|
On October 23 2013 22:00 istandwithmitt wrote:
That should be a mafia win not a draw. If number of mafia = number of other players during a day that's the end of the game for mafia.
Technically, it would have been a vote race because of the tiebreaker rule, and the winner would've been the one that dropped a vote on the other first. Since vote races are dumb we decided we prefer to end the game with a draw.
On October 23 2013 22:00 istandwithmitt wrote:
Also sorry I got modkilled. The rule that you have to vote every day is really dumb so I'm not that sorry. I was posting that day & was busy before the deadline but I still got modkilled? I don't know what that's set up to avoid because it's obviously not just
people who don't post.
However dumb you think it is, it was the rule. You don't like the rules, then don't play.
Personally, I believe the rule makes sense from a game theory perspective, but that's not the issue here.
On October 23 2013 22:00 istandwithmitt wrote:
An okay game mod should learn how to call games in the end & fix modkill rule & maybe it would be better than okay.
I'm glad you appreciate the effort we put into this...
On October 23 2013 22:36 kitaman27 wrote:
There is a grey area between whether or not a single no-vote should be a modkillable offense. Some hosts will wait until you break a rule twice, others will enforce it right away. While I don't think the voting rule should change, we should probably try to be more consistent with how it is punished.
If we consistently let single no-voters get by with a warning, that becomes a strategic option in itself (although one of questionable morality)...
|
United Kingdom36160 Posts
On October 23 2013 22:49 LoneMeow wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2013 22:00 istandwithmitt wrote:
That should be a mafia win not a draw. If number of mafia = number of other players during a day that's the end of the game for mafia.
Technically, it would have been a vote race because of the tiebreaker rule, and the winner would've been the one that dropped a vote on the other first. Since vote races are dumb we decided we prefer to end the game with a draw.
No, the game is a draw because owb can shoot at the mafia.
If owb didn't have a gun, then it would be a mafia win.
|
OWB'S GOT A GUN... OWB'S GOT A GUN!
|
On October 23 2013 12:29 Seuss wrote:Hey, wait a second: WaveOfShadow, to Seuss: WaveOfShadow, to onlywonderboy: NOW JUST A DARN MINUTE HERE!
this cracked me up. it's OK Seuss, you're still a special snowflake.
|
United Kingdom36160 Posts
|
On October 23 2013 22:27 marvellosity wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2013 22:26 istandwithmitt wrote:On October 23 2013 22:24 marvellosity wrote:On October 23 2013 22:00 istandwithmitt wrote:
That should be a mafia win not a draw. If number of mafia = number of other players during a day that's the end of the game for mafia.
I actually posted this then edited it out because I realised I was wrong. owb was a multi-shot vigilante and so could have shot mafia at the time he was shot by mafia. People worry way too much about the exact wording in the OP, when using common sense to work out what would happen is almost always the right way. The only reason there's the # of mafia = # of town rule is to rule out stupid vote races based on who's online when. Exactly. If its 2:1 town:mafia, then town isn't actually encouraged to vote for mafia nor is mafia to kill the following night in the case of a NL. That should 100% be a mafia victory. What are you talking about? Town is obviously encouraged to vote in a 2:1 situation, otherwise a 2:1 situation becomes a 1:1 situation. Literally the *only* situation that mafia does NOT win in this 1:1 situation is the EXACT situation that occurred in this game - where the remaining townie has bullets to shoot at the mafia.
Not very. In a 2:1 situation, town could vote, mislynch, & have the other townie killed off resulting in a mafia victory. All things equal that's a 67% chance of happening & resulting in a scum win. If they no lynch & one of them is killed off the next day, the vote race (while dumb) results in a 50% chance of a scum win.
That's why 1:1 situations are resolved as scum wins. Not to mention that usually in a 1:1 situation it wouldn't be possible to have a majority vote but I think we were playing plurality which is usually also bad.
|
On October 23 2013 23:03 istandwithmitt wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2013 22:27 marvellosity wrote:On October 23 2013 22:26 istandwithmitt wrote:On October 23 2013 22:24 marvellosity wrote:On October 23 2013 22:00 istandwithmitt wrote:
That should be a mafia win not a draw. If number of mafia = number of other players during a day that's the end of the game for mafia.
I actually posted this then edited it out because I realised I was wrong. owb was a multi-shot vigilante and so could have shot mafia at the time he was shot by mafia. People worry way too much about the exact wording in the OP, when using common sense to work out what would happen is almost always the right way. The only reason there's the # of mafia = # of town rule is to rule out stupid vote races based on who's online when. Exactly. If its 2:1 town:mafia, then town isn't actually encouraged to vote for mafia nor is mafia to kill the following night in the case of a NL. That should 100% be a mafia victory. What are you talking about? Town is obviously encouraged to vote in a 2:1 situation, otherwise a 2:1 situation becomes a 1:1 situation. Literally the *only* situation that mafia does NOT win in this 1:1 situation is the EXACT situation that occurred in this game - where the remaining townie has bullets to shoot at the mafia. Not very. In a 2:1 situation, town could vote, mislynch, & have the other townie killed off resulting in a mafia victory. All things equal that's a 67% chance of happening & resulting in a scum win. If they no lynch & one of them is killed off the next day, the vote race (while dumb) results in a 50% chance of a scum win. That's why 1:1 situations are resolved as scum wins. Not to mention that usually in a 1:1 situation it wouldn't be possible to have a majority vote but I think we were playing plurality which is usually also bad.
this is a unique situation because both town and mafia have 1 kp.
|
On October 23 2013 22:49 LoneMeow wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2013 22:00 istandwithmitt wrote:
That should be a mafia win not a draw. If number of mafia = number of other players during a day that's the end of the game for mafia.
Technically, it would have been a vote race because of the tiebreaker rule, and the winner would've been the one that dropped a vote on the other first. Since vote races are dumb we decided we prefer to end the game with a draw. Show nested quote +On October 23 2013 22:00 istandwithmitt wrote:
Also sorry I got modkilled. The rule that you have to vote every day is really dumb so I'm not that sorry. I was posting that day & was busy before the deadline but I still got modkilled? I don't know what that's set up to avoid because it's obviously not just
people who don't post.
However dumb you think it is, it was the rule. You don't like the rules, then don't play. Personally, I believe the rule makes sense from a game theory perspective, but that's not the issue here. Show nested quote +On October 23 2013 22:00 istandwithmitt wrote:
An okay game mod should learn how to call games in the end & fix modkill rule & maybe it would be better than okay. I'm glad you appreciate the effort we put into this... Show nested quote +On October 23 2013 22:36 kitaman27 wrote:
There is a grey area between whether or not a single no-vote should be a modkillable offense. Some hosts will wait until you break a rule twice, others will enforce it right away. While I don't think the voting rule should change, we should probably try to be more consistent with how it is punished. If we consistently let single no-voters get by with a warning, that becomes a strategic option in itself (although one of questionable morality)...
I realize it was a rule which is why I said it was a "dumb rule" & not a "dumb mod." Abstaining is a silly thing to deter especially since the reason seems to be that it's a "scum tactic." You wouldn't deter bussing so why does it make sense to deter abstaining? Both can confuse the town but apparently one is legitimate & one illegitimate in a game based on lying.. okay..
It just seemed silly to modkill someone who was active in the game clear up to a deadline & then modkilling them for something inconsequential.
It is the mod's decision & if that's a common rule around here, everyone should consider reconsidering it. 
|
More often than not I find that rule more visibly affects people who fuck off for most of a game and don't care enough to vote.
In which case I support it wholeheartedly.
|
United Kingdom36160 Posts
On October 23 2013 23:03 istandwithmitt wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2013 22:27 marvellosity wrote:On October 23 2013 22:26 istandwithmitt wrote:On October 23 2013 22:24 marvellosity wrote:On October 23 2013 22:00 istandwithmitt wrote:
That should be a mafia win not a draw. If number of mafia = number of other players during a day that's the end of the game for mafia.
I actually posted this then edited it out because I realised I was wrong. owb was a multi-shot vigilante and so could have shot mafia at the time he was shot by mafia. People worry way too much about the exact wording in the OP, when using common sense to work out what would happen is almost always the right way. The only reason there's the # of mafia = # of town rule is to rule out stupid vote races based on who's online when. Exactly. If its 2:1 town:mafia, then town isn't actually encouraged to vote for mafia nor is mafia to kill the following night in the case of a NL. That should 100% be a mafia victory. What are you talking about? Town is obviously encouraged to vote in a 2:1 situation, otherwise a 2:1 situation becomes a 1:1 situation. Literally the *only* situation that mafia does NOT win in this 1:1 situation is the EXACT situation that occurred in this game - where the remaining townie has bullets to shoot at the mafia. Not very. In a 2:1 situation, town could vote, mislynch, & have the other townie killed off resulting in a mafia victory. All things equal that's a 67% chance of happening & resulting in a scum win. If they no lynch & one of them is killed off the next day, the vote race (while dumb) results in a 50% chance of a scum win. That's why 1:1 situations are resolved as scum wins. Not to mention that usually in a 1:1 situation it wouldn't be possible to have a majority vote but I think we were playing plurality which is usually also bad.
The 1:1 situation this game is a special situation because the townie has a gun
pretty sure i already explained this. I think we're done here.
|
On October 23 2013 23:09 WaveofShadow wrote:
More often than not I find that rule more visibly affects people who fuck off for most of a game and don't care enough to vote.
In which case I support it wholeheartedly.
A better rule would be not posting for a whole day = modkill then in my imo
|
On October 23 2013 23:13 istandwithmitt wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2013 23:09 WaveofShadow wrote:
More often than not I find that rule more visibly affects people who fuck off for most of a game and don't care enough to vote.
In which case I support it wholeheartedly. A better rule would be not posting for a whole day = modkill then in my imo
That rule already exists, and it's not enough imo. (Ingame day rather than 24h period is the current rule).
|
On October 23 2013 23:11 marvellosity wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2013 23:03 istandwithmitt wrote:On October 23 2013 22:27 marvellosity wrote:On October 23 2013 22:26 istandwithmitt wrote:On October 23 2013 22:24 marvellosity wrote:On October 23 2013 22:00 istandwithmitt wrote:
That should be a mafia win not a draw. If number of mafia = number of other players during a day that's the end of the game for mafia.
I actually posted this then edited it out because I realised I was wrong. owb was a multi-shot vigilante and so could have shot mafia at the time he was shot by mafia. People worry way too much about the exact wording in the OP, when using common sense to work out what would happen is almost always the right way. The only reason there's the # of mafia = # of town rule is to rule out stupid vote races based on who's online when. Exactly. If its 2:1 town:mafia, then town isn't actually encouraged to vote for mafia nor is mafia to kill the following night in the case of a NL. That should 100% be a mafia victory. What are you talking about? Town is obviously encouraged to vote in a 2:1 situation, otherwise a 2:1 situation becomes a 1:1 situation. Literally the *only* situation that mafia does NOT win in this 1:1 situation is the EXACT situation that occurred in this game - where the remaining townie has bullets to shoot at the mafia. Not very. In a 2:1 situation, town could vote, mislynch, & have the other townie killed off resulting in a mafia victory. All things equal that's a 67% chance of happening & resulting in a scum win. If they no lynch & one of them is killed off the next day, the vote race (while dumb) results in a 50% chance of a scum win. That's why 1:1 situations are resolved as scum wins. Not to mention that usually in a 1:1 situation it wouldn't be possible to have a majority vote but I think we were playing plurality which is usually also bad. The 1:1 situation this game is a special situation because the townie has a gun pretty sure i already explained this. I think we're done here.
That's still dumb. Town has a 33% chance of winning, tying, or losing in LYLO lmao. In MYLO, it's a 25% chance of winning , 50% chance of a vote race, or a 25% chance of a tie. Allowing vote racing OR calling things a tie "because a townie has a gun" is dumb & favors town way over scum.
|
United Kingdom36160 Posts
On October 23 2013 23:17 istandwithmitt wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2013 23:11 marvellosity wrote:On October 23 2013 23:03 istandwithmitt wrote:On October 23 2013 22:27 marvellosity wrote:On October 23 2013 22:26 istandwithmitt wrote:On October 23 2013 22:24 marvellosity wrote:On October 23 2013 22:00 istandwithmitt wrote:
That should be a mafia win not a draw. If number of mafia = number of other players during a day that's the end of the game for mafia.
I actually posted this then edited it out because I realised I was wrong. owb was a multi-shot vigilante and so could have shot mafia at the time he was shot by mafia. People worry way too much about the exact wording in the OP, when using common sense to work out what would happen is almost always the right way. The only reason there's the # of mafia = # of town rule is to rule out stupid vote races based on who's online when. Exactly. If its 2:1 town:mafia, then town isn't actually encouraged to vote for mafia nor is mafia to kill the following night in the case of a NL. That should 100% be a mafia victory. What are you talking about? Town is obviously encouraged to vote in a 2:1 situation, otherwise a 2:1 situation becomes a 1:1 situation. Literally the *only* situation that mafia does NOT win in this 1:1 situation is the EXACT situation that occurred in this game - where the remaining townie has bullets to shoot at the mafia. Not very. In a 2:1 situation, town could vote, mislynch, & have the other townie killed off resulting in a mafia victory. All things equal that's a 67% chance of happening & resulting in a scum win. If they no lynch & one of them is killed off the next day, the vote race (while dumb) results in a 50% chance of a scum win. That's why 1:1 situations are resolved as scum wins. Not to mention that usually in a 1:1 situation it wouldn't be possible to have a majority vote but I think we were playing plurality which is usually also bad. The 1:1 situation this game is a special situation because the townie has a gun pretty sure i already explained this. I think we're done here. That's still dumb. Town has a 33% chance of winning, tying, or losing in LYLO lmao. In MYLO, it's a 25% chance of winning , 50% chance of a vote race, or a 25% chance of a tie. Allowing vote racing OR calling things a tie "because a townie has a gun" is dumb & favors town way over scum.
It's nothing to do with "favouring"
You disallow vote-races because that relies on when people are physically online, which is an outside-of-game commodity/chance
Therefore it goes to night actions, where both players have guns to shoot each other with, which they obviously will. It's really, really, really simple.
|
this argument is dumb and has gone on to long.
Marv has won move on.
|
On October 23 2013 23:20 marvellosity wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2013 23:17 istandwithmitt wrote:On October 23 2013 23:11 marvellosity wrote:On October 23 2013 23:03 istandwithmitt wrote:On October 23 2013 22:27 marvellosity wrote:On October 23 2013 22:26 istandwithmitt wrote:On October 23 2013 22:24 marvellosity wrote:On October 23 2013 22:00 istandwithmitt wrote:
That should be a mafia win not a draw. If number of mafia = number of other players during a day that's the end of the game for mafia.
I actually posted this then edited it out because I realised I was wrong. owb was a multi-shot vigilante and so could have shot mafia at the time he was shot by mafia. People worry way too much about the exact wording in the OP, when using common sense to work out what would happen is almost always the right way. The only reason there's the # of mafia = # of town rule is to rule out stupid vote races based on who's online when. Exactly. If its 2:1 town:mafia, then town isn't actually encouraged to vote for mafia nor is mafia to kill the following night in the case of a NL. That should 100% be a mafia victory. What are you talking about? Town is obviously encouraged to vote in a 2:1 situation, otherwise a 2:1 situation becomes a 1:1 situation. Literally the *only* situation that mafia does NOT win in this 1:1 situation is the EXACT situation that occurred in this game - where the remaining townie has bullets to shoot at the mafia. Not very. In a 2:1 situation, town could vote, mislynch, & have the other townie killed off resulting in a mafia victory. All things equal that's a 67% chance of happening & resulting in a scum win. If they no lynch & one of them is killed off the next day, the vote race (while dumb) results in a 50% chance of a scum win. That's why 1:1 situations are resolved as scum wins. Not to mention that usually in a 1:1 situation it wouldn't be possible to have a majority vote but I think we were playing plurality which is usually also bad. The 1:1 situation this game is a special situation because the townie has a gun pretty sure i already explained this. I think we're done here. That's still dumb. Town has a 33% chance of winning, tying, or losing in LYLO lmao. In MYLO, it's a 25% chance of winning , 50% chance of a vote race, or a 25% chance of a tie. Allowing vote racing OR calling things a tie "because a townie has a gun" is dumb & favors town way over scum. It's nothing to do with "favouring" You disallow vote-races because that relies on when people are physically online, which is an outside-of-game commodity/chance Therefore it goes to night actions, where both players have guns to shoot each other with, which they obviously will. It's really, really, really simple.
In LYNCH OR LOSE, town has a 33% chance of winning, tying, or losing. With no vig, they have a 50% chance of tying by not lynching.
|
kitaman27
United States9244 Posts
Rather than LYLO, I believe they call that scenario MYLODITHAV (Mislynch and lose or draw if town has a vig).
|
United Kingdom36160 Posts
On October 23 2013 23:25 istandwithmitt wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2013 23:20 marvellosity wrote:On October 23 2013 23:17 istandwithmitt wrote:On October 23 2013 23:11 marvellosity wrote:On October 23 2013 23:03 istandwithmitt wrote:On October 23 2013 22:27 marvellosity wrote:On October 23 2013 22:26 istandwithmitt wrote:On October 23 2013 22:24 marvellosity wrote:On October 23 2013 22:00 istandwithmitt wrote:
That should be a mafia win not a draw. If number of mafia = number of other players during a day that's the end of the game for mafia.
I actually posted this then edited it out because I realised I was wrong. owb was a multi-shot vigilante and so could have shot mafia at the time he was shot by mafia. People worry way too much about the exact wording in the OP, when using common sense to work out what would happen is almost always the right way. The only reason there's the # of mafia = # of town rule is to rule out stupid vote races based on who's online when. Exactly. If its 2:1 town:mafia, then town isn't actually encouraged to vote for mafia nor is mafia to kill the following night in the case of a NL. That should 100% be a mafia victory. What are you talking about? Town is obviously encouraged to vote in a 2:1 situation, otherwise a 2:1 situation becomes a 1:1 situation. Literally the *only* situation that mafia does NOT win in this 1:1 situation is the EXACT situation that occurred in this game - where the remaining townie has bullets to shoot at the mafia. Not very. In a 2:1 situation, town could vote, mislynch, & have the other townie killed off resulting in a mafia victory. All things equal that's a 67% chance of happening & resulting in a scum win. If they no lynch & one of them is killed off the next day, the vote race (while dumb) results in a 50% chance of a scum win. That's why 1:1 situations are resolved as scum wins. Not to mention that usually in a 1:1 situation it wouldn't be possible to have a majority vote but I think we were playing plurality which is usually also bad. The 1:1 situation this game is a special situation because the townie has a gun pretty sure i already explained this. I think we're done here. That's still dumb. Town has a 33% chance of winning, tying, or losing in LYLO lmao. In MYLO, it's a 25% chance of winning , 50% chance of a vote race, or a 25% chance of a tie. Allowing vote racing OR calling things a tie "because a townie has a gun" is dumb & favors town way over scum. It's nothing to do with "favouring" You disallow vote-races because that relies on when people are physically online, which is an outside-of-game commodity/chance Therefore it goes to night actions, where both players have guns to shoot each other with, which they obviously will. It's really, really, really simple. In LYNCH OR LOSE, town has a 33% chance of winning, tying, or losing. With no vig, they have a 50% chance of tying by not lynching.
Town loses 100% of the time by not lynching if they have no vigi - it goes to 1-1, no voting, then mafia kills the townie at night
Once again, town having a vigi alive at the end of the game is a unique situation.
|
THE SEXINESS IT'S SO OVERWHELMING
Seriously though, move on guys.
|
On October 23 2013 23:31 marvellosity wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2013 23:25 istandwithmitt wrote:On October 23 2013 23:20 marvellosity wrote:On October 23 2013 23:17 istandwithmitt wrote:On October 23 2013 23:11 marvellosity wrote:On October 23 2013 23:03 istandwithmitt wrote:On October 23 2013 22:27 marvellosity wrote:On October 23 2013 22:26 istandwithmitt wrote:On October 23 2013 22:24 marvellosity wrote:On October 23 2013 22:00 istandwithmitt wrote:
That should be a mafia win not a draw. If number of mafia = number of other players during a day that's the end of the game for mafia.
I actually posted this then edited it out because I realised I was wrong. owb was a multi-shot vigilante and so could have shot mafia at the time he was shot by mafia. People worry way too much about the exact wording in the OP, when using common sense to work out what would happen is almost always the right way. The only reason there's the # of mafia = # of town rule is to rule out stupid vote races based on who's online when. Exactly. If its 2:1 town:mafia, then town isn't actually encouraged to vote for mafia nor is mafia to kill the following night in the case of a NL. That should 100% be a mafia victory. What are you talking about? Town is obviously encouraged to vote in a 2:1 situation, otherwise a 2:1 situation becomes a 1:1 situation. Literally the *only* situation that mafia does NOT win in this 1:1 situation is the EXACT situation that occurred in this game - where the remaining townie has bullets to shoot at the mafia. Not very. In a 2:1 situation, town could vote, mislynch, & have the other townie killed off resulting in a mafia victory. All things equal that's a 67% chance of happening & resulting in a scum win. If they no lynch & one of them is killed off the next day, the vote race (while dumb) results in a 50% chance of a scum win. That's why 1:1 situations are resolved as scum wins. Not to mention that usually in a 1:1 situation it wouldn't be possible to have a majority vote but I think we were playing plurality which is usually also bad. The 1:1 situation this game is a special situation because the townie has a gun pretty sure i already explained this. I think we're done here. That's still dumb. Town has a 33% chance of winning, tying, or losing in LYLO lmao. In MYLO, it's a 25% chance of winning , 50% chance of a vote race, or a 25% chance of a tie. Allowing vote racing OR calling things a tie "because a townie has a gun" is dumb & favors town way over scum. It's nothing to do with "favouring" You disallow vote-races because that relies on when people are physically online, which is an outside-of-game commodity/chance Therefore it goes to night actions, where both players have guns to shoot each other with, which they obviously will. It's really, really, really simple. In LYNCH OR LOSE, town has a 33% chance of winning, tying, or losing. With no vig, they have a 50% chance of tying by not lynching. Town loses 100% of the time by not lynching if they have no vigi - it goes to 1-1, no voting, then mafia kills the townie at night Once again, town having a vigi alive at the end of the game is a unique situation.
But the townie has a gun
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
