but I think my point still stands. I'm open to changing my view on this, but for now I will park my vote here.

VOTE: No Elimination

[Alianna]

Didn't see Dunnstral's posts. Let me think on that.

[Radical Rat]

-Inform, Choose a player alongside this. You can no longer kill the chosen player, ever.

From the sample Role PM. Scum will not be shooting the bulletproof, who is separate from the Informed person, who is separate from the Imprisoned person.

So I still don't really understand what it is you're saying here.

[Alianna]

-Inform, Choose a player alongside this. You can no longer kill the chosen player, ever.

From the sample Role PM. Scum will not be shooting the bulletproof, who is separate from the Informed person, who is separate from the Imprisoned person.

So I still don't really understand what it is you're saying here.

I think what they're saying is that scum could deliberately shoot the bulletproof to force a no-kill if they wanted, but the wording of the Role PM implies that they can't actually do that.

[Alianna]

With the inform ability, the first vote of the day is what determines who is informed, not a majority. So the mafia could bulletproof one of themselves? (can they) and then vote for themselves as soon as day starts so no one knows the alignment. So if anyone votes quickly or for themselves if we get the inform ability (which I doubt we will anyway) that's very sus.

I don't think there's a good reason for scum to risk BPing themselves. I asked the mod and they told me you won't be informed if you get BPed, so I'm assuming it won't ever be publicly announced. If the person voted to be informed is scum, they can just fake an inno on their buddy anyway.

[GoldfishFromTheMoon]

As I understand it, the BP'ed player is the one the result is given about. so scum wouldn't BP themselves because then they would be revealed as scum.

[GoldfishFromTheMoon]

-Inform, the mafia chooses a player to gain bulletproof. The first vote of the day will tell the voted player what alignment the chosen player is at the start of the night phase.

So this is what I thought it meant, @mod could you tell us if this is correct:
Mafia selects a person to gait bulletproof. During the ability phase we vote on a player to receive the result. The voted player is then told if the bulletproof player is town or mafia.

Which means:
- We don't know who the bulletproof is while we are voting for who to receive the result
- Scum will probably try to get themselves voted as the informed player who receives the result, so they can then lie about it.
- The bulletproof and the informed (player who receives the investigation result) could end up being the same person, who would then get results on them self.
- if we get a confirmed innocent from this action, Mafia can't kill them at any point because they are bulletproof (I don't understand what is mean't by this thing of scum shooting the bulletproof twice, they are not a 1-shot bulletproof and the scum PM says "you can no longer kill the chosen player, ever" so scum shooting the bulletproof twice in a row doesn't break the protection and kill them, it would be a no-kill two nights in a row)

[MegAzumarill]

-Inform, the mafia chooses a player to gain bulletproof. The first vote of the day will tell the voted player what alignment the chosen player is at the start of the night phase.

So this is what I thought it meant, @mod could you tell us if this is correct:
Mafia selects a person to gait bulletproof. During the ability phase we vote on a player to receive the result. The voted player is then told if the bulletproof player is town or mafia.

Which means:
- We don't know who the bulletproof is while we are voting for who to receive the result
-

Scum will probably try to get themselves voted as the informed player who receives the result, so they can then lie about it.

- The bulletproof and the informed (player who receives the investigation result) could end up being the same person, who would then get results on them self.
- if we get a confirmed innocent from this action, Mafia can't kill them at any point because they are bulletproof (I don't understand what is mean't by this thing of scum shooting the bulletproof twice, they are not a 1-shot bulletproof and the scum PM says "you can no longer kill the chosen player, ever" so scum shooting the bulletproof twice in a row doesn't break the protection and kill them, it would be a no-kill two nights in a row)

The Stricken part isn't a question of the setup but the rest is correct. For the future please bold mod questions so I make sure I can see them.

[Alianna]

-Inform, Choose a player alongside this. You can no longer kill the chosen player, ever.

From the sample Role PM. Scum will not be shooting the bulletproof, who is separate from the Informed person, who is separate from the Imprisoned person.

So I still don't really understand what it is you're saying here.

I think what they're saying is that scum could deliberately shoot the bulletproof to force a no-kill if they wanted, but the wording of the Role PM implies that they can't actually do that.

@mod, can the scum force a no-kill by shooting the bulletproof?

[MegAzumarill]

-Inform, Choose a player alongside this. You can no longer kill the chosen player, ever.

From the sample Role PM. Scum will not be shooting the bulletproof, who is separate from the Informed person, who is separate from the Imprisoned person.

So I still don't really understand what it is you're saying here.

I think what they're saying is that scum could deliberately shoot the bulletproof to force a no-kill if they wanted, but the wording of the Role PM implies that they can't actually do that.

@mod, can the scum force a no-kill by shooting the bulletproof?

Yes

[Alianna]

-Inform, Choose a player alongside this. You can no longer kill the chosen player, ever.

From the sample Role PM. Scum will not be shooting the bulletproof, who is separate from the Informed person, who is separate from the Imprisoned person.

So I still don't really understand what it is you're saying here.

I think what they're saying is that scum could deliberately shoot the bulletproof to force a no-kill if they wanted, but the wording of the Role PM implies that they can't actually do that.

@mod, can the scum force a no-kill by shooting the bulletproof?

Yes

Oof, ok. Thank you for clarifying!

[Alianna]

At least if that happens, the disadvantage of being stuck on evens will be cancelled out by the existence of the Bulletproof Innocent Child. Unless we vote to inform scum. Then we're screwed.

[Flea The Magician]

-Track, if town selects the player that is performing the nightkill, they are revealed as the killer that night phase.

-Watch, if the town selects the player that was selected for nightkill the player performing the kill is revealed as mafia.

- Imprison, if the town selects the kill target OR the player performing the kill, there is no kill the next night.

-Kill, the town gets an extra elimination that day phase. This is not plurality and is majority.

-Inform, the mafia chooses a player to gain bulletproof. The first vote of the day will tell the voted player what alignment the chosen player is at the start of the night phase.

We have 3 phases and 5 options.

Why would the maf use the informed role at all?
Imprison, is a shot in the dark, watch and track are about the same.
If we have strong scum players, there's no threat here.
We play this steady.
We play this smart.

[Cat.Jpeg]

-Inform, the mafia chooses a player to gain bulletproof. The first vote of the day will tell the voted player what alignment the chosen player is at the start of the night phase.

So this is what I thought it meant, @mod could you tell us if this is correct:
Mafia selects a person to gait bulletproof. During the ability phase we vote on a player to receive the result. The voted player is then told if the bulletproof player is town or mafia.

Which means:
- We don't know who the bulletproof is while we are voting for who to receive the result
- Scum will probably try to get themselves voted as the informed player who receives the result, so they can then lie about it.
- The bulletproof and the informed (player who receives the investigation result) could end up being the same person, who would then get results on them self.
- if we get a confirmed innocent from this action, Mafia can't kill them at any point because they are bulletproof (I don't understand what is mean't by this thing of scum shooting the bulletproof twice, they are not a 1-shot bulletproof and the scum PM says "you can no longer kill the chosen player, ever" so scum shooting the bulletproof twice in a row doesn't break the protection and kill them, it would be a no-kill two nights in a row)

Ok I see

[Radical Rat]

I think we should hold conversation about what scum may or should do with each ability and their relative utility until AFTER the ability shows up. Let scum figure out their own strategies

[Dunnstral]

You're wrong, we are talking about what we're dealing with today, which is whether to eliminate today or not. I argued that mafia can no-kill if we no-elim, essentially putting the ball in their court. The opposing argument seems to be that we have more info if we wait for later to eliminate.