Newbie 2016: Snapdragons (Game Over)

[LuckyLuciano]

@JamSV, why did you put Blopp at L-1 and proceed to tell players to feel free to hammer and state that you see quickhammers as NAI?

[LuckyLuciano]

UNVOTE:
I don't want a quick hammer. L-2 is plenty for pressure. Scumlean on Lucky for not removing his vote. Could be hoping for that quickhammer

LAMIST. Scumlean on Lucky for not removing his vote... lol. Feels like a forced post.

-0.5 Gangrenous Limb

Have I told you that I still hate when you assign scumpoints like this?

[Nahdia]

Vote Count 1.04

LuckyLuciano (3):

Homura, JamSV, Raya36

Blopp (2):

LuckyLuciano, 72offsuit

ClarkBar (2):

Blopp, TheThirteenthJT

Homura (1):

ClarkBar

Not Voting (1):

EchoVision

Deadline is in

(expired on 2020-07-11 13:52:07)

, at which point we will default to no elimination.

With nine players alive, it takes

five

to reach majority.

Mod Note:

Still seeking replacement for EchoVision. Blopp has been prodded.

[LuckyLuciano]

What's everyone's thoughts on how Homura positioned herself while JamSV and I were arguing last night?

[Raya36]

Not necessarily. I'll take a look at all the associations with that player and decide from there. I don't think one of you and Blopp HAVE to be scum. I just scumread both of you, associations aside.

[Raya36]

Spoiler:

Lucky and blopp. Maybe Clark but I'm unsure

Where's your vote then?

My vote is "on" Blopp I just don't want him at L-1

Perhaps it is a coincidence, but since being wagoned, Blopp has removed their profile pic. That means they have been onsite and decided not to post. So now we have her ignoring the initial wagon that I started with 72o, despite posting after it began and ignoring my case. In addition, we have her logging on to remove her profile pic and still not posting. Feels a lot like giving up to me.

This is a bad case and very reachy.

Also can you all look back at my two questions (rqs) I asked. I really want to know the answer for the first one.

I'll do this in my next post.

UNVOTE:
I don't want a quick hammer. L-2 is plenty for pressure. Scumlean on Lucky for not removing his vote. Could be hoping for that quickhammer

Is he your only scumlean or do you have more?

Lucky and blopp. Maybe Clark but I'm unsure

"I scumlean Lucky for possibly wanting a quick hammer on my other scumlean."

For the record, I'm expecting Blopp not to post again until the slot is replaced, and if the slot claims VT I will be pushing for the slot to be eliminated.

Just because I scumlean him doesnt mean I'm right (I never take associations into account D1. I often have multiple scumread that don't work together). And its perfectly viable to be concerned about someone not removing their vote at L-1 when Blopp hasn't even talked yet.

Actually since I can't vote Blopp right now VOTE: Lucky. I think this is more likely anyway. Your stats case also was reachy and the whole basis of your scumread isn't concrete. I would accept your case if and only if it was supporting evidence of a much stronger and more viable case.

If one of Blopp or I is eliminated, and flips town, do you intend to eliminate the other player tomorrow?

That's in response to this

[JamSV]

JamSV, I'm not going to derail the game with stats. I'll give you some info and if you want to put in the legwork of verifying it, you can.

There has been 62 completed newbie games on this site with this current setup matrix. Within those games, there is not a statistical difference in town eliminations and mafia eliminations

day 1

based on post count. In other words, deviations in post count cannot reliably predict which faction will be lynched day 1. Posting more or posting less has no statistically significant effect. In games where mafia is eliminated day 1, town has won 17/18 times. In the single game representing a mafia win after a D1 mafia elimination, a town player was on V/LA during ELo and did not place a vote before EoD, resulting in a no elimination. If you eliminate mafia day 1 as town, you win. It's a flaw with the setup that has been known practically since its inception. Mafia mechanically loses if one of them is eliminated D1.

Now let's look at games where town is eliminated day 1. Note, there was one game with a no elimination day 1, which is not accounted for in these numbers. In the games where town is eliminated D1, the average D1 post count in mafia wins is 19.7% higher than the average post count in town wins. That is to say, posting more or posting less does not increase or decrease your chances of eliminating mafia on D1, so while you win the game if you eliminate mafia D1, posting more doesn't yield any different results than posting less in this case. However, in the instances which you eliminate town D1, town wins more often when they have less posts D1. Now you can go ahead and graph everything out to determine if this is actually predictive or if its coincidental, but I'm not going to waste thread space going over it. If you want to save yourself time and actually trust other people for once (Hint: This is how you win mafia games), you can take my word that you can determine the winning faction in games where town is eliminated D1 in this setup accurately enough using D1 post count alone to make a money gambling on game outcomes.

My personal theory as to why this correlation exists has been given before:

My theory as to why this is true is two-fold, (1) Players are reluctant to change their reads because they don't want to be wrong. However, given that DP1 is the point in the game with simultaneously the least amount of information and the statistical highest chance of a mis[elimination], reads are most likely to be wrong DP1. Extending the DP artificially prompts players to make more and more reads in a dayphase where they shouldn't have that many. (2) Players look back on earlier DPs at [E]LO to solve the game. The more valuable and genuine information available, the more likely town solves the game at [E]LO. Cross-applying the latter analysis of (1), we see that artificially extended DP1s prompt town players to give less valuable and less genuine reads because they are trying hard to make something out of the nothingness that is DP1.

You can choose to reject this information if you want, but I insist you focus on behavior that is actually alignment indicative. Somebody telling you that you are wrong is not alignment indicative. You need to look more into

why

players take the stances that they do.

The minimum amount of day phases, the game can go on for is 3 day phases, in which case two town would have been accidentally killed, and two town during the night phase, this is the simplest and most common way to get to an ELo situation. You're certainly correct that during an ELo, players look back on earlier day phases in order to make their decisions. However, that is precisely why the day phase should be prolonged. We can all agree, we can't all play perfectly and optimally, especially considering this is a newbie game. The longer the game goes on the higher chance somebody will slip, or make a mistake with logic somewhere along the lines. Working from nothing, also allows a snowball effect to occur. If pressure is applied to somebody repetitively, even if it starts of slowly, as more people start to pressure said person, the more information we can work out from them, for example, we would be able to get a better grasp of their play style, what they consider to be the most scummy and least scummy things to do, etc etc. With a longer day you also have an effect on Lurking. If Day 1, were to always end within 3 days, it would be much harder to call out a lurker, we'll have less time to see if its genuine, prod dodging, or if they're scummy or not.

With regards to some of the stats side you brought up, this is the last I will bring up about it, it will probably be boring people. If you were able to predict, after a day 1 town kill, who is what alignment based off of post count accurately it would be lovely, it would make games a lot easier. However, you're assuming Alignment determines post count, players determine post count, not the alignment. For example BattleMage. He is a player I played a game with, and whom I am currently playing with. I can't mention anymore about the current game, but he is somebody who posts, a lot. In my previous full game, he was town, and while alive he was one of the most active posters. I looked over one of his games to try and pick up some tricks, in games where he was scum, his post count was a similar level, as where his town games. You need to look past Day 1. I want the day to be prolonged as long as possible, both for security on Day 1, and future Day Phases. Cutting Day 1 short makes the game more about luck and guessing, a cop has a 2/7 chance of getting scum (if a town execution) if its random. The longer Day 1 goes on for, the higher his odds of hitting scum would be, given, he now has more informed reads about who could be what, this is similar for all other town PR also (obv except masons). If we were all complete novices, who were incapable of coming up with reads, your game plan would be smart. We aren't incapable of coming up with reads. Its in towns interest to keep a day going longer. I stand by my belief wanting to shorten a day phase abruptly is scum indicative.

Also as much as I would love to question the stats, its probably for the best we both stop bringing it up, it will bore most people. I would contact you privately just to discuss how the statistics would work generally, however I'm not sure if that would be allowed, even if it was completely unrelated to this game state, but if @Mod could get back to me on that I'd appreciate it. I don't want to break any rules.

[LuckyLuciano]

You entirely missed the point of everything I posted, but again, let's move on to things that are actually AI. You will understand more when you have more experience and can start recognizing patterns.

[JamSV]

@JamSV, why did you put Blopp at L-1 and proceed to tell players to feel free to hammer and state that you see quickhammers as NAI?

A quickhammer can be seen as NAI as it could just be a really bad misunderstanding leading to a bad play. Which is why I believe a quickhammer without an explanation is scum indicative, but one with (on its own) is NAI.

I put him on L-1 to see how he would react. Nobody would express intent to hammer so my proceeding post was to in force that a extra bit of pressure. I have faith nobody would come in and swoop to quick hammer, considering we had all already posted (excluding Echovision), and we could all easily see how close he is to getting hammered. I will admit, I really didn't expect him to "leave" if we can class that as what he is doing. Plus that type of play is good for moving more out of the RVS, and it can apply simple pressure to see just how easily somebody would actually fold.

- If you were wondering if I have a bit too much faith in people, I probably do.

[LuckyLuciano]

Between when the case was actually made against Blopp and when you replaced, Homura and JT had not posted, plus we have the replacement on the way. Why did you think Homura and JT would not express intent Also you just finished a game where a player replaced in and quickhammered town. You weren't worried of that happening again?

[JamSV]

Between when the case was actually made against Blopp and when you replaced, Homura and JT had not posted, plus we have the replacement on the way. Why did you think Homura and JT would not express intent Also you just finished a game where a player replaced in and quickhammered town. You weren't worried of that happening again?

No
I don't think any of us are bad enough players for that, and I assume at the start we're all decent players, so risks like that can be worth it. Of course in this situation, didn't work at all, blopp has vanished.

[LuckyLuciano]

Mmk. Can I get your thoughts on 153?

[ClarkBar]

I wonder if it'll be like last game and the bulk of the players are replaced.

By the way Clark may I ask for your opinion on 72 and Lucky? Its okay if you're unsure, its still early in Day 1

I'm unsure. I'm enduring a learning curve on this site. I have to learn to separate personality from actual play. Lucky is hard nut to crack. He has a big ego (not an attack, Lucky) and his approach is unique. I guess I'm less interested in Lucky than I am in his wagon, which I'll look at more closely tomorrow.

7 2 off-suit is another matter. No comment yet, I'm a little tired and will post more tomorrow. I didn't like that this game had (in my mind) noteworthy developments that were worth a quick comment, and 72 declined despite being active elsewhere. And I really didn't like that my expertly crafted post referring to 72 and that specific issue went unnoticed. C'mon, how many poker references do I have to throw in?

In general, I'll be much more myself tomorrow. Had a bit of a shit day.

[72offsuit]

UNVOTE: 72
VOTE: Blopp

Why the change of vote?
Same question for 72

23 - dat smiley face --- bad overly friendly/buddy-buddy vibe.
LAMIST - "Lets move out of RVS" with 0 game-related content

Have your thoughts on Blopp changed at all?

No. Why do you ask?

[72offsuit]

UNVOTE:
I don't want a quick hammer. L-2 is plenty for pressure. Scumlean on Lucky for not removing his vote. Could be hoping for that quickhammer

LAMIST. Scumlean on Lucky for not removing his vote... lol. Feels like a forced post.

-0.5 Gangrenous Limb

Have I told you that I still hate when you assign scumpoints like this?

Maybe. Why?

[72offsuit]

What's everyone's thoughts on how Homura positioned herself while JamSV and I were arguing last night?

Nothing pinged me either way

[72offsuit]

I wonder if it'll be like last game and the bulk of the players are replaced.

By the way Clark may I ask for your opinion on 72 and Lucky? Its okay if you're unsure, its still early in Day 1

I'm unsure. I'm enduring a learning curve on this site. I have to learn to separate personality from actual play. Lucky is hard nut to crack. He has a big ego (not an attack, Lucky) and his approach is unique. I guess I'm less interested in Lucky than I am in his wagon, which I'll look at more closely tomorrow.

7 2 off-suit is another matter. No comment yet, I'm a little tired and will post more tomorrow. I didn't like that this game had (in my mind) noteworthy developments that were worth a quick comment, and 72 declined despite being active elsewhere. And I really didn't like that my expertly crafted post referring to 72 and that specific issue went unnoticed. C'mon, how many poker references do I have to throw in?

In general, I'll be much more myself tomorrow. Had a bit of a shit day.

What's so glaringly noteworthy that I have ignored/ not commented on?

[Nahdia]

LicketyQuickety replaces EchoVision.

[TheThirteenthJT]

I will be rereading from my last post and replying to anything as I go. These past few days I've been busy and reading what I could but without enough time to really reply to anything.

[LicketyQuickety]

It's a lie that LL prefers short Days necessarily.

[LicketyQuickety]

[LicketyQuickety]

124

[LicketyQuickety]

VOTE: GB

[LicketyQuickety]

VOTE: 72

[LicketyQuickety]

We have about 4 days left in D1 and we have a lot of content to inform us for things on D2.

GB seems to be giving "too little to late" content. He might be Town here, but given how everyone else in the game is playing, Consider this Intent to hammer.