EPTNewbie Mini XII - Page 9
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Gummy
United States2180 Posts
| ||
|
Gummy
United States2180 Posts
On May 02 2012 05:00 DeMorcerf wrote: ...Seriously, I feel like you are burying us with your posts Gummy. That huge poll...what? Distractions and spam = scummy, not helpful. (dahdum is correct, and Gummy and paschl are wrong.) In this game, LAL is best. It is wrong to suggest that Town all have an incentive to lie. An honest Townie can be quite powerful. Once a Town player has lied, even with good intentions, the rest of us can no longer trust him for the remainder of the game. Hence, there is no justifiable reason for us to lie. And since we need at least one plan to stick with, we should lynch all proven liars. Claw, I think you are overthinking things. The Mafia will not avoid hitting you because they think you are lying: they are just as likely to hit a townie by randomly hitting someone else, so their best bet is to hit you with the chance of you having been honest (since liars get lynched). A revealed DT and medic are not going to be left living after 2 nights. The Mafia cannot and will not risk letting Tofu live any longer than that because with only 2 members they can't afford the chance he is DT and manages to finger one of them. Took a shower and I feel awake! Yay Caffeine! A stronger strategy than LAL, especially in newbie games, is LSP or Lynch Suboptimal Play. If people play strategies that are not rationalizable given their claimed set of beliefs, either they don't know what they are doing or they are lying about their beliefs. LAL is too restrictive a solution concept and when brought to a logical conclusion, everybody posts "I am a vanilla townie. I don't know anything" as often as possible and no information is brought out. Bullying people into making hasty plays is a much stronger strategy, imo. Even if that bullying requires some lying on my part. As far as I'm concerned I'm a dead man walking anyway, so I might as well get as much information out as possible for you guys before I get shot in my sleep tonight. | ||
|
Gummy
United States2180 Posts
A stronger strategy than LAL, especially in newbie games, is LSP or Lynch Suboptimal Play. If people play strategies that are not rationalizable given their claimed set of beliefs, either they don't know what they are doing or they are lying about their beliefs. Glossary Information set: A set of states of the world between which a given player cannot distinguish. Information partition: A set of nonintersecting information sets. Each player's information partition may differ from every other person's. I don't actually use this term, but it serves to place the previous term in context. A person can be said to be "omniscient" if all his or her information sets within his/her information partition is of size 1. A player is said to have "imperfect information" otherwise. Strategy: A mapping from an information set to an action. An example would be "If I am here, I will play this action with some probability." In Rock paper scissors, since you don't know what your opponent is playing, your strategy can only be a probability distribution on R, P, or S. You can't say "If my opponent plays rock, I'll play paper" since what your opponent will play (Rock, paper or scissors) are all in the same information set. In chess, however, you can say "If my opponent plays E4 for his first move, I'll play E5 for my first move." Belief: In a game of imperfect information, this is a probability distribution conditioned on you being in a given information set over the possible states of the world in that information set. For example you can say in Rock Paper Scissors, I believe that my opponent will play Rock. Thus, your belief places a probability of 1 on rock and probability of 0 on the other two actions playable by your opponent. You can say that a strategy is optimal with respect to a player's beliefs if he plays "Scissors" in response to a claimed belief of Paper. Correct or Reasonable Beliefs: There are some beliefs that are obviously incorrect. Computation of correctness of a belief is rather pedantic and involves taking limits. As far as is necessary to understand, when I use the term "reasonable beliefs" or "set of beliefs" I am referring to the "Support" of reasonable beliefs, or that is the states of the world one can reasonably believe himself to be in with nonzero probability. States of the world are just different possible scenarios you could be in within a given information set. (Again with RPS, the opponent having made up his mind to play scissors is one state of the world. Paper would be another, etc...) To expand on this for people unfamiliar with game theory.... We are all playing a game of imperfect information. We can assume that people play rationalizable strategies given their claimed set of beliefs. Rationalizable means best response. In rock paper scissors, this means that I play rock if I think you will play scissors, etc... If, however, it turns out that somebody claims they were expecting scissors, but then play paper, we know they were lying. But lying isn't important. What is important is that we can deduce from a given set of play, a set of beliefs (see glossary) for which that play is optimal or near-optimal. In the instance where somebody says "I'm expecting paper" yet invariably plays rock, for example, we can deduce that he ACTUALLY was expecting scissors or is just bad. So while LAL is a good starting point for casting suspicion, we need to see the set of beliefs for which the discovered lie is optimal. If the set of beliefs for which the discovered lie is optimal does not intersect with correct beliefs to be held by townspeople, only then do we lynch them. To illustrate this point with another example... presume that revealing yourself as a role increases your believed likelihood of getting targeted at night if you're a townie, but does not increase your believed likelihood of getting targeted at night if your'e a mafia. Thus, suicidal role revelation is not an action consistent with any beliefs that might be reasonably held by a townsperson. It is, however, almost consistent with some beliefs that could be reasonably held by a Mafia, depending on how we model players' conditioning of beliefs based on information sets. I've used "imperfect information" "beliefs" and "states of the world." These are all different ways for saying more or less the same thing in somewhat different frameworks. You can simulate "states of the world" in a game of imperfect information by adding an impartial player at the beginning, named "Nature" if you will, who plays a strategy unobservable by some subset of the players. Then we can model beliefs based on what each player believes about which unobservable strategies were played. | ||
|
Gummy
United States2180 Posts
| ||
|
Gummy
United States2180 Posts
I am so bad at English. | ||
|
Gummy
United States2180 Posts
Whether certain beliefs make sense for a player depends on payoffs of all players. We don't know the payoff of a given player, say Gummy, but if we hypothesize the setup of the game, we can ascertain payoffs for certain roles. Mafia, for example, have positive payoff when a nonmafia is lynched during day play. Townspeople, on the other hand have a positive payoff wherever Mafia have a negative payoff. From payoffs, we can derive beliefs, so in that sense the pedantic computation of limits I dismissed a few posts up is significant. In most cases, however, such computations are simply consistent with common sense. | ||
|
paschl
Germany666 Posts
A lof of people are gonna make mistakes because theyre new to the game. Lynching suboptimal play in a newbie game makes 0 sense. I feel like my head just exploded. | ||
|
Mattchew
United States5684 Posts
No more polls. (They are stupid) Do not edit your posts. Claw has been warned. The only change in his post is the bold'ing of his vote. This is Mod-Confirmed. | ||
|
paschl
Germany666 Posts
If he puts this much effort into the game and puts himself out there like this as a mafia, respect. | ||
|
Gummy
United States2180 Posts
On May 02 2012 22:06 Mattchew wrote: 2 things No more polls. (They are stupid) Do not edit your posts. Claw has been warned. The only change in his post is the bold'ing of his vote. This is Mod-Confirmed. Lots of stupid things are fun though. Some people even find things fun precisely because those things are stupid. More to the point, I feel that polls are a way of anonymously involving the input of nonplayer TL members and gives the game an illusion of interactivity that will draw more observers and garner more interest in future TLM games! | ||
|
Gummy
United States2180 Posts
On May 02 2012 21:30 paschl wrote: Gummy, its a newbie game. A lof of people are gonna make mistakes because theyre new to the game. Lynching suboptimal play in a newbie game makes 0 sense. I feel like my head just exploded. So what's the alternative? Voting people off via an arbitrary and provably exploitable strategy (LAL)? | ||
|
paschl
Germany666 Posts
On May 02 2012 22:54 Gummy wrote: Lots of stupid things are fun though. Some people even find things fun precisely because those things are stupid. More to the point, I feel that polls are a way of anonymously involving the input of nonplayer TL members and gives the game an illusion of interactivity that will draw more observers and garner more interest in future TLM games! It also kinda messes with the metagame since any interaction can have consequences ingame. I was actually surprised to see people not in the game posting itt. On May 02 2012 22:58 Gummy wrote: So what's the alternative? Voting people off via an arbitrary and provably exploitable strategy (LAL)? Its exploitable under optimal circumstances. This is a newbie game. Mafia is gonna be afraid to post, have a harder time reaching their goals since they have to lie every step of the way. They have to make up cases and most likely defend them. They have to think ahead on how their posting today influences them tomorrow. This isnt an easy job. And were here to shoot them if they screw up. I mean id like to give you a course on scumhunting but i dont think im experience enough to do it. Votecount AcesRequiem Ange777 Clawtrocity votes Gummy Dahdum DeMorcerf FirmTofu Gummy votes Clawtrocity Matriarch Paschl So its Gummy 1 Claw 1. Just wanted to put this out there since it gets real today (or tomorrow). Ill be back with a bigger post soon. Can the medic heal the same target twice in a row?. | ||
|
paschl
Germany666 Posts
towny DeMorcerf - towny. Gummy - i made this point in my last post but if he puts himself out there like this as a mafioso he deserves the spot on my list. Ange777 - latest post was extremely villagery. Both the line of thinking and him telling Gummy not to go after everyone for very little. (+ Show Spoiler + On May 02 2012 17:50 Ange777 wrote: If there can't be 2 medics, at least one of you is lying. I am somehow torn between Claw and Gummy. Claw I actually agree with DeMorcerfs LAL, so what struck me was this: Why are you already implying that (both of) you are lying? As of now, no one can prove the claims. Although you stated you don't like this specific tactic of early roleclaiming, why wouldn't you insist on being the medic and defend your role against other accusations? Is it because you know you are lying and the medic has to be someone else? You might confuse mafia with this move but you could be mafia youself confusing all of us townies. Gummy I don't like your aggressive way of playing, doubting every player based on very little and somehow changing your mind every minute. But your timing to claim medic and to suspect Claw got me thinking. Gummy immediately called Claw scum when Claw roleclaimed. There may not have been any good arguments why Claw should be scum at that time but if Gummy was sure about Claw lying that would be more than enough to doubt him. Only after rereading the filter I saw that Gummy already sliped a medic claim. Either it was a simple mistake him being the medic or a really well did move being scum to cast suspicion on Claw. FirmTofu - claimed detective on day1, think this trough. Does a scum claim detective on day1? It would surely come back to haunt him later. Id even argue about the usefulness of this when youre a vanilla. This combined with his posts having a sort of tonwish conspiricy feel to them he goes on my town list. neutral AcesRequiem - liked his first post, fell off after and hasnt been back yet. Clawtrocity - Im torn on claw. Some of his posts are weird. F.e. "If the detective wants to claim I'll be here to heal him." (+ Show Spoiler + On May 01 2012 09:24 Clawtrocity wrote: I don't really understand the point behind forcing a role claim. Everyone will claim vanilla townie because that's the most common role and it's completely unprovable. It doesn't hide any roles because if everyone claims vanilla townie then everyone is up for attack. I'll go ahead and say that I don't like that strategy, but regardless I'll give actions a real role to claim. With the possibility of a jailkeeper or another Medic I'm fine in saying that I'm one of the medics. The best part is the Mafia won't attack me because they'll think I'm a vanilla townie trying to bite the bullet for the town. If the detective wants to claim I'll be here to heal him. We really just need to keep the detective alive for as long as possible because with so many non-power roles we'll be powerless eventually. I'd be wary of Gummy for being so aggressive so early on. He's most likely trying to accuse other people so if anyone tries to point fingers at him he can claim that they're protecting the person he's pressuring. That's a pretty shady tatic and with his confindence in himself going to his head he might be trouble. scumy Matriarch - has barely posted. Only him making sense in his last post makes ne not want to lynch him today. Still want to see more. Dahdum - should be lynched. He still barely posted. Ive made my post about him earlier, and since then he added one post defending claw. I understand his reasoning but the whole post is evasive. Like he wants to distance himself from a claw lynch (+ Show Spoiler + On May 02 2012 12:06 dahdum wrote: I don't see the benefit in lynching Claw. a) If he's medic, we've screwed ourselves. b) If he's VT, we should have let scum waste a night on him. c) If he's scum, his doctor claim will get him lynched later (when a doctor dies or is confirmed). In any case, lynching him now doesn't provide us with information on anyone else. I have a similar point of view on FirmTofu, his claim seems very difficult to fake. Gummy, you're getting hard to follow for me. These two statements in particular, 3 minutes apart: If you get lynched or die, it will be difficult for us to analyze your reveal and play correctly. So, how do i do this? ##Vote: Dahdum The talk about blue roles should probably stop for today. Im not saying you shouldnt make cases based on those posts but the discussion of who might be what role shouldnt take up most of our time on day1. We will get a lot of additional informations on day2. For now lets focus on hunting scum. I know its day1 and hard to find scum based on the low postcount but all we can do is use what we have. | ||
|
Gummy
United States2180 Posts
Your reasoning for voting Dahdum is that he's useless. If that's his worst offense, then I recommend you vote for nolynch. Clawtrocity, imo, has not only shown himself to be a liar, but has shown himself to be a liar with motives that could only be scummy. It's not that he's useless, it's that he's actively hurting the townie's position with his play (luring out a detective). Whether or not he is scum, he needs to go. Despite what Claw warned you of, I am confident enough in my case and the reasoning I have laid out to say that anybody defending Claw or even deflecting attention away from Claw is suspect. There is literally no evidence in this format that could be more incriminating than what has already been presented. So incriminating is the evidence against him that even as his partner in scum, you should be voting for him at this point. A lot of the faulty logic I've seen so far is "let it play out. We'll have more information later." You don't get free information in this game. If you don't land a lynch on a Mafia you are in exactly the same information state in the next day, only you're in a worse position than the day before. Anybody can claim to be detective and make something up. That's not information. The only information in this game you can trust is stuff revealed directly from Mattchew and your own deductions based on those revelations. So when somebody says "He's made himself suspicious enough for us to vote him off later." That is a huge logical fallacy. If he's made himself suspicious enough NOW, then you must vote him off NOW. | ||
|
Gummy
United States2180 Posts
You MUST vote clawtrocity or we will be in EXACTLY the same place as we are right now, only down one and 6/7ths of a townie only up (2/8=)1/4th of a mafia in expectation, since a vote for anybody else is essentially a shot in the dark at this point. Any vote not directed toward clawtrocity is a vote against the town. Seeing as I'm dead anyway, it would be fair to say that you are either with me or against me. Make my sacrifice worth it | ||
|
paschl
Germany666 Posts
You will still have peoples posts, the way they voted their conversations with eachother. Most importantly you know that the guy that got lynched was a towny and you can reevaluate. There is also going to be a mafia kill and we get to analyse it. And my reason isnt that he is useless, my reason is the way he wrote his posts. Im not the best tone reader out there but there is something off about him. Mafia is so much more than confirmed facts. Youre saying Clwa lied, well you lied too. You claimed vanilla towny early itt. And you even defended your lie itt. Him pointing this out is more than reasonable. On May 03 2012 00:11 Gummy wrote: To make my case a little bit stronger.... I WILL be killed tonight. I have made my power role clear and Mafia will be INSANE not to kill me given that I cannot save myself and nobody has roleclaimed a jailkeeper. You MUST vote clawtrocity or we will be in EXACTLY the same place as we are right now, only down one and 6/7ths of a townie only up (2/8=)1/4th of a mafia in expectation, since a vote for anybody else is essentially a shot in the dark at this point. Any vote not directed toward clawtrocity is a vote against the town. Seeing as I'm dead anyway, it would be fair to say that you are either with me or against me. Make my sacrifice worth it How many games have you played? For what its worth, in most of my games there were little to no claims on day1, and most claims that got made on day1 were made up and werent killed. A blue player will be intuitively scared to come out with his role like this. He feels like its his duty to his team to do as much as possible. So i hope you understand that discussing the lynch with the implicating that youre the sure nightkill is not an option. | ||
|
Mattchew
United States5684 Posts
On May 02 2012 23:48 paschl wrote: So, how do i do this? ##Vote: Dahdum yes this is how you vote. | ||
|
Gummy
United States2180 Posts
There is nothing categorically wrong with the lie. It's what that lie reveals about the underlying beliefs. Reading tone in your second language on an internet forum is not a valid source of information in a newbie game. Your statistic on blue roles not getting killed on day one is ridiculous. It's not conditioned on day 1 contestation of role claims. Given that a blue player (myself) came out with a role on day one means that I have sufficient confidence in my accusation to risk myself for the greater good of the team. To be honest your reasoning of "I will divine the mafia by analyzing tone" will hold us back far more than it will help us going forward. Vote the obvious scum. Claw IS scum. | ||
|
Gummy
United States2180 Posts
I am making an ultimatum here. If Claw is not voted off today, then I will shut up for the rest of the game, only posting enough not to get modkilled. I will vote nolynch every day after this one if Claw is not voted off today. So make your choice between him or me. GL HF folks. | ||
|
Gummy
United States2180 Posts
| ||
| ||
