EPTEgo Mini Mafia - Page 93
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
raynpelikoneet
Finland43268 Posts
| ||
|
Oatsmaster
United States16628 Posts
Marv totally sheeped me day 1, fucking instant majority lynch. Right there is where we lost the game. The point I was bringing up about the 'good' mafia players/high impact players is because in a game SUCH AS THIS, with instant lynches, you need dudes like marv/palmar or the like to be able to PUSH the lynch through. You see on Axle, if Palmar didnt switch but proposed a new target or whatever, I dont think it wouldve gone through. Same with Ace. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
edit: oats, not sure you know what 'sheeping' means dear  | ||
|
Oatsmaster
United States16628 Posts
On April 12 2013 01:16 marvellosity wrote: I was going for truthful edit: oats, not sure you know what 'sheeping' means dear It means you want to lynch a player after I call him scum  | ||
|
AxleGreaser
Australia1154 Posts
On April 12 2013 00:04 wherebugsgo wrote: so what do you propose this game would have been a fair scumteam? That would be the rub, while I know something about the algorithms to do such things and how to implement and create them, I think I lack the expertise to do one critical step (accurately). So I will walk through version alpha zero, of an algorithm. If it does not in fact work I will just keep making up crap until I find one that does. Also note I substituted aqua for me as its less wifomy to do it for others. Step 1. Split players into two skill groups (doesnt matter where) Ace Palmar marvellosity iamperfection WaveofShadow prplhz DarthPunk Oatsmaster Tunkeg Aquanim raynpelikoneet sciberbia step 2 Repeat step one until you look at every group and say meh all the same AFAIK. Group 3 Ace Palmar marvellosity Group 2 prplhz iamperfection DarthPunk sciberbia raynpelikoneet Group 1 WaveofShadow Oatsmaster Tunkeg Aquanim Pls note If I put you in the wrong bucket... booo hoo... It really doesn't change much. If I did put you in the wrong bucket all it means is I am bad at mafia. Also I have some order in my head for those buckets and some doubt about where the best divisions are. At this point players within each group is not ordered. The categories are based on average of town and scum play according to my best guess. If you can split it into more or less groups, then fine, it wont matter. Minorish tweaks of what comes next will work with that too. So far I am probably not too far off what other people think on the groupings and even if I was it wont matter much. Indeed me injecting my personal perspective if i am the host makes it that much harder to guess. here is where expertise I don't have, but the people who host games have better than I do. Does the team prplhz, iamperfection, DarthPunk got an even money chance of winning? How about Ace, Iamperfection, WaveOfShadow/Aquanim If you suddenly find yourself saying Ace, Iamperfection, Oats is lot better then perhaps your original groupings are wrong. Anyway if the green two are balanced, then i suspect you will find the following will workish. Give each player their group number. Adding up the players group number in the scum team measures its strength. Then one trivial algorithm would be to first generate the scum teams exactly randomly. Score the team (add up its group numbers.) The two green ones add up to 6. If its is 6 keep it. If it is 5 or 7 keep it 83% of the time ( roll a D6, reject team on 6 ) If it is 4 or 8 keep it 66% of the time ( roll a D6, reject team on 5,6) If it is 3 or 9 keep it 50% of the time ( roll a D6, reject team on 4,5,6) If it is <=2 or >=10 get your cohost to do it or wait until you sober up. if you rejected the scum team go back and roll another random one. When you look at that algorithm and groupings and Go yeah Thats Ok... BUT you really must do that before you roll, you also ought check the boundary conditions thus. Just how BAD is Scumteam(Ace Palmar marvellosity) or (Oatsmaster Tunkeg Aquanim) is 50% less likely than random enough... or would just how epic it might be compensate? Note what you also might do is based on, your scum team total rating change the setup by? Edit: Note this post will probably get edited for clarity. and becuase its alpha.... Caveats: if the algorithm gives you the wrong answer dont be afraid to just mess with it. Group 3 might be given the score 3.5 or 2.5. Hell I can imagine giving player -1, if they were positively likely to get flipped after having first fingered all their scum buddies. Host ranking of players etal would all of course be shredded. If I was host Id ask the cohosts to rank them as well and mix their ranking result with mine even if I thought they were wrong. Caveats: in practice I would try to get more than 2 example teams that looked 50-50 and check they or most of them scored 6. Caveat: The above algorithm, as it stands, is probably a bad idea, as it changes the probability that anyone player rolls scum. By re-rolling games that are group3 and group 1 heavy, the odds of group 3 and 1 rolling scum in any team go down. While that probably is an issue the size of the difference is minimised because, there naturally is not a lot of combinations that are group 3 or 1 heavy. While that is still some issue, it would i believe be repairable by fiddling at the margins with some scum teams frequency a little bit. For instance reducing the frequency of teams 222 would be able to fix most of the problem, spreading that out into the 221 and 223 (decreased) (311, 331 increased) ... would compensate for this and still leave a bias against the unbalanced skill teams being rolled. While I will probably work that out, as its interesting, posting the results in an intelligible form, does not seem worth it. | ||
|
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On April 11 2013 21:16 wherebugsgo wrote: there's no proper measure of skill in this game, so the chess analogy fails horribly. Handpicking teams results in a lot of bias. It's just inherent. Based on experience I roll scum way more often when I don't request an alignment. Out of the times recently I haven't requested an alignment, I've rolled nontown 4 out of 5 times. I don't think that's coincidence. and YES, people HAVE been lynched on balance reasons. Almost solely sometimes, in fact. It hasn't happened recently but there are a myriad of reasons that can explain that. to add to this and sciberbia's point: this is why people have turned to smurfing. "vets" may not end up ultimately getting lynched, but it does have an affect on reads throughout the game. Knowing someone is likely to be Scum due to host balance can cause players to be read a certain way regardless of what they say in the thread. Many games I've played in have resulted in people not reading what I say because they assume I have to be Scum, leading to nonsense. I'm not the only one that this has happened to either. RNG is the best way to balance teams. If the Scum team gets rolled so be it - learning experience. | ||
|
wherebugsgo
Japan10647 Posts
There is nothing that indicates a scumteam of sciberbia/DP/whoever would necessarily have been better than what we had. You know why? Cause people like Axle, who play very differently dependent on alignment, are unlikely to get lynched as town. It's all just conjecture, saying that you would have been able to balance the game better on that basis without considering those 3 vets. The argument is based on seeing the results, but there is no empirical evidence that it actually holds in practice (also there's no evidence that the reason the scumteam lost was because of player imbalance either!) And to top it all off there's no measure of skill that says the scumteam you proposed is better than the one that was in this game, or that the change would have kept town level the same. E: this was @ DP and whomever else was talking about the teams | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
On April 12 2013 01:29 wherebugsgo wrote: I disagree still. There is nothing that indicates a scumteam of sciberbia/DP/whoever would necessarily have been better than what we had. You know why? Cause people like Axle, who play very differently dependent on alignment, are unlikely to get lynched as town. It's all just conjecture, saying that you would have been able to balance the game better on that basis without considering those 3 vets. The argument is based on seeing the results, but there is no empirical evidence that it actually holds in practice (also there's no evidence that the reason the scumteam lost was because of player imbalance either!) And to top it all off there's no measure of skill that says the scumteam you proposed is better than the one that was in this game, or that the change would have kept town level the same. E: this was @ DP and whomever else was talking about the teams I'm kinda tempted, in a completely arbitrary manner, to do some kind of ELO rating for players with both a town and a mafia ELO, with results in games averaged across the team's ELO. Just for curiosity of how it looks. On a speculative note, you could say that you'd expect games with a higher proportion of players with large disparity between town and mafia ELOs to have more positive town results, regardless of 'objective' rating. For example a game of 12 iamperfections would more often result in a town win than a game of 12 wbgs. | ||
|
Oatsmaster
United States16628 Posts
On April 12 2013 01:36 marvellosity wrote: I'm kinda tempted, in a completely arbitrary manner, to do some kind of ELO rating for players with both a town and a mafia ELO, with results in games averaged across the team's ELO. Just for curiosity of how it looks. On a speculative note, you could say that you'd expect games with a higher proportion of players with large disparity between town and mafia ELOs to have more positive town results, regardless of 'objective' rating. For example a game of 12 iamperfections would more often result in a town win than a game of 12 wbgs. 12 Iamps. Hilarious | ||
|
raynpelikoneet
Finland43268 Posts
| ||
|
raynpelikoneet
Finland43268 Posts
| ||
|
AxleGreaser
Australia1154 Posts
On April 12 2013 01:02 raynpelikoneet wrote: Yeah then your record is very impressive. What i mean is even if you got a record of 100-0 it doesn't really mean anything if you are lynched in 80% of the games. And then you are clearly doing something wrong. After all this is a game where not only what you say matters, but who are the people analyzing what you are saying and do they believe you. If nobody believes you it doesn't matter how right you are and you are doing something wrong. :D A question: If there was player with a 100-0 win rate as town and scum. Got lynched 100 times D1.... But somehow had the uncanny ability to get the scum to out themselves by mislynching him, and town to fall in WIFOM hole when they lynched him D1 as scum. While probably not plausible, just as the 100-0 isn't. Wouldn't that be spectacular play? | ||
|
raynpelikoneet
Finland43268 Posts
On April 12 2013 01:43 AxleGreaser wrote: A question: If there was player with a 100-0 win rate as town and scum. Got lynched 100 times D1.... But somehow had the uncanny ability to get the scum to out themselves by mislynching him, and town to fall in WIFOM hole when they lynched him D1 as scum. While probably not plausible, just as the 100-0 isn't. Wouldn't that be spectacular play? Yeah it would but i assume that's impossible. There always has to be townies who agree to lynching you either way, so it would be hard to point out who of the voters on you are scum, especially if you get ALWAYS lynched on D1 (meta meta). | ||
|
iamperfection
United States9640 Posts
I'm 3 and 1 as scum and I blame my teammate for the 1 | ||
|
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On April 11 2013 22:40 marvellosity wrote: Surprising that, isn't it. My belief is that a team I view as pretty one-sided would destroy the other team, the result supports my beliefs... yeah. Seems pretty reasonable to me. This game IS the alternate situation, and this game shows how the alternate situation pans out. But you're ignoring what actually happened. If myself or any other Townie hammers WoS on Day 1, or we let sciberbia get lynched Day 1 - both of which were close to happening this entire argument is meaningless. Looking at the end result without acknowledging how we got there and just declaring the entire scenario imbalanced is crazy . Also saying 3 newbie scum vs a team with 3 "vets" is a bit dishonest - in this game myself, you and Palmar didn't even have as much impact as 3 or 4 other Townies. Imagine if we knew the teams were supposed to be balanced - after you flip green, then I get mislynched there is no reading of Oat's and Turnkeg's filters. Scibebria never makes his hypothesis post about the Axle wagon. No one even needs to bother re-reading the thread - lynch Palmar because of balance. That isn't Mafia play. | ||
|
Artanis[Xp]
Netherlands12968 Posts
 | ||
|
DarthPunk
Australia10855 Posts
On April 12 2013 01:47 iamperfection wrote: I'm 3 and 1 as scum and I blame my teammate for the 1 Blame marv. New rule. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
1. iamperfection; town ELO 2000 mafia ELO 1000 2. WaveofShadow; town ELO 1500 mafia ELO 1500 3. Ace; town ELO 2100 mafia ELO 2500 4. prplhz; town ELO 1600 mafia ELO 1200 5. DarthPunk; town ELO 2000 mafia ELO 2000 6. Oatsmaster; town ELO 1400 mafia ELO 1300 7. Tunkeg; town ELO 1500 mafia ELO 1500 8. Palmar; town ELO 2400 mafia ELO 2000 9. marvellosity; town ELO 2100 mafia ELO 2400 10. Axlegreaser; town ELO 1300 mafia ELO 1300 11. raynpelinkeet; town ELO 1600 mafia ELO 1600 12. sciberbia; town ELO 2100 mafia ELO 1700 Average strength of mafia team in this game: 4100/3 = 1366.6 Average strength of town team in this game: 17400/9 = 1933.3 Best theoretical mafia team: 6900/3 = 2300 Worst theoretical town team: 15000/9 = 1666.6 Average town ELO: 21600/12 = 1800 Average mafia ELO: 20000/12 = 1666.6 | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
On April 12 2013 01:58 syllogism wrote: While you are doing arbitrary math, can you factor in the advantage town gets from knowing that teams aren't RNGed Well the thing is, it becomes much less arbitrary if I go back many games and factor in results of each game, because ELO by its nature is self-correcting. So if I make a guess that's originally too high, if they lose games then their rating would fall quite quickly. | ||
| ||
