U-Pick Mafia Vol 1 - Game Over

[Kylemii]

@Quin do you want bread?

No. I have bread.

on a salad roll???

[ColinIsCool]

One can also say to be fair that the increased time frame adjusts the raw probability further in an ideal world, to some unknowable degree.

This is the other thing I'd say. I'd actually be more inclined to option 6 later in the game. The raw probability of a successful lynch is more likely to improve in the civilians favour later. If this option came along when we actually had a pool of decently agreed suspects, it might be worth the risk. As it stands, we don't have a strong enough collective view on who the suspects are to rely on that.

I have had a hard time articulating this point, I tried earlier and failed, so thank you.

[Scotty]

I’m on page 40 but at face value I’m seeing Golden Brit buddied by Quin. Either they both found some extra gel behind each other’s ear or they’re just really in tune about nutella.

I still hve yet to read half of day 1, but from what I remember in the beginning, I was liking nutella’s Instigative attitude, gettin in people’s business. “Got any examples, Scottzilla?” NoZ sir, that would require me to go back and reread and holy fuck does that sound exhausting. I’m here to have fun

[Sloonei]

WHATS ALL THIS HOGWASH ABOUT NUMBERS? YOU KIDS THESE DAYS AND YOUR FANCY MATHEMATICS. BACK IN MY DAY IT WAS SIMPLE ARITHMETIC ! I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE WENT WRONG ... HAVE A LOVELY DAY!

Spoiler: show

How do I make a video on the page ?
thanks.

Spoiler: show

LOL

[Marmot]

The thing I like about the triple lynch is that suddenly, more players will have made meaningful votes.

Instead of Player X being lynched with 6 votes while Players Y & Z live on with 4 votes apiece, all three players are lynched. Instead of Player Y's and Player Z's alignment remaining a mystery going forward to some unknown future time while the players who voted for them continue to have uncertain intentions, they would die immediately, and more information is gained about the players who died, as well as the players who lynched them.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

It's not. Controlling a lynch is town-leaning, if the town controls it. If the mafia controls a lynch, it's mafia-leaning. I would say a triple lynch could be at best vaguely similar to a double lynch and a mafia vig shot. At worst (and in my opinion most likely), it's like having your normal lynch and giving each mafia team a vig shot.

This demands that the civilians make no effort to consolidate into three wagons -- we may not always agree on everything, but the opportunity to kill three people allows for disparate opinions to work in unison. The higher the single-player tallies get, the harder it is for mafia members to handpick their lynches (something I still believe can be identified by a dedicated civilian who is literally looking for that). 4-4-4-1-1-1-1-1-1 is hard to manipulate. 5-5-3-1-1-1-1-1-1-1 is easier to manipulate, but still difficult (and it demands a bold standout move). 4-3-3-2-2-2-1-1-1 would be easy to manipulate and also represent a failure of the civilians to work together -- is that what you'd anticipate?

Imagine you got a free lynch but only a third of the town votes would count but every mafia vote would count. Would you take that lynch? Or would you see it as too much of a risk of just being an extra mafia kill?

I would not take that vote. I don't understand this though, because the mafia have to split their votes in three just the same. Any manipulative capacity owned by a mafioso is also owned by a civilian bearing a suspicion.

[Golden]

If the mafia teams just try to combine their votes to ensure command of #2 or #3 spot without regard for their actual suspicions (or the suspicions being promoted by civilians), then... that should be something we can see, right?

Why would they need to do that? I doubt they'd have to block vote.

Look at the day one poll. Third place got 2 votes. There were lots of them. Is it really hard to drop one vote at a timely point to ensure someone gets to three that isn't on your team, without it being obvious?

Do you not believe in your own skill to do this if you're bad? I fully believe in mine.

I believe that is as plausible as any other strategic vote in any lynch. I don't understand why this is different. There are three wagons that die instead of one. Everyone who votes in those wagons (or doesn't) is responsible for what they've done and open to questioning accordingly.

In this case, the potential to evade a lynch of one's own teammate requires dancing around three wagons instead of just one.

I've never had any difficulty dancing around my voting decisions.

I guess all I'm saying is if I were mafia I'd take option 6 every single time. I wouldn't be afraid of dancing around decisions; at this point in the game, that's easy as hell.

I do think that at this point, though, we've talked out the options, and I'm inclined to see your perspective as extremely genuine at the end of the day (and I hope that I've at least managed to influence your perspective on the balance of the move).

[colonialbob]

I’m on page 40 but at face value I’m seeing Golden Brit buddied by Quin. Either they both found some extra gel behind each other’s ear or they’re just really in tune about nutella.

I still hve yet to read half of day 1, but from what I remember in the beginning, I was liking nutella’s Instigative attitude, gettin in people’s business. “Got any examples, Scottzilla?” NoZ sir, that would require me to go back and reread and holy fuck does that sound exhausting. I’m here to have fun

read her case on Colin EoD, should be recent in her iso. I felt it was good thought process.

[Quin]

I’m on page 40 but at face value I’m seeing Golden Brit buddied by Quin. Either they both found some extra gel behind each other’s ear or they’re just really in tune about nutella.

I still hve yet to read half of day 1, but from what I remember in the beginning, I was liking nutella’s Instigative attitude, gettin in people’s business. “Got any examples, Scottzilla?” NoZ sir, that would require me to go back and reread and holy fuck does that sound exhausting. I’m here to have fun

no man, golden's bad too.

[Golden]

I don't understand this though, because the mafia have to split their votes in three just the same. Any manipulative capacity owned by a mafioso is also owned by a civilian bearing a suspicion.

No they don't. Why would they have to? They can easily just use their influence in the lesser votes if they need to, mostly avoiding the highest lynch. Or be in the highest lynch if there is noone they particularly need to save. There isn't the same need to dilute their votes at all.

[Golden]

I’m on page 40 but at face value I’m seeing Golden Brit buddied by Quin. Either they both found some extra gel behind each other’s ear or they’re just really in tune about nutella.

I still hve yet to read half of day 1, but from what I remember in the beginning, I was liking nutella’s Instigative attitude, gettin in people’s business. “Got any examples, Scottzilla?” NoZ sir, that would require me to go back and reread and holy fuck does that sound exhausting. I’m here to have fun

I haven't really noticed quin this game so if he's buddying me he's shit at it.

[colonialbob]

I’m on page 40 but at face value I’m seeing Golden Brit buddied by Quin. Either they both found some extra gel behind each other’s ear or they’re just really in tune about nutella.

I still hve yet to read half of day 1, but from what I remember in the beginning, I was liking nutella’s Instigative attitude, gettin in people’s business. “Got any examples, Scottzilla?” NoZ sir, that would require me to go back and reread and holy fuck does that sound exhausting. I’m here to have fun

no man, golden's bad too.

Why are you picking objectively the worst poll option?

And i don't mean the option that most favors mafia, I mean unchangeable votes are terrible and should be forever banned

They do favor mafia tho

[Scotty]

Wait, Golden, you’re votig for the “pick 8 rando’s for tomorrow’s lynch” and yet you’re critical of the option that gives us more town power to choose the most suspicious tomorrow?

That’s Silver, at best.

Putting Day phases in the power of RNG and decrying our ability to pick candidates is hypocritical, dontcha think? Or maybe you explained your reasoning better and I’m just harping on old news. I dunno

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I will move my vote to #3 temporarily and allow everyone else to discuss the matter. There is a lot of time left to make the call. If I have to vote right now and the night ends, I vote #6.

I DO NOT ENDORSE #3. #3 IS A HEINOUS CRIME AGAINST ALL CIVILIANS, AND QUIN LOOKS AWFUL FOR VOTING IT.

[Marmot]

I will move my vote to #3 temporarily and allow everyone else to discuss the matter. There is a lot of time left to make the call. If I have to vote right now and the night ends, I vote #6.

I DO NOT ENDORSE #3. #3 IS A HEINOUS CRIME AGAINST ALL CIVILIANS, AND QUIN LOOKS AWFUL FOR VOTING IT.

Too bad once you vote it you can't switch away.

[Quin]

I’m on page 40 but at face value I’m seeing Golden Brit buddied by Quin. Either they both found some extra gel behind each other’s ear or they’re just really in tune about nutella.

I still hve yet to read half of day 1, but from what I remember in the beginning, I was liking nutella’s Instigative attitude, gettin in people’s business. “Got any examples, Scottzilla?” NoZ sir, that would require me to go back and reread and holy fuck does that sound exhausting. I’m here to have fun

no man, golden's bad too.

Why are you picking objectively the worst poll option?

And i don't mean the option that most favors mafia, I mean unchangeable votes are terrible and should be forever banned

They do favor mafia tho

Because I am objectively the worst.

[colonialbob]

Wait, Golden, you’re votig for the “pick 8 rando’s for tomorrow’s lynch” and yet you’re critical of the option that gives us more town power to choose the most suspicious tomorrow?

That’s Silver, at best.

Putting Day phases in the power of RNG and decrying our ability to pick candidates is hypocritical, dontcha think? Or maybe you explained your reasoning better and I’m just harping on old news. I dunno

Your option is bad and you should feel bad

[Quin]

I will move my vote to #3 temporarily and allow everyone else to discuss the matter. There is a lot of time left to make the call. If I have to vote right now and the night ends, I vote #6.

I DO NOT ENDORSE #3. #3 IS A HEINOUS CRIME AGAINST ALL CIVILIANS, AND QUIN LOOKS AWFUL FOR VOTING IT.

I mean, when you say it in caps it just sounds mean.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I will move my vote to #3 temporarily and allow everyone else to discuss the matter. There is a lot of time left to make the call. If I have to vote right now and the night ends, I vote #6.

I DO NOT ENDORSE #3. #3 IS A HEINOUS CRIME AGAINST ALL CIVILIANS, AND QUIN LOOKS AWFUL FOR VOTING IT.

I mean, when you say it in caps it just sounds mean.

Why did you vote for it though?

[Quin]

I will move my vote to #3 temporarily and allow everyone else to discuss the matter. There is a lot of time left to make the call. If I have to vote right now and the night ends, I vote #6.

I DO NOT ENDORSE #3. #3 IS A HEINOUS CRIME AGAINST ALL CIVILIANS, AND QUIN LOOKS AWFUL FOR VOTING IT.

I mean, when you say it in caps it just sounds mean.

Why did you vote for it though?

Dunno. Still haven't figured it out myself.

[ColinIsCool]

I am getting a lot of town points for Golden in his posts tonight. Not that a scum could not be against 6, but the particular justification that it is a “wet dream” makes a lot of sense to me. It makes me think I should check out the argument with dunya again.

Aside from nutella, I’m reiterating that I don’t like the people who slid onto 6, in my opinion a great slot for scum, without initially commenting. That would be wolbre, Spacedaisy and speed.

[Golden]

It's not. Controlling a lynch is town-leaning, if the town controls it. If the mafia controls a lynch, it's mafia-leaning. I would say a triple lynch could be at best vaguely similar to a double lynch and a mafia vig shot. At worst (and in my opinion most likely), it's like having your normal lynch and giving each mafia team a vig shot.

This demands that the civilians make no effort to consolidate into three wagons -- we may not always agree on everything, but the opportunity to kill three people allows for disparate opinions to work in unison. The higher the single-player tallies get, the harder it is for mafia members to handpick their lynches (something I still believe can be identified by a dedicated civilian who is literally looking for that). 4-4-4-1-1-1-1-1-1 is hard to manipulate. 5-5-3-1-1-1-1-1-1-1 is easier to manipulate, but still difficult (and it demands a bold standout move). 4-3-3-2-2-2-1-1-1 would be easy to manipulate and also represent a failure of the civilians to work together -- is that what you'd anticipate?

Yes, that is what I'd anticipate. You can't win - coalesce too early and actually your just asking for loud voices to choose the targets before too many people have a say, because you're forced to stick with the three you've got. I mean, it's actually sort of option 3 by another name, you may as well have non-changeable votes. Don't coalesce early and it's easy to manipulate late. I think you'd agree that generally speaking building an early consensus and not deviating from it is something that works in the favour of the mafia.

It's possible we could find mafia in the haze based on voting but I wouldn't count on it.

I really genuinely think it's a very bad idea - as I've said, I would as mafia trust my ability to run lynches two and three.

[Sloonei]

I will move my vote to #3 temporarily and allow everyone else to discuss the matter. There is a lot of time left to make the call. If I have to vote right now and the night ends, I vote #6.

I DO NOT ENDORSE #3. #3 IS A HEINOUS CRIME AGAINST ALL CIVILIANS, AND QUIN LOOKS AWFUL FOR VOTING IT.

I mean, when you say it in caps it just sounds mean.

YOU KIDS THESE DAYS ARE TOO SENSITIVE

[colonialbob]

I've made a terrible mistake, I should've been Morbotron.

Curses, wasted opportunity

[Quin]

I will move my vote to #3 temporarily and allow everyone else to discuss the matter. There is a lot of time left to make the call. If I have to vote right now and the night ends, I vote #6.

I DO NOT ENDORSE #3. #3 IS A HEINOUS CRIME AGAINST ALL CIVILIANS, AND QUIN LOOKS AWFUL FOR VOTING IT.

I mean, when you say it in caps it just sounds mean.

YOU KIDS THESE DAYS ARE TOO SENSITIVE

OH MY GOD GRANDMA SHUT UP

[Golden]

I'd see option 6 as a honeytrap that failed because of Jay's strong town voice. But there's still an outside chance it functioned well as a honeytrap, colin is right to look at people in there.

I still mostly don't like that nutella, who is extremely good at such things, laid down on option 6 being objectively better based on statistics.

[ColinIsCool]

The Boobquest feels like one million years ago.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

[mention]ColinIsCool[/mention], [mention]Jackofhearts2005[/mention], [mention]Sloonei[/mention]

What is your rationale for #1?

The only one up there I actually like apart from #6 is #2. I think that one offers a tiny benefit of creating a temporarily manageable POE (and also threatens to narrow thread-wide focus for an entire day, so it's not perfect).

[Quin]

ok but seriously is sloonei playing or not i cant figure it out

[ColinIsCool]

I chose 1 because I think it forces us to get reads out, which is helpful, and it isn’t as high risk as other options. I’m not in love with it though.

[ColinIsCool]

You can learn a lot from lynching three people at once. But you may lose a lot too. Aside from lynching, vote patterns are town’s best chance, and 1 gives us more meat there without giving anything up.

[Sloonei]

ColinIsCool, Jackofhearts2005, Sloonei

What is your rationale for #1?

The only one up there I actually like apart from #6 is #2. I think that one offers a tiny benefit of creating a temporarily manageable POE (and also threatens to narrow thread-wide focus for an entire day, so it's not perfect).

MORE VOTES = MORE ACTION, SONNY!

[Golden]

@ColinIsCool, @Jackofhearts2005, @Sloonei

What is your rationale for #1?

The only one up there I actually like apart from #6 is #2. I think that one offers a tiny benefit of creating a temporarily manageable POE (and also threatens to narrow thread-wide focus for an entire day, so it's not perfect).

I genuinely think number 2 is a pretty decent town tool right now, with a downside risk of extremely bad luck in randomisation. I think a narrowed focus is a good thing early in a game with 30 players... provided the focus is widened again afterwards.

[colonialbob]

ColinIsCool, Jackofhearts2005, Sloonei

What is your rationale for #1?

The only one up there I actually like apart from #6 is #2. I think that one offers a tiny benefit of creating a temporarily manageable POE (and also threatens to narrow thread-wide focus for an entire day, so it's not perfect).

I would argue threadwide focus is inevitably narrowed anyway with 31 players, else it's fragmented beyond usefulness. A random selection promises to be more interesting than continuing to argue about the people who post the most, no offense intended to any of you

[Sloonei]

I will move my vote to #3 temporarily and allow everyone else to discuss the matter. There is a lot of time left to make the call. If I have to vote right now and the night ends, I vote #6.

I DO NOT ENDORSE #3. #3 IS A HEINOUS CRIME AGAINST ALL CIVILIANS, AND QUIN LOOKS AWFUL FOR VOTING IT.

I mean, when you say it in caps it just sounds mean.

YOU KIDS THESE DAYS ARE TOO SENSITIVE

OH MY GOD GRANDMA SHUT UP

RESPEKT YOUR ELDERS YOUNG MAN

[ColinIsCool]

Question for the thread: is failing to vote in a lynch, and other forms of inactivity, alignment indicative per your view? Consider your own playstyle as scum. I’m not sure.

[Scotty]

Wait, Golden, you’re votig for the “pick 8 rando’s for tomorrow’s lynch” and yet you’re critical of the option that gives us more town power to choose the most suspicious tomorrow?

That’s Silver, at best.

Putting Day phases in the power of RNG and decrying our ability to pick candidates is hypocritical, dontcha think? Or maybe you explained your reasoning better and I’m just harping on old news. I dunno

Your option is bad and you should feel bad

I’ll go unload the dishwasher

oh look I forgot to put soap in, and now it just smells like hot tuna fish

[Sloonei]

A NARROW FOCUS IS BAD FOR EVERY BODY. OPEN MINDS MEAN OPEN HEARTS AND YOU NEED TO HAVE AN OPEN HEART TO LOVE .

[Golden]

Question for the thread: is failing to vote in a lynch, and other forms of inactivity, alignment indicative per your view? Consider your own playstyle as scum. I’m not sure.

I would say no.

[ColinIsCool]

I kinda just think that scum would be careful enough to not not-vote and risk repercussions. But I know that’s dangerous.

[Sloonei]

Question for the thread: is failing to vote in a lynch, and other forms of inactivity, alignment indicative per your view? Consider your own playstyle as scum. I’m not sure.

No

[colonialbob]

ColinIsCool, Jackofhearts2005, Sloonei

What is your rationale for #1?

The only one up there I actually like apart from #6 is #2. I think that one offers a tiny benefit of creating a temporarily manageable POE (and also threatens to narrow thread-wide focus for an entire day, so it's not perfect).

I genuinely think number 2 is a pretty decent town tool right now, with a downside risk of extremely bad luck in randomisation. I think a narrowed focus is a good thing early in a game with 30 players... provided the focus is widened again afterwards.

A reminder, we're virtually guaranteed at least one mafioso in the random 8, and very likely we'll have at least 2.

(Well, assuming what I feel to be reasonably sized mafia teams)

[Golden]

I’m on page 40 but at face value I’m seeing Golden Brit buddied by Quin. Either they both found some extra gel behind each other’s ear or they’re just really in tune about nutella.

I still hve yet to read half of day 1, but from what I remember in the beginning, I was liking nutella’s Instigative attitude, gettin in people’s business. “Got any examples, Scottzilla?” NoZ sir, that would require me to go back and reread and holy fuck does that sound exhausting. I’m here to have fun

no man, golden's bad too.

Why are you picking objectively the worst poll option?

And i don't mean the option that most favors mafia, I mean unchangeable votes are terrible and should be forever banned

They do favor mafia tho

They do favour mafia.

But from my perspective, I used to catch a lot more baddies who couldn't hide in unchangeable votes than I did in changeable votes. I wish we'd get a lot more 'unchangeable vote' games around here. But I'm not going to argue it's the best option in the poll.

[colonialbob]

Question for the thread: is failing to vote in a lynch, and other forms of inactivity, alignment indicative per your view? Consider your own playstyle as scum. I’m not sure.

In a regular game, perhaps. In this glorious monstrosity? No.

[Scotty]

I am getting a lot of town points for Golden in his posts tonight. Not that a scum could not be against 6, but the particular justification that it is a “wet dream” makes a lot of sense to me. It makes me think I should check out the argument with dunya again.

Aside from nutella, I’m reiterating that I don’t like the people who slid onto 6, in my opinion a great slot for scum, without initially commenting. That would be wolbre, Spacedaisy and speed.

I disagree about golden. Commenting about the abject suspiciousness of someone choosing option 6 is one thing, and condemning those that do is an easy way to throw blame.

While I DO agree that voting without explanation is also suspect, lumping everyone that voted one option together into a snotbubble is taking the easy route. It sounds like a reasonable argument but in reality it’s just stirring up the pot when it was just a grilled cheese and why is it in a pot to begin with

[Sloonei]

I kinda just think that scum would be careful enough to not not-vote and risk repercussions. But I know that’s dangerous.

Yes

[JaggedJimmyJay]

A premier concern of Golden's is that, for #6, civilians won't be able to adequately coalesce votes to evade mafia-aligned manipulation of the second and third wagons.

I checked the Day 1 poll, and 24 of 31 players placed a vote. This is both more than I expected and less than I'd like. We cannot know how many people will vote on Day 2, but I do think it would be optimistic to expect more votes than were seen Day 1. This is essentially a projection of no-shows and otherwise missed votes (RL difficulties or whatever). If a player dies and the trend holds (it likely won't to perfection, I grant), we have 23 votes on Day 2.

For a comfortable set of three wagons, I think we'd need about 5 votes on third place to be comfortable, and 4 votes to be decent. A three-way tie at 5-5-5 is manageable, but only if civilians do not bicker over minutia. Golden is definitely right about this if the tally ends up being a buffet of 1 or 2 vote wagons. If #6 is selected, any civilian involved is shouldering a responsibility to ensure that doesn't happen. We don't have to decide immediately or place undeviating votes, but we do have to maintain dialogue all day long and be available to work the poll the way it must be worked. If you cannot guarantee your ability to do that, then #6 may not be for you.

If 23 people vote, I think it's enough. It's not a sure thing like 27-30 might be though. If fewer people vote, then it's considerably more likely to be a bad time.

[Scotty]

ColinIsCool, Jackofhearts2005, Sloonei

What is your rationale for #1?

The only one up there I actually like apart from #6 is #2. I think that one offers a tiny benefit of creating a temporarily manageable POE (and also threatens to narrow thread-wide focus for an entire day, so it's not perfect).

I genuinely think number 2 is a pretty decent town tool right now, with a downside risk of extremely bad luck in randomisation. I think a narrowed focus is a good thing early in a game with 30 players... provided the focus is widened again afterwards.

A reminder, we're virtually guaranteed at least one mafioso in the random 8, and very likely we'll have at least 2.

(Well, assuming what I feel to be reasonably sized mafia teams)

Wha huh?? Can you please do the math for me? How many mafia do you think is on each team?

[Golden]

Wait, Golden, you’re votig for the “pick 8 rando’s for tomorrow’s lynch” and yet you’re critical of the option that gives us more town power to choose the most suspicious tomorrow?

That’s Silver, at best.

Putting Day phases in the power of RNG and decrying our ability to pick candidates is hypocritical, dontcha think? Or maybe you explained your reasoning better and I’m just harping on old news. I dunno

I mean, to be fair, I think option 6 is actively mafia-favouring, but with the other 5 I could live with any of them. I mostly picked the one that I think would enable me to best scum hunt. I'm never looking at more than about 8 people at this point in such a large game anyway. May as well have RNG choose the 8.

Also, thinking further about option 6. In theory you are reducing the entire game my a single day/night phase. This means that you would only be gaining one extra lynch, not two. You'll be stealing the second from a later point in time where we're more informed.

[Golden]

ColinIsCool, Jackofhearts2005, Sloonei

What is your rationale for #1?

The only one up there I actually like apart from #6 is #2. I think that one offers a tiny benefit of creating a temporarily manageable POE (and also threatens to narrow thread-wide focus for an entire day, so it's not perfect).

I genuinely think number 2 is a pretty decent town tool right now, with a downside risk of extremely bad luck in randomisation. I think a narrowed focus is a good thing early in a game with 30 players... provided the focus is widened again afterwards.

A reminder, we're virtually guaranteed at least one mafioso in the random 8, and very likely we'll have at least 2.

(Well, assuming what I feel to be reasonably sized mafia teams)

Wha huh?? Can you please do the math for me? How many mafia do you think is on each team?

Balance would suggest 5, but 4 is possible, and then anything is possible given Mac promised nothing about balance.