|
On August 22 2010 05:52 Bill Murray wrote:
the 8 people who haven't claimed have mafia in there, obviously. Radfield is worried about how mafia can double up with town, but the people who are doubling up with people are obviously going to be our lynch candidates (after someone who lied to us about what numbers theyre picking)
the reason for this plan was simple: last game the mafia were in doubled up numbers singularly. They weren't going to be picking the same numbers as a teammate. If the only doubled up numbers have people who claimed they were picking that number and one person who did it without claiming anything and without working with the town whatsoever, who are we going to lynch? the uncooperative person.
If you're in the 8 people and you want to be in the top 12, challenge someone for their number or something. A good old fashioned game of rock, paper, scissors could do the trick. We really need you 8 to claim, and act like you want to help the town.
the 8 people who havent claimed do not have to be mafia, obviously. The mafia could simply claim in the thread? what's to stopping them, why does it matter.
The draft list is going to be made public ffs, it's stupid to just go by our subjective list we've made up ourselves when the mob could be the top 4/3 whatever many of them there are.
|
i have a very pro town reason for not announcing my number though, which shall be explained if you guys keep with this silly draft list
|
yalli'm waiting for the picking to say anything. thanks.
|
Radfield
Canada2720 Posts
I agree with Citizen and Siniquity here. There is simply no benefit to having public numbers. Lets stick with hidden numbers.
Sinquity, we could have another pick slightly lower down (#2-5) also take Comp Vig. This would double check that the first player actually did take the CV role. We could also add in a percentage for taking CV in the 4-6 slots instead.
Citizen, the reason I would be against lynching the CV on day 1, is that the role doesn't hurt us until late game. As long as the CV follows orders, we get a double lynch each day. A double lynch is always advantageous for town, as it means we get to kill off 2 people each day/night cycle instead of 1. Without the CV role, Mafia/SK have a KP of 2, we have a KP of 1. With the CV role, Mafia/SK have a KP of 2, we have a KP of 2. Big benefit for town. At some point the CV becomes a liability(if we keep mislynching), but at the start of the game, a CV following orders is a plus for the town. If the CV ever doesn't shoot the proper player, then we lynch the CV, and the player who was supposed to get hit.
|
On August 22 2010 08:16 Pandain wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2010 07:52 SiNiquity wrote:
EBWOP
This is not to say I'm advocating the player list model over all others; I'm simply advocating it over the current model. Personally I say keep your # to yourself. We flesh out the picking algorithm and follow that tomorrow.. So your post is saying we should do Radfield's plan,but keep numbers hidden? Or do you propose we scrap the plan altogether?
Something along the lines of Radfield's, so that every player knows what they're doing because they know their number. By keeping our numbers to ourselves, no player knows what another player is doing. The exception here is if it is deemed worthwhile for part of the final algorithm to announce in certain cases (so that we know the identity of some roles, i.g. CV).
However, if we keep the numbers secret then we can rid ourselves of the obfuscation of the RNG and instead use a deterministic algorithm (i.e. Player 1 pick X, player 2 pick Y, etc) -- and in this case, there will be a maximum of M collisions (in the case where M mafia members steal a role). So if we go with the weighted system approach (i.e. 50% chance to pick this, 50% to pick that) then we'd need to make sure the expected number of collisions is less than M (whatever M may be).
|
On August 22 2010 09:22 SiNiquity wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2010 08:16 Pandain wrote:On August 22 2010 07:52 SiNiquity wrote:
EBWOP
This is not to say I'm advocating the player list model over all others; I'm simply advocating it over the current model. Personally I say keep your # to yourself. We flesh out the picking algorithm and follow that tomorrow.. So your post is saying we should do Radfield's plan,but keep numbers hidden? Or do you propose we scrap the plan altogether? Something along the lines of Radfield's, so that every player knows what they're doing because they know their number. By keeping our numbers to ourselves, no player knows what another player is doing. The exception here is if it is deemed worthwhile for part of the final algorithm to announce in certain cases (so that we know the identity of some roles, i.g. CV). However, if we keep the numbers secret then we can rid ourselves of the obfuscation of the RNG and instead use a deterministic algorithm (i.e. Player 1 pick X, player 2 pick Y, etc) -- and in this case, there will be a maximum of M collisions (in the case where M mafia members steal a role). So if we go with the weighted system approach (i.e. 50% chance to pick this, 50% to pick that) then we'd need to make sure the expected number of collisions is less than M (whatever M may be).
*stares blankly*
|
What Radfield said - there isn't really a benefit to having public numbers that I can think of, and it just makes it more likely scum knows my role if the number I chose is forced to pick a role (thus mafia knows to bump me off if I get a good one).
I am not trying to be uncooperative, I just don't agree with the plan. Still failing to see why Pandain/BM are casting FoS on me.
|
On August 22 2010 10:09 BrownBear wrote:
What Radfield said - there isn't really a benefit to having public numbers that I can think of, and it just makes it more likely scum knows my role if the number I chose is forced to pick a role (thus mafia knows to bump me off if I get a good one).
I am not trying to be uncooperative, I just don't agree with the plan. Still failing to see why Pandain/BM are casting FoS on me.
Not anymore. And I really didn't have one on you, just copy pasted that on it. I don't agree with public numbers either anymore(or at least see the potential dangers.)
|
On August 22 2010 09:16 Radfield wrote:
I agree with Citizen and Siniquity here. There is simply no benefit to having public numbers. Lets stick with hidden numbers.
Sinquity, we could have another pick slightly lower down (#2-5) also take Comp Vig. This would double check that the first player actually did take the CV role. We could also add in a percentage for taking CV in the 4-6 slots instead.
Citizen, the reason I would be against lynching the CV on day 1, is that the role doesn't hurt us until late game. As long as the CV follows orders, we get a double lynch each day. A double lynch is always advantageous for town, as it means we get to kill off 2 people each day/night cycle instead of 1. Without the CV role, Mafia/SK have a KP of 2, we have a KP of 1. With the CV role, Mafia/SK have a KP of 2, we have a KP of 2. Big benefit for town. At some point the CV becomes a liability(if we keep mislynching), but at the start of the game, a CV following orders is a plus for the town. If the CV ever doesn't shoot the proper player, then we lynch the CV, and the player who was supposed to get hit.
Interesting, I see it as exactly the opposite: the CV hurts us early on, but may be helpful later.
The CV's KP = shots in the dark early on, most likely we will kill townies and end the game faster, the SK and mafia should love it. Now, late game, when we may have more information, an extra KP could be quite helpful. So to me the question is whether it is worth killing 1-2 probable townies nights 2 and 3 so we have an extra KP later on, and hope we can use it wisely. Also note that the comp vigi KP isn't quite the same as a lynching: it can't kill the SK or any bullet proof role.
These are issues if we have a town-aligned CV. If this is a mafia role it's a lot more dangerous. So it is very much unclear to me that this role is overall helpful for the town.
Alternatively, as someone else mentioned either here or in the prior PYP game, we could role-block them until we are ready to use them. Of course, this assumes we'd have a role blocker.
|
Radfield
Canada2720 Posts
Citizen, I guess the question is, if town could double lynch every single day, is it in there best interest to do so? Yes, it speeds up the game, giving less days for town. But if we're using the double lynch(CV) to take out scummy players, who we would otherwise have to waste investigative powers or lynches on, then it's highly beneficial in my eyes.
|
Anyone else have an opinion on this?
|
On August 22 2010 11:17 citi.zen wrote:
Anyone else have an opinion on this?
I think if we are going to do the public number things via the sign up list, we should not(as I would be CV and be lynched, never being able to be mason) :p
However that already seems to have been discarded, so I still think we should roleblock the CV if we don't have a good lynch target. (Future reference I was the one who brought that up). However that still means we'd have to add that in to the algorithim.
So I am against lynching the CV
|
On August 22 2010 08:49 ~OpZ~ wrote:
yalli'm waiting for the picking to say anything. thanks.
I have been thinking about it and actually this is probably the best course of action. The more we plan our actions in this phase the more chance we have a mafia infiltration. I have some ideas on how we should go about role picking but I think we need to wait till the actual picking stage before we plan anything about roles.
|
it's not really forced double lynches everyday. we can just no lynch and have the CV shoot.
|
yeah...i dont want the mafia to redend new numbers either. So yea
|
Well, I'm not mafia, so if anyone picked [6] with me I'm pushing for their lynch
|
On August 22 2010 16:49 Bill Murray wrote:
Well, I'm not mafia, so if anyone picked [6] with me I'm pushing for their lynch
guess we'll have to take your word on that huh?
I'm fine with your lynch. bad course of action you came up with
|
Canada1068 Posts
On August 22 2010 12:20 johnnyspazz wrote:
it's not really forced double lynches everyday. we can just no lynch and have the CV shoot.
well said.
|
On August 22 2010 12:20 johnnyspazz wrote:
it's not really forced double lynches everyday. we can just no lynch and have the CV shoot.
This is actually an smart idea. Regarding to the current debate, my position consistently has been for publicized randomized (=player list) number claiming but I can see why it wouldn't work if some are reluctant to claim.
|
The CV is not really the same as a lynch: they can't kill bullet proof targets & can (claim to) be role-blocked if we try to target a mafia.
That said, since the killing only starts night 2 I guess there's no reason to make a decision now. Let's see where we are then.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
