Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Traitors on the Battlefront
#81
Posted 05 September 2010 - 07:16 AM
so that we can discuss something more. There's nothing more
to discuss if we don't.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mafia fail statistics: 13 Wins (11T/1M/1O), 7 Loses (6T/1O), 4 Draws/Abandoned
Code Geass Mafia is currently looking for players. Come play with us!
#82
Posted 05 September 2010 - 08:47 AM
Actually, they could just post all their info in one post instead of double or triple posting. Anyway, I agree with trying to get three people with clearly more posts than the others. I suggest that the top three posters try and post as much content as possible in the next two days and that everyone else doesn't post in the meantime. I'd suggest that if you are not in the top 3 that you will only post if you desperately need to get something out now or if you disagree with the strategy. We can request the update at the end of the two days when the differences are even bigger. We don't want a spread of post counts, we want three clear leaders and the rest clearly behind. This is the best way to be able to say something about the top 3. With a spread it could be that #4-5-6 are mafia and we may falsely conclude that someone from the top 3 must have been mafia.Let me explain it better...
If we're going with your strategy we need to make it so that the other 7 posters
will be significantly lower than the top 3 posters.
To keep their post counts at a minimum, they'll
try to double post or triple post as much as possible.
There are pros and cons to this strategy however.
#83
Posted 05 September 2010 - 09:02 AM
Two medium-activity posters that are scum will look exactly the same as one heavy-activity and one light-activity poster.
The suggestion to only have three players with alot of activity is bad. If two of those three are scum, it's possible they'll reach 90%. If one of those three are scum, the information gained that each has a 1/3 chance of being scum is not much better than knowing that 3 of the other 9 of you are scum.
Unvote.
Keep posting. I'm interested in the battlefield shift but it will be of more use if we get the update later rather than sooner. If one player lags significantly behind in post count, they will probably get my vote.
#84
Posted 05 September 2010 - 11:39 AM
What? Why?Keep posting. I'm interested in the battlefield shift but it will be of more use if we get the update later rather than sooner. If one player lags significantly behind in post count, they will probably get my vote.
And what you can see in the last few pages is completely why this strategy can't and won't work.
1) People post when they want to. They can have periods of more activity. They won't be constrained by people saying "Hey dude post less so we can find scum". A "nominated" person to post might drop down and be overtaken because of RL or whatever. The aim of this game is not to discourage activity by people, it's to encourage it for everyone to help their faction.
2) I imagine with such a large amount of posting everyone will be at an even-ish keel in terms of posts. Thus, using them to try and track scum is next to impossible.
3) 'Content' posts are completely subjective. What person considers to have content the mod might not. Hell, he might even discount posts which talk about using this method to find scum for all we know. Thus, using this method, we may get it completely wrong.
WHY WE SHOULD SCUMHUNT INSTEAD: The more dead scum, the less they can influence the battlefield in their favour. And even if we don't, for instance on Day 1, the posts we make don't have to be correct to be counted as contentful and to influence the battlefield in our favour.
Proud IRONer since 5th July 2006
Proud to have taken 6 nukes, and been ZI'ed for IRON.
- Mod of General Spam, Mafia, and Mole Stargazer's Bar and Grill
- Ex-Field Marshal, Admissions Admin, Warnings & Walkers and Generalwazawaza mod, Diplomat, amongst many other things that I've forgotten.
#85
Posted 05 September 2010 - 03:04 PM
Point 1 supports my position. People post when they can. I want that to continue.
Point 2 might happen but from past experience there are always a few "lurkers".
Point 3 is subjective but I would consider most of the current posts valid. Don't you miss my poetry?
#86
Posted 05 September 2010 - 05:00 PM
Lots. And every single one of those times we've got valuable information from that Day 1 where we lynched. I'm quite happy to do it again.
Proud IRONer since 5th July 2006
Proud to have taken 6 nukes, and been ZI'ed for IRON.
- Mod of General Spam, Mafia, and Mole Stargazer's Bar and Grill
- Ex-Field Marshal, Admissions Admin, Warnings & Walkers and Generalwazawaza mod, Diplomat, amongst many other things that I've forgotten.
#87
Posted 05 September 2010 - 05:30 PM
#88
Posted 05 September 2010 - 10:39 PM
The aim of this game is not to discourage activity by people, it's to encourage it for everyone to help their faction.
QFT.
Nuclear Accolade___IRON Spirit___Above Beyond_____Diligence______Seniority___
Karma Campaign__Karma Nuke_____Karma Aid___TPF Complience__CnG Campaign____CnG Nuke___
The Realm of Philonoe | | The GIMP Workshop
#89
Posted 06 September 2010 - 01:44 AM
Player A: 5 posts
Player B: 10 posts
Player C: 15 posts
If battlefield is 71% townie, then Player A must be scum.
If battlefield is 50% townie, then Player B must be scum.
If battlefield is 33% townie, then Player C must be scum.
#90
Posted 06 September 2010 - 02:29 AM
Simple case (1 scum left):
Player A: 5 posts
Player B: 10 posts
Player C: 15 posts
If battlefield is 71% townie, then Player A must be scum.
If battlefield is 50% townie, then Player B must be scum.
If battlefield is 33% townie, then Player C must be scum.
Good Point, i like this strategy Kevin, well thinking
#91
Posted 06 September 2010 - 03:45 AM
Pancho needs your prays its true but save a few for lefty too he did what he had to do and now he is growing old - Townes Van Zandt
#92
Posted 06 September 2010 - 06:25 AM
1. molestargazer - 2+4+2+0+2
2. Chaoshawk - 2+1+1+1+1
3. CanucksDynasty - 7+1+7+4+1
4. Nerau - 0+2+0+1+1
5. ccabal86 - 0+2+2+2+0
6. KevinH - 2+4+2+2+3
7. Kasabian - 0+2+0+2+1
8. Alasdair - 0+0+2+1+0
9. Martino - 0+0+1+1+1
10. Kaziocore - 0+1+1+3+1
I've taken account for every post except double/triple post (counts as 1).
I checked and every post is talking about the game so they should be valid.
No one has put in poetry or "no u" in the posts.
Cleary the top 3 posters are:
CanucksDynasty 20
KevinH 13
molestargazer 10
The next nearest are:
Chaoshawk 6
ccabal86 6
Kaziocore 6
Kasabian 5
Nerau 4
Martino 3
Alasdair 3
I vote to put in the request for update asap.
Kaziocore agrees with me...so that's 2 votes.
Chaoshawk is in somewhat of agreement...so maybe it up to 3 votes.
What do the rest of you say?
Games: NHL09, MGS4, LBP, T:WfC, KZ2, U:DF
Mafia: 24gp, 15W (8T/5M/2O), 9L (8T/1M)
#93
Posted 06 September 2010 - 07:32 AM
#94
Posted 06 September 2010 - 07:47 AM
I'll just say that we should get update now. There's not much else to discuss until we get that information.
OK that's 3 votes for update now....only need 3 more for a majority consensus.
Including this post (by page)
1. molestargazer - 2+4+2+0+2
2. Chaoshawk - 2+1+1+1+2
3. CanucksDynasty - 7+1+7+4+2
4. Nerau - 0+2+0+1+1
5. ccabal86 - 0+2+2+2+0
6. KevinH - 2+4+2+2+3
7. Kasabian - 0+2+0+2+1
8. Alasdair - 0+0+2+1+0
9. Martino - 0+0+1+1+1
10. Kaziocore - 0+1+1+3+1
CanucksDynasty 21
KevinH 13
molestargazer 10
Chaoshawk 7
ccabal86 6
Kaziocore 6
Kasabian 5
Nerau 4
Martino 3
Alasdair 3
I'm #1...yay...however the gap between #3 and #4 is shrinking.
Games: NHL09, MGS4, LBP, T:WfC, KZ2, U:DF
Mafia: 24gp, 15W (8T/5M/2O), 9L (8T/1M)
#95
Posted 06 September 2010 - 09:36 AM
Then those people have very poor discipline. I am not asking them to remain silent for the complete D1. I am asking them to refrain from posting for 48hrs unless they have something extremely urgent to post. They will still have enough time to post their opinion after the battlefield update.What? Why?
And what you can see in the last few pages is completely why this strategy can't and won't work.
1) People post when they want to.
I'm not just saying hey dude post less. I'm saying: "Hey if we have a large difference in posts, we can gain valuable information about the top three posters. So could you please wait with posting until we have a large gap and are able to extract maximum value from our ability(battlefield update)."They can have periods of more activity. They won't be constrained by people saying "Hey dude post less so we can find scum".
Well yeah that could happen. That would still leave two people with lots of posts and the rest with very few. It would still give a lot more information than a battlefield update when we have a nice spread in posts.A "nominated" person to post might drop down and be overtaken because of RL or whatever.
The aim of the game is primarily to win it. The aim of the battlefield mechanism was obviously to encourage activity. However, the objective is so steep that it doesn't really matter. There is no way it will be achieved before the fate of the game has pretty much been decided anyway. (In fact, I really can't see the town reaching our objective with any scum left alive) So sure the mechanism may be designed to encourage activity, but there is no way we will win this game with activity. However, we can win this game by using the battlefield update to get an idea about the top posters.The aim of this game is not to discourage activity by people, it's to encourage it for everyone to help their faction.
That is what we have been saying. We don't want an even spread, we want a few clear leaders.2) I imagine with such a large amount of posting everyone will be at an even-ish keel in terms of posts. Thus, using them to try and track scum is next to impossible.
Yeah, more likely though we won't get it completely wrong. Sure we may think X has 20 content posts and the mod may only count 15. But if the other posters are around 5 that is still a big difference.3) 'Content' posts are completely subjective. What person considers to have content the mod might not. Hell, he might even discount posts which talk about using this method to find scum for all we know. Thus, using this method, we may get it completely wrong.
: The more dead scum, the less they can influence the battlefield in their favour. And even if we don't, for instance on Day 1, the posts we make don't have to be correct to be counted as contentful and to influence the battlefield in our favour.WHY WE SHOULD SCUMHUNT INSTEAD
Getting a spread in postscounts IS scumhunting. It is not traditional scumhunting, but it will give us valuable information. Anyway, I'm starting to think that it is not so much that you don't see the value in the strategy, but that you know it will harm you.
vote molestargazer
#96
Posted 06 September 2010 - 10:55 AM
It could very well harm me, doesn't mean I'm scum, does it?Getting a spread in postscounts IS scumhunting. It is not traditional scumhunting, but it will give us valuable information. Anyway, I'm starting to think that it is not so much that you don't see the value in the strategy, but that you know it will harm you.
Fine, fine, I'll support the update. But I hope everyone will realise how futile this is when the results are wide open to interpretation and don't show us anything about who's scum with any level of confidence.
Maybe then we can actually scumhunt, hmm?
Proud IRONer since 5th July 2006
Proud to have taken 6 nukes, and been ZI'ed for IRON.
- Mod of General Spam, Mafia, and Mole Stargazer's Bar and Grill
- Ex-Field Marshal, Admissions Admin, Warnings & Walkers and Generalwazawaza mod, Diplomat, amongst many other things that I've forgotten.
#97
Posted 06 September 2010 - 11:12 AM
#98
Posted 06 September 2010 - 12:35 PM
1) Play with the math and agree on some conclusion about the best lynch candidate.
2) Get enough players to vote for the chosen candidate.
In a perfect world, I would prefer to wait a bit. More data would yield better results.
However, it will probably take some time to accomplish our 2 major tasks; I support the update.
#99
Posted 06 September 2010 - 12:53 PM
It could very well harm me, doesn't mean I'm scum, does it?
Fine, fine, I'll support the update. But I hope everyone will realise how futile this is when the results are wide open to interpretation and don't show us anything about who's scum with any level of confidence.
Maybe then we can actually scumhunt, hmm?
With or without this update thingy,
there will always be inactive people.
With this update, at least we might have a chance
to pinpoint the scum instead of outright guessing.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mafia fail statistics: 13 Wins (11T/1M/1O), 7 Loses (6T/1O), 4 Draws/Abandoned
Code Geass Mafia is currently looking for players. Come play with us!
#100
Posted 06 September 2010 - 01:38 PM
We will have 2 major tasks to accomplish after getting an update.
1) Play with the math and agree on some conclusion about the best lynch candidate.
2) Get enough players to vote for the chosen candidate.
In a perfect world, I would prefer to wait a bit. More data would yield better results.
However, it will probably take some time to accomplish our 2 major tasks; I support the update.
more data so also support the updated
it can help give us a clearer picture on what the math is doing due to mutliplier and such
Pancho needs your prays its true but save a few for lefty too he did what he had to do and now he is growing old - Townes Van Zandt
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users