U-Pick Mafia Vol 1 - Game Over

[JaggedJimmyJay]

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.

It depends upon the specific context. A complete absence of posts? I would say it's not indicative. A lower number of posts than is typical, or a constant insistence on catch-up? It can be. Not voting? I would be more inclined to judge inactive posting than inactive voting, but normally the worst suspicions arise from people who are at least minimally present (and more likely to vote).

[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.

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

Fair enough. I wouldn’t recommend lynching them one-by-one on that basis alone but you gotta call out sketchy stuff when you see it.

[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

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.

There has to be a bunch of not-civ-aligned roles in this game, and odds are there aren’t a huge number of people that can manipulate one side or another.

I think you’re looking at this through the lens of 1 mafia team. I don’t think the voting coordination of 2 mafia teams is a conclusion. AND if there is some sort of manipulation in the final vote tally, it would be extra apparent, dontcha think?

[Kylemii]

[mention]Quin[/mention] what kind of games do you like

[ColinIsCool]

I was hoping JJJ would respond and engage the debate like this. I like what I’ve seen.

[Golden]

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.

I haven't 'condemned' them. I feel confident Daisy isn't bad, at the moment, for example. I'm also feeling ok about Jay right now. You are oversimplifying in an effort to find me bad.

[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)

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

I'm using a base assumption of 6, for 12/31. Generally double mafia games have a higher proportion of mafia because they hunt/kill each other. I'd be pretty surprised at less than 5/5 unless we have a lot of kill-y 3p roles.

Prob of at least 1 mafia in the 8 random as it stands now is >99% if you assume 12, 97.8% if you assume 10.

(Those are ignoring any night deaths for obvious reasons, but if anything that would push the numbers higher since mafia is less likely to die at night than civs)

[Golden]

I was hoping JJJ would respond and engage the debate like this. I like what I’ve seen.

I concur.

[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.

There has to be a bunch of not-civ-aligned roles in this game, and odds are there aren’t a huge number of people that can manipulate one side or another.

I think you’re looking at this through the lens of 1 mafia team. I don’t think the voting coordination of 2 mafia teams is a conclusion. AND if there is some sort of manipulation in the final vote tally, it would be extra apparent, dontcha think?

No, I disagree strenuously. As I've said several times, if I were mafia I'd have a strong confidence in my ability to manipulate votes two AND three without being seen.

Jay imagines a world of 5-5-5, but to me even if you could achieve that, it would be dangerous... because if there's one you are most certain is bad they are also the one most likely to be saved. If we have one person we were sure was bad, they should go above 5, but to do that you lower the others. It's really spreading things too thin.

[Quin]

@Quin what kind of games do you like

How about a simple game of tic tac toe?

[Golden]

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.

[mention]JaggedJimmyJay[/mention] I want you to note this point too.

[Golden]

Epi can get away with doing Blackmon Face and there's no big deal.

[Kylemii]

@Quin what kind of games do you like

How about a simple game of tic tac toe?

never mind, i have a cooler idea

[Quin]

@Quin what kind of games do you like

How about a simple game of tic tac toe?

never mind, i have a cooler idea

Or maybe having my state my preference was the end goal, hm?

[Long Con]

You guys never shut up.

[nutella]

Whoops I left the thread for a couple hours and there are suddenly 4 more pages, quoting stuff as I go and won't be surprised if I change my opinion on things over the course of this catchup

Guys, I'm a baseball player. I don't understand what you do.

If you could have three Day phases in a row, would you take them? If not, why not?

Thanks Epi, this argument is reinforcing my confidence in this decision -- it's really stupid not to take this opportunity, Jay's right about that and sorry Golden you're wrong for thinking it's stupid to do it. It's statistically, computably, objectively a better chance for the civs compared to a basic prototypical series of lynches and nightkills one-to-one. To be completely fair, this thought experiment of Epi's is not a perfect one again for the reason that it's condensed into a single phase of discussion and we wouldn't necessarily lynch the same people on three separate days and that it's a single vote spread so harder for the town to control all three lynches, but it's early in the game, there are a lot of us, I'm sure we can manage to get a set of 3 candidates that enough civs would like to vote for.

Nutella is bad and at the top of my hit list.

She’s pretending to engage but she’ll ‘hope’ in the face of good logic and agree that non-analogous situations are persuasive.

I don’t believe she is genuinely considering any alternative.

I was and still am genuinely considering alternatives. I've been thinking out loud through this option, you've already seen my thought process on it evolve back and forth a few times.

nutella is also bad for posing this whole "we should just lynch let three people be lynched because they're all suspicious anyway and we'll end up lynching them eventually" bullshit.

I already conceded that I was probably wrong about that point. I don't stand by it as a good justification.

Quin and Jack, why are your votes where they are?

3 lynches and 3 votes for player (similar to “lights out”) is pro town. Without the three vote stipulation, the lynch is out of the town’s (and specifically, my) control.

I can see the third lynch suspect having 2-3 votes on them from players that aren’t around with no real way to avoid death.

Possible that active players voting for higher total suspects remove their votes to try to change the end result, causing maybe 5-6 trains with 2-3 votes. Hot potato causes unintentional results.

Two votes each is not amazing but builds better consensus. Slightly protown.

These are good points. #1 was my initial preference and I may go back to it. I just wish we could have both (2 or 3 lynches with 2 or 3 votes each) but I guess that would be too good.


Not quoting cause it's long but Epi's thoughts on dunya and eloh are intriguing. I've been wanting to see eloh as town but if epi says she's bad I've gotta give that some credence, and the dunya theory is compelling based on what I know of dunya's baddie game.

For a long time in RYM Mafia, double-lynches were a normal possibility. They were incorporated into every game because it's just how it worked, and we didn't really consider other options. That was Mafia.

Eventually we had to discontinue them when we realized how unfairly town-slanted they were.

Now we're being offered a triple lynch, and I am being told that it favors mafia. I literally live in bizarro world, and am so irritated that I seriously considering being replaced. It's leading the vote thankfully.

It's literally mathematically provable that it favors the town. Idk what Golden is on about man.


Aaaand this is where I am in the thread right now:



Guess I've got some catching up to do.

[Long Con]

@Quin @novaselinenever @motel room @Long Con @lapluie @Kylemii @Kites @Kenway @insertnamehere despite the poll end time the deadline is in 7 minutes get those votes in!

Hey dude my vote was already on dunya.

Like... option #1 sounds nice but it doesn't actually really accomplish much. It gives people an outlet to express feelings on more than one top suspect, but it still ultimately results in a single lynch. It's like in Dominion when you draw a bunch of cards without having an action split, you know?

Nice Dominion reference! I told BR and she said "I respect a person that knows Dominion"

Excited for supatown Stumpignosis.

Out of the poll options, I'd suggest #1 or #6. More votes means that more people have to put forth their opinions, encouraging discussion. More deaths means a higher chance of killing a baddie and kicking things into high gear. Plus, if people start dying the thread'll become actually manageable.

LOL Stumpignosis. Very nice. Congrats on becoming a stump dude. So early! Truly a game to get your hands dirty.

hmm maybe that's a good point. but I think we can work together so that town is controlling all three lynches

Seriously jays logic is awful but worst of all it’s not consistent in my opinion with what town jay would say.

I don't really like the conviction that he likes it because he's bad. He might be bad, but I can understand a point of view that says catching one baddie in three would provide good info. Your conviction that the 6 option is rife with baddies is too much for my taste, and it makes me suspect you.

Statistics aren't fate, luck, and chaos. Lynching a baddie is really useful in scumhunting, and I say that because Ass "Handed To Us" Class was just a beautiful spiral of not knowing anything anytime. I believe that we would likely get one baddie with a triple lynch. Isn't that worth it?

[Golden]

It's literally mathematically provable that it favors the town. Idk what Golden is on about man.

Marmot and I literally mathematically proved this is false. This is why I don't like your townieness, because you seemed to decide this was a fact based on... what exactly? This isn't the puzzle-solving nutella I know.

[Golden]

[mention]Long Con[/mention] catch up on the maths first.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

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.

JaggedJimmyJay I want you to note this point too.

I don't follow, so I am going to map it out and see where I end up:

31 players - D1 Epi Stump
30 players - N1 Kill (maybe civilian)
27 players - D2 3 players lynched
26 players - N2 Kill (maybe civilian)
25 players - D3 1 player lynched
...
If a 1 lynch/1 kill trend holds and teams die in generally balanced distribution (all doubtful, but we cannot speculate), the game reaches 3 players at Day 14 (wherein someone is lynched). That's 14-1+2 = 15 lynches.

~~~

31 players - D1 Epi Stump
30 players - N1 Kill (maybe civilian)
29 players - D2 1 player lynched
28 players - N2 Kill (maybe civilian)
27 players - D3 1 player lynched
...
If a 1 lynch/1 kill trend holds and teams die in generally balanced distribution (all doubtful, but we cannot speculate), the game reaches 3 players at Day 15 (wherein someone is lynched). That's 15-1 = 14 lynches.

This appears to be valid. The net gain is one lynch, not two (ignoring unpredictable deviations from the default numbers degradation which can impact either scenario). It's a pseudo-bonus day phase, but not necessarily two. I would encourage someone who is not in a 2am world to give the numbers a look and verify or deny.

[Long Con]

@Long Con catch up on the maths first.

Yeah, but that's not absolute. Sometimes you gotta let go and roll the dice, you know? The math is so cold, there are so many factors the math cannot engage, living and changing elements in a dynamic game.

[Long Con]

Going to bed now anyway; catch you on the flip side.

[ColinIsCool]

Posting so I can ISO my way to where I left off.

[Golden]

@Long Con catch up on the maths first.

Yeah, but that's not absolute. Sometimes you gotta let go and roll the dice, you know? The math is so cold, there are so many factors the math cannot engage, living and changing elements in a dynamic game.

Sure, that's fine... I know what you mean.

I can understand someone voting for 6 on emotion.

I'm just saying that I don't think the second and third lynches increase our odds of getting a baddie substantially at all. It might feel good, but I don't think it IS good, which is why it's an uphill argument for me (I am arguing against the good feeling).

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Statistics aren't fate, luck, and chaos. Lynching a baddie is really useful in scumhunting, and I say that because Ass "Handed To Us" Class was just a beautiful spiral of not knowing anything anytime. I believe that we would likely get one baddie with a triple lynch. Isn't that worth it?

This is what my stubborn brain continues to tell me, and the futile experience of Ass Class is fresh. The numbers cannot account for the contextual benefit of just getting one. Even if it might not seem pertinent numerically, it means everything in terms of generating reads. 2 mislynches and 1 good lynch in one day provides so much more avenue for investigation moving forward than having to wait until Day 4 or some other undefined moment to finally have something (especially if Mac janitors night kills).

Nothing screws a civilian team more than having no interactions to judge. Gotta get that first one or nothing else matters. At least in this case with two teams we have more chances to get one right either way. I freaking hope.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

It's literally mathematically provable that it favors the town. Idk what Golden is on about man.

This will be interesting.

[Golden]

To counter that, how defeating would a triple town lynch feel?

[JaggedJimmyJay]

To counter that, how defeating would a triple town lynch feel?

It would suck ass.

It'd suck less ass than Ass Class sucked though. 6 civilian lynches in a row without a single catch, game over. I don't know if you paid any attention to that game, but it's running fresh in the minds of many.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

It's funny because if I was mafia I would probably vote #6 just to look like the JJJ that is expected (perhaps erroneously), but I'd hate it.

[Sloonei]

Have any of you kids even stopped to think that we might need to vote like this every night?

[Golden]

To counter that, how defeating would a triple town lynch feel?

It would suck ass.

It'd suck less ass than Ass Class sucked though. 6 civilian lynches in a row without a single catch, game over. I don't know if you paid any attention to that game, but it's running fresh in the minds of many.

I saw the results, rather than following the game. Rough game.

I’m just arguing against the emotive for why with the emotive for why not. A three civ lynch could be devastating for morale.

A two-baddie lynch could be amazing.

I can understand rolling the dice but people should be awake to the emotional impact of failure.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Have any of you kids even stopped to think that we might need to vote like this every night?

There will at least be a night poll, I can imagine. I dunno what it'll feature. What does this mean to you?

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Sloonei my boy, I enjoy the roleplay, but you ain't done shit since you arrived. No bueno.

[Sloonei]

Have any of you kids even stopped to think that we might need to vote like this every night?

There will at least be a night poll, I can imagine. I dunno what it'll feature. What does this mean to you?

Nothing yet !

[nutella]

I'll use numbers in your 5 vs 3 situation, Jay, since that's your 'town-leaning' one. I can't possibility demonstrate it with the complex numbers required for 31 players.

You have 5 civilians. On day one, each has a 0.428 shot at being right about who a mafia is. If they need to find two mafia on that day, they have a 0.286 probability of successfully identifying a second one.

However, if you kill one at a 0.428 probability and allow a nightkill, ending at 4 v 2 the next day, your odds of catching the second mafia increase from 0.286 to 0.333

That's the most basic illustration I can provide to demonstrate how catching two mafia on one day rather than on consecutive days is less likely and provides lower odds for the civilians.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The numbers absolutely live on a curve, and depends on the numbers. I can't compute the numbers because I don't know exactly what is out there. What I can say is that it sits on a curve, so while odds might increase from 1 to 2, they'd dramatically drop from 2 to 3, because you are diluting civilians too far.

ok... that's not the scenario we are in though. sure it's "on a curve" I understand that, and we don't know how many baddies there are... but we do know that there are two baddie teams that can catch each other, so I think you should account for that in your calculations. like let's say there's 18 civs, two mafia teams of 5 each, and 2 3ps (I'm not counting epi so that's 30). each civ has a 0.414 (12/29) chance of voting a non-civ, and each mafia member has a 0.28 (7/25) chance of voting a non-civ if they don't bus, and each 3p has 0.379 (11/29). so.... ok I don't actually know where I'm going with this and it would probably be a bit lower due to one or more nightkills but just want to point out that having two baddie teams makes some difference here.

[Sloonei]

Sloonei my boy, I enjoy the roleplay, but you ain't done shit since you arrived. No bueno.

You respect your elders!

[nutella]

*higher rather, nightkills increase the probability of catching baddies

[JaggedJimmyJay]

We should also consider we’ll be losing Epi’s vote.

[Sloonei]

We should also consider we’ll be losing Epi’s vote.

But you are gaining mine

[nutella]

Thank you Marmot. I have a feeling your alignment guesses are off, as 23-4-4 would be highly civilian slanted. Still, the basic concept of what you are saying is apt.

The question here must then be: going one at a time offers a slight improvement in raw probability while also increasing the probability of night killed civilians during the nights between those one-at-a-time lynches. 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.

Is it an agreeable trade?

I will stop screaming and allow others to pipe in.

hm yeah [mention]Marmot[/mention] what would those numbers be with my distribution guesses? (18-5-5-2)

[nutella]

It also allows us to see the flips before making additional lynch decisions, is the crucial bit I feel isn't being given enough weight.

This is perhaps the most convincing point against 6 I have seen yet.

[nutella]

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.

by "such things" do you mean statistics? because I don't really do deep statistical analysis ever at all. I believed it was best because of lynches vs nightkills but I didn't crunch the numbers hardcore like you and jay and marmot have been trying to, so perhaps it's not so clear-cut, but also I really don't like to rely only on statistics, there are all those other factors which contribute to suspicions and reads and solving the game through more qualitative means. like, bob's point about simultaneous lynches being less informed than sequential ones because we might change our minds about who else to lynch -- that's swaying me right now over the mathy stuff.

I'm changing my vote to #1 for now. could end up back on 6, could end up on something else, who knows.

[Golden]

Yes, for me it’s very critical that we don’t know anything right now. It could be better than the statistics show at a point where we are more informed, but right now it’s worse than the statistics.

[nutella]

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

hmm maybe. I am sort of wary of the random pool of 8 giving us odds that are just as bad or worse, but they could also be better I guess, I haven't even tried to crunch any numbers on that, but you are right that in general early-game focus tends to be disproportionately skewed toward the higher posters and lets baddies skate along in the middle/background

[nutella]

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

I tend to lean toward this view tbh, but it depends. Scum members have more pressure and accountability, but sometimes someone just isn't around.

[dunya]

I like more focused options so I'll go with #2. I'd laugh to the moon and back if Mac meant nothing by this poll.

[dunya]

I like Golden. I feel better about him.. I also feel about Quin and cbob from this.

nutella is still bad.

[nutella]

@Quin @novaselinenever @motel room @Long Con @lapluie @Kylemii @Kites @Kenway @insertnamehere despite the poll end time the deadline is in 7 minutes get those votes in!

Hey dude my vote was already on dunya.

You sure about that?

[Sloonei]

2 & 3 are bad. 4 is chaos. 1, 5, & 6 all add unique and volatile dimensions .

[dunya]

2 & 3 are bad. 4 is chaos. 1, 5, & 6 all add unique and volatile dimensions .

Why is 2 bad?