Mafiascum.net

In post 123, Carl Tuckerson wrote:triggered.

UNVOTE: emps
VOTE: PURGE

What does this even mean

In post 124, Oversoul wrote:I think objectively we should still vote for people because potentially hitting a goon is still better than not even attempting to hit a goon. Even if we hit a random townie, it is still better for town because I’m average people are wrong with their reads anyway.

Why is it better to take away town night actions than not? That's my hangup.

p.edit: I think I want everyone to have their night actions. I can be talked down from that but I want info and we don't get it by stranding people.

Even if we do vote for scum, it only matters for two of the three.

Because the person we are going to strand is a person we already do not trust, so it doesn’t matter if they die and it definitely matters that they do not shoot. I agree if we are just choosing randomly that isn’t good, but we aren’t.

We could very much lose Day 1. Stranding someone makes that chance less, regardless of alignment.

How, exactly, are you saying that we could lose Day 1? Is it that the Mafia will take out two members of the town? In that case, I think that is more of an inevitability than anything else.

Either the Mafia coordinate a second kill or some random Townie gets trigger-happy and the Mafia kill them.

In post 129, Delta Klim wrote:How, exactly, are you saying that we could lose Day 1? Is it that the Mafia will take out two members of the town? In that case, I think that is more of an inevitability than anything else.

If townies shoot, we lose a huge % of people right off the bat.

If I recall correctly, the last Purge game ended on something like D2 or D3.

If most* townies shoot... *

Yes, but that is assuming the Town plays poorly. Few of us should have a reason to shoot Night 1 beyond killing who we vote to strand.

In post 128, Oversoul wrote:Because the person we are going to strand is a person we already do not trust, so it doesn’t matter if they die and it definitely matters that they do not shoot. I agree if we are just choosing randomly that isn’t good, but we aren’t.

Agreed. I think stranding is worth it.

While I'm not yet certain of the numbers, I think it's also good to assign a small group with the task of either killing the stranded person or barricading.

In post 133, Delta Klim wrote:Yes, but that is assuming the Town plays poorly. Few of us should have a reason to shoot Night 1 beyond killing who we vote to strand.

You asked how we could lose D1. I told you.

My point about last game was to demonstrate the possibility of a bunch of town dying on N1.

Got cockblocked by the site

In post 128, Oversoul wrote:Because the person we are going to strand is a person we already do not trust, so it doesn’t matter if they die and it definitely matters that they do not shoot. I agree if we are just choosing randomly that isn’t good, but we aren’t.

We could very much lose Day 1. Stranding someone makes that chance less, regardless of alignment.

I agree with the trust bit, and I think it would be constructive to have people place votes and reads as if we were lynching.
However, I'd expect someone who would otherwise be stranded, but is given a chance not to be stranded, would almost always choose to barricade, because some number of the people who failed to strand them come after them. If that would-be stranded is town then in theory I think we're reducing our risk of losing night 1 (or subsequent nights). Stranding someone guarantees that the mafia can kill them if nothing else (although it's not clear to me that they'd actually take them up on the offer).

I like your first argument though, and in any case we have a lot of time to figure it out.

I think we should strand today, we can essentially treat it like a lynch if we need to by shooting the stranded player, and whoever said we have less chance of losing after stranding is right. Revealing honestly what we did day two is definitely a good idea, but I don’t think making a plan of who will shoot who in groups is a good idea as it just gives mafia something to exploit.

In post 135, EspressoPatronum wrote:You asked how we could lose D1. I told you.

My point about last game was to demonstrate the possibility of a bunch of town dying on N1.

Yes, but I do not believe that to be the problem if we play competently.

On Night 1, almost no Townie should be confident enough in their reads to attempt a kill on anyone who isn't stranded. The Mafia will of course take either a kill and 2 barricades or 2 kills, and the Masons might decide to team up for a kill, but it's a bad idea for anyone else to shoot at someone who may be barricading. The only way we lose 4 townies is if the Goons both risk their lives on a kill, the Masons decide to kill and guess wrong, and a townie is stranded and killed. Otherwise we are still losing a few regardless of what we choose to do.

I acknowledge that this game is unwinnable if we simply stay cautious and never shoot, but there is no need to do so immediately.

I ain't never won a game by being timid

-k

In post 69, TiphaineDeath wrote:VOTE: Serene

post#48 is contradictory and must be purged

You think the hydra dissonance is bad now, just wait till the heads start scum reading each other

-k

In post 137, Egduf wrote:I think we should strand today, we can essentially treat it like a lynch if we need to by shooting the stranded player, and whoever said we have less chance of losing after stranding is right. Revealing honestly what we did day two is definitely a good idea, but I don’t think making a plan of who will shoot who in groups is a good idea as it just gives mafia something to exploit.

Gonna reread the setup, is voting plurality based and we always hit deadline?

It is plurality, but majority ends the day as usual.

7 for majority and plurality if majority isn't reached.

Don't think we need to deprive anyone of the ability to barricade but I'm not sure it's preventable with plurality.

Can No Lynch win a vote by plurality?

No lynch seems silly, even in this format. Just need to have a couple (3-4?) townies say they will flip a coin as to whether to shoot our (lynch) or whether to barricade.

In post 146, TiphaineDeath wrote:No lynch seems silly, even in this format. Just need to have a couple (3-4?) townies say they will flip a coin as to whether to shoot our (lynch) or whether to barricade.

If it is 4 townies shooting half of the time, it is a 94% chance of the kill with, on average, 1 of the set of 4 wasting their action and being left exposed to be taken out by a single member of the Mafia.

If it is 7 townies shooting one-third of the time, it is again a 94% chance of the kill with only one wasted action, though it's from a larger group so the Mafia have a lower chance at a cheap kill.

This is not accounting for the chance that townies will lie about their actions to mislead the Mafia, of course. It's just a basic model and should not be taken as gospel.

In post 146, TiphaineDeath wrote:No lynch seems silly, even in this format. Just need to have a couple (3-4?) townies say they will flip a coin as to whether to shoot our (lynch) or whether to barricade.

Pretty sure flipping a coin, or at least "provable randomness" is considered out of game influence and barred by site rules

-k

In post 148, Most Serene wrote:Pretty sure flipping a coin, or at least "provable randomness" is considered out of game influence and barred by site rules

It is not provable. Anyone can lie about the result of their coin flip or dice roll.