910 replies to this topic

[legoboyvdlp]

but i figured nobody'd fall for kitkat, at least on D1.

 

 

so that's the reason you voted for him? 

 

just a minute, I'm talking on Discord.

[FrigidInferno]

(sorry tw lol)

aight

btw you might wanna include the other points i made

[Canik]

Tough to get much from those wall of texts with a skimming over. And I don't have time for doing much more than that. 

​From what I've absorded currently tho I'm not getting a bad vibe from Frigid.

​In any case, I don't like lynching active people D1. I don't mind lynching inactives tho if it seems they'll remain inactive. The main reason people say don't is because they can be replaced but.. those replacements are fairly often scum and it messes with town. I think SeeBeeGipson won it for Mafia last game that way if I'm not mistake.

​So, might change this to a different inactive later but for the moment:

​Unvote: SBG

​Vote: GoldIron

[legoboyvdlp]

I also believe that kitkat should be investigated night 2, considering the fact that if kit IS mafia, kit might be making a bluff to get rid of two non-mafia. So if someone investigates the others and finds them inno, we can move on to other sus rather than lynching them. Not sure if what I said makes sense but imo the warrior and robert are now the last on my sus list. I'll try to sum it up: Kit comes out as mafia, it turns out kit IS actually mafia, so now we are desperate to lynch/kill tw and robert, who, for all we know, could be the more powerful townies or at the other end of the spectrucm, a fruit vendor and a neighborizer.

 

 

It is evident that for Kitkat to be investigated on night 2, he couldn't be lynched day 1 OR day 2. 

And yes, you seemingly believed that the other two should be investigated also, which I agree with. But to do that, you would have to leave Kitkat, a claimed scum (albeit in a joke) alive throughout day 1 and day 2. 

you never said that kitkat should be investigated first, but that's not the point

to be fair, you probably meant night 1, that is tonight?

[FrigidInferno]

oh fuck ive made a terrible mistake concerning the nights lmao, for some odd reason in my head i was thinking it went like this:

 

D1, N2, D3, N4, and so on

instead of

 

D1,N1,D2,N2.

wow i am super fucking stupid lmao

[brewersalliance]

if there was a violation, it would have been handled privately.

but, there is another clause to that rule, if all the scum members agree to it, a scum can out fellow scum, as a tactic.

so i can't confirm nor deny whether all the 3 are scum as they could be using a tactic or it could be a rule violation.

a rule violation may result in a reset, but sometimes it will be dealt with by giving out a warning privately.
depending on the mod's discretion.

I made this post as i feel that my post after KitKat's became a major argument in the successive posts.
I now feel that the wording of my post there is not accurate.

My post was just a clarifier for all the new players, as some of them will soon ask me if what KitKat did is permissible.

So keep hunting scum and don't drag me into all your posts.
when i see my name in a post as i fly through the post, i am thinking there is a question in it for me.

alright im going to address this first:  MK saying this basically means my kitkat strategy now has absolutely zero merit, since nothing at all would be confirmed with a kitkat lynch, thus meaning its pointless to follow through on a strategy that holds zero merit.  So with that being said

 

unvote:  kitkat

[iSocialism]

All the wall of text, mostly quoting, is painful. Just say hey blank blank, I disagree. Not quote the quote of the person quoting a quote.

[Robert2424]

FrigidInferno immediately agreed that kitkat should be left to day two, which IMO is suspicious. A claimed scum... shouldn't he be lynched immediately? Also, he contradicted himself, saying first that kitkat should be investigated, then saying that Kitkat's reveals should be investigated in post 43. Also, he voted no lynch which is a scummy move as I have stated before. Especially given the fact that mafia could have very high powered roles. Another point, he was quick to follow my lead in both kitkat and GoldIron which makes me think SCUMMY due to the buddy theory. Reading doown he says he knows he isn't scum. Claiming to "know" is suspicious in itself, also, it is a given that few mafia will caim they are mafia , so why the need to say you are town? Show, don't tell!   

I did find the post to be odd in itself. Also funny. I mainly put that as KitKat way of a joke. I proceed to say if TW was in fact a scum partner, it be unfair to you guys. (And no, I'm not trying to kiss ass here) He's an Intelligent individual who understands mafia and I've talked to him many times meaning if I'm going to have chemistry with anybody here as a mafia partner, it be him. So I would say it would no way clear me as Town if Kit Kat is truly scum. Nor TW for that matter. 

KevinH said "scum will never vote for one of their own". I don't think that is correct. For instance, should GoldIron indeed be scum, the person who also voted on him is high on my s--t list / scum list, since it would "prove" said person to be "town". I agree with what brewers said: if Kevin votes on a scum, this may well be a post to fall back on to prove his town status. Also, he has added nothing of value so far. RVS still, on page 5, really? 

I agree with this. I will admit in past games I've done so myself. It creates distance and destroys links between scum teams. 

Robert, I find very suspicious indeed. That was one place where I was telling the truth --> in post 46 he tried to draw attention to my posts, which is an excellent maneouvre for scum, but a really stupid maneouvre for town, unless you are doing it to yourself, like me. I really drew attention to myself today, and he bit starting a wagon on me. He claims that I rub him the wrong way. FYI I don't rub him. He also gives no reason apart from this vague claim. This also sets off another vote on me by SBG. See my first point regarding robert in post 46. 

You misunderstand my motives. I shrugged off your vote as nothing more then Fluff. I felt it was unwise to involve me with your own problems. As I have no idea what your current experience in Mafia is, that was me, giving you a chance to rethink what you were doing. 

 

It's Day 1. Nobody knows nothin'.

The only way this has context is cause nobody has used there night actions yet. I agree that probably day 1 should end in a No Lynch, but I come from a different school of thought about it. Days can be used to collect information just as much as the night, while Kevin, (I could be wrong here), counts on info from Power roles to get a good lynch. I believe we should let the day continue for as much time as we can and gain the info we can then voting for a no lynch so early. Its almost like you've given up on gaining any info or reads. We all have one piece of information and motivation to work from. Our roles them self. Some know more then others. 

 

(sorry tw lol)

Why you apologizing to TW?

[The Warrior]

The brewers/frigid/lego love triangle is making my head spin. I read through the arguments but am at work and don't believe I've been able to give them enough thought yet to comment so I will re-visit them when I am less busy. Having said that, it has generally been my experience that big back and forth arguments like that are generally made between townies while the scum team is perfectly content sitting back and watching it occur. Does that mean that none of them are scum? No, I just don't like big arguments occurring between two or three people while everyone else sits back and watches.

Any thoughts on all that Rafay or iSoc or Kevin?

[iSocialism]

To much wall to overcome. Didn't read in to it.

[Robert2424]

Well, Kevin is Kevin. Isoc is mainly complaining about walls of text, and rafay I don't have a big mental not on him.

[brewersalliance]

So after re reading everything here are some of my thoughts.

 

There has def been some suspicious behavior from lego that most of you have already hit on, but at the same time, lego has been very vocal, and thus has been painting a target on his back.  He has not backed away from any sort of confrontation and at times, he seems to be looking for it.  If he was scum im not entirely sold that he would be so aggressive and polarizing so quickly.

 

Two people that jump out at me that no one has really touched on much yet are Canik and iSoc.  Canik started off the game with a lulz vote but hasnt really posted anything of significance.  Canik then placed a vote on GoldIron for not posting anything of significance in the game when in fact thats exactly what Canik has also done.

[brewersalliance]

As far as iSoc, this is what he has given us so far:  6 pointless fluff posts so he is not viewed as inactive or hiding, but at the same time, he has not contributed a single thing to the game

I got nothing to add at the moment, just don't want to be labeled inactive

fluff with no point other than to prevent a lynch vote on himself

 

I want to be suspicious. Dibs on the hammer

I feel this might be an attempt at reverse psychology with the idea being "if i joke that i want to be a suspect, no one will actually think i am and will just view me as joking"  This is a HUGE red flag to me

 

I always want to be seen as suspicious, scum tends not to lynch you that way.

Same with this for the exact same reasons.  Saying he wants to avoid being targeted by scum so he acts like it makes me wonder if he is again trying to throw us off his trail.  if that was my strategy i dont think i would announce it to the scum

 

Mafia day talk has been more of a TW moderated game thing. Not fully ruling it out, but o don't see where MK has hint at day talk for scum.

it was in the rules, so he either didnt read them, or he wants us to think he cant be mafia because if he was he would obviously know that they can talk during the day

 

All the wall of text, mostly quoting, is painful. Just say hey blank blank, I disagree. Not quote the quote of the person quoting a quote.

here is one of iSoc making excuses for why he cant read the posts others have made because they are "painful"

 

To much wall to overcome. Didn't read in to it.

another excuses for why he isnt reading the posts.  This is a game about reading what people say and analyzing it.  If you dont read it, what good are you to the town.  Either you are a town that doesnt care and has no value, or you are scum and dont want to help hunting your people, since perhaps the ones town are hitting at are in fact your scum partners

 

Im putting my FoS on iSoc, which could very quickly turn into a vote depending on what iSoc has to say

ive only played one other game but in the one I played iSoc was town, and sure he did get killed, but at the same time he did put in a strong effort into finding scum and never was lackadaisical in his posts or acting like he just didnt care to help town.  sure it could be a change in his town strategy but at the same time, i would like to think that there would be at least some resemblance of the effort he gave in the past

[iSocialism]

Mafia is a complicated game to model, so most analyses of optimal play have assumed both (a) that there are only townsfolk and mafiosi and ( that the townsfolk never have a probability of identifying the Mafia that is better than chance. Early treatment of the game concentrated on simulation,[20] while more recent studies have tried to derive closed-form equilibrium solutions for perfect play.

In 2006, the computer scientists Braverman, Etesami and Mossel proved that without detectives and with perfect players the randomized strategy is optimal for both citizens and mafia. When there is a large enough number of players to give both groups similar probability of winning, they showed that the initial number of mafiosi m needs to be proportional to the square root of the total number of players P, that is {\displaystyle {\textstyle m\propto {\sqrt {P}}}} {\textstyle m\propto {\sqrt {P}}}.[21] With a simulation, they confirmed that 50 mafiosi would have almost a 50% chance to win among 10,000. The Mafia's chance of victory is

{\displaystyle W(m,P)\approx {\frac {m}{\sqrt {P}}},} W(m,P)\approx {\frac {m}{\sqrt {P}}},

which is a good approximation when the right hand side is below 40%. If any detectives are added to the game, Braverman et al. proved that the number of mafiosi must remain at a fixed proportion of the total number of players for their chance of winning to remain constant.[Note 3]

In 2008, Erlin Yao derived specific analytical bounds for the mafia's win probability when there are no detectives.[22]

In a paper[23] from 2010, exact formula for the probability that the mafia wins was found. Moreover, it was shown that the parity of the initial number of players plays an important role. In particular, when the number of mafiosi is fixed and an odd player is added to the game (and ties are resolved by coin flips), the mafia-winning chance do not drop but rise by a factor of approx. {\displaystyle {\sqrt {\pi /2}}} {\sqrt {\pi /2}} (equality in the limit of the infinite number of players)....

Better?

[brewersalliance]

No, not better.  I dont think copy and pasting from this  helps in any way lol

[iSocialism]

But... I saved Latin, I mean me add stuff. Like FOS everyone, besides town. FoS the inactive for not talking. FoS the top poster for talking too much. FoS those still alive on d1. Screw it, no more FoS . Vote than unvote. Than vote again wait unvote. Wait FoS that person for being to eager to vote. Naw unvote. Guys are you even paying attention if we mis-lynch today we are going to be closer to losing. Me? I'm town see how many FoS I have on other people... like frikin thousands of them. FoS on someone.

That's my summary of day one, mix with some day 2.

In every f ing game. Sorry if it doesn't fit anyone standard on what I should be posting on day one
That post doesn't imply to just one person.

[FrigidInferno]

/ooc lol you scientifical bastard, you. /ooc

Adding my two cents by saying I still wanna lynch canik for allowing the secretive killings to go on as long as they have. This should have been address the second they started.

very well said

Un-Vote: No-Lynch

Vote: Canik, for allowing these killings to go unhindered, and for public indecency (Stop flashing yourself you drunk bastard")

[brewersalliance]

But... I saved Latin, I mean me add stuff. Like FOS everyone, besides town. FoS the inactive for not talking. FoS the top poster for talking too much. FoS those still alive on d1. Screw it, no more FoS . Vote than unvote. Than vote again wait unvote. Wait FoS that person for being to eager to vote. Naw unvote. Guys are you even paying attention if we mis-lynch today we are going to be closer to losing. Me? I'm town see how many FoS I have on other people... like frikin thousands of them. FoS on someone.

That's my summary of day one, mix with some day 2.

In every f ing game. Sorry if it doesn't fit anyone standard on what I should be posting on day one
That post doesn't imply to just one person.

you forgot to FoS on the mod

[The Warrior]

To much wall to overcome. Didn't read in to it.

 
 

Mafia is a complicated game to model, so most analyses of optimal play have assumed both (a) that there are only townsfolk and mafiosi and ( that the townsfolk never have a probability of identifying the Mafia that is better than chance. Early treatment of the game concentrated on simulation,[20] while more recent studies have tried to derive closed-form equilibrium solutions for perfect play.

In 2006, the computer scientists Braverman, Etesami and Mossel proved that without detectives and with perfect players the randomized strategy is optimal for both citizens and mafia. When there is a large enough number of players to give both groups similar probability of winning, they showed that the initial number of mafiosi m needs to be proportional to the square root of the total number of players P, that is {\displaystyle {\textstyle m\propto {\sqrt {P}}}} {\textstyle m\propto {\sqrt {P}}}.[21] With a simulation, they confirmed that 50 mafiosi would have almost a 50% chance to win among 10,000. The Mafia's chance of victory is

{\displaystyle W(m,P)\approx {\frac {m}{\sqrt {P}}},} W(m,P)\approx {\frac {m}{\sqrt {P}}},

which is a good approximation when the right hand side is below 40%. If any detectives are added to the game, Braverman et al. proved that the number of mafiosi must remain at a fixed proportion of the total number of players for their chance of winning to remain constant.[Note 3]

In 2008, Erlin Yao derived specific analytical bounds for the mafia's win probability when there are no detectives.[22]

In a paper[23] from 2010, exact formula for the probability that the mafia wins was found. Moreover, it was shown that the parity of the initial number of players plays an important role. In particular, when the number of mafiosi is fixed and an odd player is added to the game (and ties are resolved by coin flips), the mafia-winning chance do not drop but rise by a factor of approx. {\displaystyle {\sqrt {\pi /2}}} {\sqrt {\pi /2}} (equality in the limit of the infinite number of players)....

Better?

Come on man.. I've played with you and seen you play enough now to know your play style but some real, game pertinent thoughts would be helpful. Do you have a read on any individual players yet? If not, do you have any thoughts about the game format?

[iSocialism]

Everyone know nothing, besides who they are. By being suspicious my theory is scum will not go for me. Therefore I'm doing my best to save the most town person on my list. Creed points to iSoc for pro-town. Mafia shouldn't worry about being selected with their targets IMO. Random will be the best method, as there are many roles. I would be more inclined to hit roles than certain players.
The bickering is truly painful to me. The quotes of quotes is discouraging to read. If it's truly a scum tell sign just point it out. The fact that you have to argue and further explain every action. Is showing that it probably wasn't such a scum tell sigh to begin with. This game is about reading, but it's also about deception, so I don't read into all the bull shit.

I never fully side with a no lynch. It produces no evidence, the action of lynching someone is greatly beneficial, the lynch itself is a gamble.

When people argue they're trying to make THEIR point. As soon as someone disagrees more arguing and walls will surely be built, and people will blunder and counter themselves, but it's not a scum tell sign. Seeing how other people react and who they defend is more telling in my mind.

As for leads, you're all scum. Watch your step. Dang it another wall.