Bad Idea Mafia Redux! GAME OVER!

[Omnididdle]

I (Riddle) am going to post in orange and Omni is going to post in green just so you guys know.

Uhh I guess I feel like a sex offender? Lol.

Meta discussion is dumb and not helping us at all as everyone has said. I think the best way to approach the day is good ol' fashion scumhunting. Just because the method of killing is different doesn't mean we should go about the day differently. Obviously we should have suspicious people shoot other suspicious people.

 

[CT Chia]

I guess me playing better is being an idiot -_-

 

[Rockin]

I guess me playing better is being an idiot -_-

*rolls eyes* never said it like that.

I only ask cause I need to make sure you're thinking things through as well as understand what's going on. That's all.

 

[Nicholas1024]

@Rockin
The idea is, we start by scumhunting like normal, and suppose we later pressure someone who then claims bomb. Assuming there's no town fake-claiming shenanigans (which is really a bad idea when you're near-dead) There are two possibilities.

1: Mafia fakeclaiming
Obviously, shooting them is the best idea.

2: Town bomb
If we don't shoot them immediately, they get rewired. BAM. Scum gets 2 extra kills. Also, we can't completely trust them due to the fact they might be mafia. (Even if we have a cop investigate them. The godfather can fakeclaim too, you know.) The only way we could clear them would be to have the other bombs claim... which the mafia could then rewire. And if we shot them later, we end up with 3 other townies dying instead of just the 1.

Anyways, that's my argument towards shooting someone who claims bomb immediately. Why do you think it's a bad idea?

 

[~ Gheb ~]

I retract what I said about Nick having to shoot or being shot toDay. Scratch that.

I understand that VT's/cops can fakeclaim bomb to try to get a defuse, but if we don't shoot people that claim bomb immediately, this opens up a very dangerous game of wifom.

But see Nick, we're trying to take a way that has the least causalities. Shooting a claimed bomb can turn out a lot more fatal than leaving it alone and have the cops take care of it. Claiming bomb is a game of WIFOM - shooting a claimed bomb can cut down our numbers hard.

I think letting the cops do it is a very good compromise and I have yet to hear a good argument against it.

And Gheb, do you realize that the godfather could quite easily fakeclaim bomb as well? And that he's immune to cop investigation? And that a bomb getting rewired STILL gives 2 extra deaths on NK? There's lots of little pieces here and there that you're ignoring/forgetting, and I don't like it.

I'm neither ignoring nor forgetting anything.

The problem with the Godfather is that there's no way to track him down with anything else than regular scumhunting. No matter what course of action you propose you can always answer "but the Godfather...". The godfather is the exception to everything you can do in this game. He can also fake vig and gets away with it because the cop gets a innocent on him. Does that mean that we should worry about every confirmed shooter being the GF? I think at this stage of the game that mentality would hinder scumhunting more than it would help.

The Godfather puts us at a lose / lose situation a priori. You can either choose to "limit" your options by using "regular" (I would call it "inefficient") scum hunting tactics and avoid all risks involving the GF. On the other hand you can take a more risky - but potentially more rewarding - approach where you don't make that big a deal out of the godfather.

Considering the fact that we have no special powers that work against the godfather and the high number of town aligned players (16 vs 3) I'd like to think that the second approach is the less evil one. It's not like we gain anything out of worrying about the godfather on our every move.

the problem with bomb claiming is that mafia knows instantly if they're lying or telling the truth. cop investigates the same night that mafia rewires or cop investigates the GF and gets a vanilla read. basically, if the cop investigates a claimed bomb, comes up with the investigation "yep, hes a bomb", there's a good chance he's already rewired at that point. i dont quite have a solution for this but i dont think bombs should ever claim... ever.

Ideally, a bomb doesn't have to claim and just gets NKed but how likely is that to happen? As I said before it's not like we can do too much about the GF: If a cop happens to investigate him he'll get the innocent result - regardless of his claim.

 

[mentosman8]

I'm thinking that I agree with the immediate bomb-claim shooting idea. If they aren't killed right away, they get re-wired if they're really a bomb. This leads to, at some point, mafia being able to either A. have GF shoot the re-wired bomb when the 5 deaths it allows would win them the game(and that's a HUGE swing. Most important about it is that there is no way whatsoever to prevent it.), or shoot it at night and have a 3 kill night. Either way town is hurt massively by leaving them alive. What's better, 2 townies dying or 3-5 dying.

Now, there is another side of this. What if the mafia guessed right and re-wired a bomb before they claimed? I'm considering this option a bit more before I make a final decision either way, but how my thoughts are now we have no way to know, and if they are rewired and we don't kill them, the mafia will when it's more advantageous for them.

Regardless, still pseudo V/LA till tomorrow evening, but figured I should make a post now that the game is started.

 

[adumbrodeus]

Argh, it's not even a matter of completely breaking the game, at this point it's looking for the most statistically viable method of play. This is VERY different then a normal mafia game, so it needs different standard play, and if town doesn't figure out what that is, it's significantly handicapped.



As far as OS is concerned, TBH if he didn't try to break the setup, I'd think he was scum, that's part of his standard methods of play, that he failed tells me the setup is reasonably resilient. Did he forget on purpose, possibly. But him making a mistake is certainly not out of the realm of possibility, omni, you of all people should know that.



We'll see how the day develops.

 

[Teemo]

@Rockin
The idea is, we start by scumhunting like normal, and suppose we later pressure someone who then claims bomb. Assuming there's no town fake-claiming shenanigans (which is really a bad idea when you're near-dead) There are two possibilities.

1: Mafia fakeclaiming
Obviously, shooting them is the best idea.

2: Town bomb
If we don't shoot them immediately, they get rewired. BAM. Scum gets 2 extra kills. Also, we can't completely trust them due to the fact they might be mafia. (Even if we have a cop investigate them. The godfather can fakeclaim too, you know.) The only way we could clear them would be to have the other bombs claim... which the mafia could then rewire. And if we shot them later, we end up with 3 other townies dying instead of just the 1.

Anyways, that's my argument towards shooting someone who claims bomb immediately. Why do you think it's a bad idea?

No. Just no. Town fake-claim shenanigans can WIN the game for town. You just can't be ******** about how you do it.

I still completely disagree with the idea of shooting a bomb immediately when they claim.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

I understand where people are coming from with the shoot claimed bombs idea now. I'm going to think about it.

Argh, it's not even a matter of completely breaking the game, at this point it's looking for the most statistically viable method of play. This is VERY different then a normal mafia game, so it needs different standard play, and if town doesn't figure out what that is, it's significantly handicapped.

I agree with this.

 

[Rockin]

1: Mafia fakeclaiming
Obviously, shooting them is the best idea.

We have little worry about them fake claiming. GF would most likely claim vanilla townie. The other two can only claim either cop or bomb, and since they'll need a legitimate reason for such investigations, I'm gonna assume they'll take the more safer claim: bomb



Now I'll tell you why it's bad,

1). They're BOMBs.

If we shoot them, and if they are the bomb, two people would die. If we try that same method on Day 2 (or over), we'll lose even more townies.

2) We risk getting the claimed bomb exposed.

If they're forced to claim, mafia would just re-wire them on that night and just use them as their little personal bomb. They don't even have to nk right away if they're re-wired.

This is why, again, I suggest all bomb players DON'T claim. If ya are scummy and get shot, that's your fault. Bombs claiming opens too much WIFOM.

 

[Omnididdle]

No. Just no. Town fake-claim shenanigans can WIN the game for town. You just can't be ******** about how you do it.

I still completely disagree with the idea of shooting a bomb immediately when they claim.

Just curious, but how would you approach this game, Tom?

 

[Nicholas1024]

I also don't want bomb/cop claiming. Just say whether you can/can't shoot instead of claiming. However, if someone does claim bomb anyway, I think the best course of action would be to shoot them. I don't think the alternative (letting them live) is a good idea.

 

[thedocsalive]

Argh, it's not even a matter of completely breaking the game, at this point it's looking for the most statistically viable method of play. This is VERY different then a normal mafia game, so it needs different standard play, and if town doesn't figure out what that is, it's significantly handicapped.

Yes, and do you really think the best thing to be doing now is trying to figure out what we'll do when certain things occur later in the game that may or may not actually happen? It's like baseball. One thing to consider in baseball is how your closer would fare against the heart of the other team's batting order. But you don't know if you'll be winning, if you'll present your closer with a save situation, and if your closer will even have to face their best hitters. It's something you can worry about as you get nearer to the end of the game, not in the first inning.

Of course this game is different, but it would benefit us IMO to standardize it in one regard:

So what does everyone think about informally voting as a guide to our daykills/who does them? I feel like without even a fake votecount, the daykills could sway too strongly towards the most recent posts and not reflect the full day/game as they should.

The only people to comment on this were Chaco and Nicholas, and they thought it was a good idea. If we go with this idea, we can just keep track of votes ourselves by posting a vote count after every vote. Is voting informally in BIM gamebreaking? No, of course not. But it can still be helpful.

 

[CT Chia]

Incase I missed this, if a bomb is modkilled, do the random townies still die?

It says in the OP that modkills are treated like daykills, but wasn't sure if it was just in the sense of ending the day, or also for the bomb side effect

 

[mentosman8]

Oh yeah, I forgot about that docs, I think it's a decent idea to vote on who gets daykilled, not so sure about voting on who daykills though. The problem I see with that, is that much like a normal game a well played cop can be found suspicious in the early game. If we vote on who does the kills, we could risk outting the cop, instead of just someone shooting when we've made a decision. It's not necessarily a bad idea for the more suspect townies to make the decision to make the shot, but by us deciding who makes the shot we risk outting our pr's early/unnecessarily. I'll think a bit more about the pros and cons, but right now I think it may have as much risk as it is potentially rewarding.

 

[mentosman8]

And @Chibo's ninja, yes, random deaths DO occur upon a bomb modkill. I'm pretty sure FF said it somewhere, but the internet at this hotel is too slow for me to try and go find it.

 

[CT Chia]

I more or less agree with mentos there, it makes no sense to vote on who carries out the daykill.

if everyone could kill, then yea thats fine. considering not everyone can daykill and more townies than scum can not daykill is not a good plan at all

but then if we cant vote on who does the daykill, why vote on who gets daykilled?

 

[mentosman8]

@Chibo: Voting on who gets shot disallows the GF from making kills without town agreement, and prevents people who are suspicious of someone for bad reasoning the town disagrees with from killing them. Pretty much it allows us to get more info from the daykills than just making them would.

 

[CT Chia]

i worded it kind of weird i guess

i like the idea of using the whole voting thing, but whats the point of voting on who dies if we cant decide who shoots the voted person?
it also helps scum somewhat in that sense. if we vote who scum knows is a townie, then the gf can shoot them and skid by syaing thats who the town voted for yada yada yada, but if a scum person was chosen, the gf can lay low and not be the one to shoot them (and decline the power to shoot if asked to)

 

[adumbrodeus]

Yes, and do you really think the best thing to be doing now is trying to figure out what we'll do when certain things occur later in the game that may or may not actually happen? It's like baseball. One thing to consider in baseball is how your closer would fare against the heart of the other team's batting order. But you don't know if you'll be winning, if you'll present your closer with a save situation, and if your closer will even have to face their best hitters. It's something you can worry about as you get nearer to the end of the game, not in the first inning.

If it effects our play from day 1, yes it IS important.

For example, if the optimum method of play involved having bombs claim and be shot 1 by 1 and then scumhunting for the mafia, then we'd need to figure that out day 1.



I dunno, I find it odd that you of all people would be saying this.

Of course this game is different, but it would benefit us IMO to standardize it in one regard:

The only people to comment on this were Chaco and Nicholas, and they thought it was a good idea. If we go with this idea, we can just keep track of votes ourselves by posting a vote count after every vote. Is voting informally in BIM gamebreaking? No, of course not. But it can still be helpful.

I was considering this, at this point we don't really have a pressure mechanic beyond the risk of the actual kill.

That said, making it a firm "we will kill this person" removes the advantages of the setup, the ability for people to act independently.


Overall, I'm down with using FoS but not necessary making it firm "equivalent to votes".

 

[Rockin]

That reminds me, why do we need the voting system thing? Can't we just come to an agreement to who we feel is the scummiest and just make an action there? >>

Still waiting on everyone to answer my question, which was how would you approch this day.

 

[Teemo]

i like the idea of using the whole voting thing, but whats the point of voting on who dies if we cant decide who shoots the voted person?
it also helps scum somewhat in that sense. if we vote who scum knows is a townie, then the gf can shoot them and skid by syaing thats who the town voted for yada yada yada, but if a scum person was chosen, the gf can lay low and not be the one to shoot them (and decline the power to shoot if asked to)

You're silly, Chibo. Mentos already made the differentiation of benefits clear in the post right before you made this one.

As for the godfather being able to skid by, well, so what? It's the job of the mafia to make plays that are good for them and then "skid by". In a traditional mafia game it's the job of the townies to see who was less than on the up-and-up when they made particular decisions. I fail to see how this is a special exception.

As always, scumhunting is the answer to everything.

Also gf laying low and not shooting a mafiat that we've decided to shoot is a dumb thing to say is "advantageous" to mafia somehow. That's like saying mafia can not vote for a scumbuddy that's at L-1. Uhm. Okay, and? There are a whole hell of a lot of townies that will gladly carry it out.

@docsalive: I don't think voting is too shabby of an idea.

@Rockin: I'm going to play this game the way I play every game. I'm going to talk, I'm going to get other people to talk, and I'm going to keep my eyes open and my gut tuned.

@Nic: You're being dumb. You don't get to cherrypick the best argument against your logic and tell people to ignore it in trying to respond to you. Fakeclaiming is a terrific idea. Fakeclaiming can **** with the mafia. Fakeclaiming completely torpedos your baffling assumption that someone claiming a bomb means that they actually are, mafia will know this and rewire them, and they will magically get shot soon NO MATTER WHAT. Fakeclaims coming into the equation decimates all of that and turns it into a big ugly game of WIFOM, and that's exactly how it should be. Also, mafia is not the only person that knows if a bomb claim is legit. Only the person making the claim can determine that -- mafia just knows that the guy is genuinely town. Derpa derp.

As for mechanical discussion, I'm not dedicating much of my thinking to it, but I'll listen to and think over any strategies or insights put forth.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

Tom / EE what do you think about my plan of having the cops investigate claimed bombs?

 

[Teemo]

Since it's a given in SWF mafia that cops grain-of-salt their inno reads on the chance of godfather and there are non-godfather mafiats who would have to claim bomb or cop, yeah I don't see how that could in any way be a bad thing.

 

[M.K]

(Sorry guys, the apartment complex that I'm stealing this wireless signal from at the beach is filled to the brim with powerhungry crackers, so I keep getting blocked from the network. I'm on, but with limited access)

So far, OS trying to break the game = not surprising at this point. Also, I don't agree with the "shoot-on-claim" idea for the bombs. That just seems incredibly risky at this point. Although, I want people to realize that if we come to an "agreed consensus" at this point in the game, it'll be *that* much easier for Mafia members to use it against us. Bomb claims should be dealt with as they come, reviewing the individual's in question actions in days past and reevaluating the situation. A generalized "contract" of sorts is such a sketchy idea.
Sorry if this seems like issues of the past, trying to catch up as I read along. ^_^

 

[Teemo]

Bomb claims should be dealt with as they come, reviewing the individual's in question actions in days past and reevaluating the situation. A generalized "contract" of sorts is such a sketchy idea.

Man it's almost like he wants us to scumhunt or something.

OUTRAGEOUS

 

[Nicholas1024]

Alright, maybe I'd better rethink it. (I'm no good at wifom. I try to avoid it when possible.) However, what do you think about just claiming can/can't kill instead of bomb/cop/VT?

 

[thedocsalive]

Oh yeah, I forgot about that docs, I think it's a decent idea to vote on who gets daykilled, not so sure about voting on who daykills though. The problem I see with that, is that much like a normal game a well played cop can be found suspicious in the early game. If we vote on who does the kills, we could risk outting the cop, instead of just someone shooting when we've made a decision. It's not necessarily a bad idea for the more suspect townies to make the decision to make the shot, but by us deciding who makes the shot we risk outting our pr's early/unnecessarily. I'll think a bit more about the pros and cons, but right now I think it may have as much risk as it is potentially rewarding.

Fair enough, but choosing who does the killing is in essence like having a second lynch, and it would probably be the second most suspicious person. We run the same risk of outing power roles by bandwagoning them without knowing what they are. Having the second most suspicious person shoot can clear them as either vanilla or GF. Could we out power roles? Possibly. Could we get scum though if they're not responding well to the pressure? Also possible.

If it effects our play from day 1, yes it IS important.

For example, if the optimum method of play involved having bombs claim and be shot 1 by 1 and then scumhunting for the mafia, then we'd need to figure that out day 1.

I was referring more to the discussion of what to do with claimed bombs, should townies ever fake-claim, etc. We can cross those bridges when we get to them.

That reminds me, why do we need the voting system thing? Can't we just come to an agreement to who we feel is the scummiest and just make an action there? >>

Still waiting on everyone to answer my question, which was how would you approch this day.

Voting IS coming to an agreement, it's just more organized. Besides, do you honestly expect there to be a clear consensus on who needs to be killed each day?

@ "how to approach this day": People have said it, but we go scumhunting. We play mafia. Personally, I'd like to do it with voting so we know where we're at. Regardless of the powers and game mechanics, we still have an uninformed majority versus an informed minority, and we need to kill scum in our day phase. Is this a fun setup? Absolutely. Is it balanced? Seems that way to me, and I trust FF/marshy. But our best approach is probably play as normally as we otherwise would, until the game mechanics immediately dictate that we do otherwise.

 

[McCloud]

Jesus christ. It's day one and I'm already lost. So many walls of text

 

[Teemo]

N to the O to the j-o-h-n-s.

 

[McCloud]

Not johning, just saying fuuuuuuuuuuuu must read

 

[CT Chia]

well when your done let's hear a run down on ur best course of action opinion

 

[Chuckie]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhPKIwKCFYc
_

Doc beat us to it!... @Rockin, specifically @how the day should be planned:- wii actually thought "Daykilling" is effectively 1/2 the standard lynching system, in that it's laying down the hammer on a said player. Wii should fill the other half and simulate as close to a standard voting system as possible. Voting or showing a declaration of suspicion leading up to a Daykill [lynch] is necessary IOO to forcibly visualise players' commitments on other players. Don't you agree?
_

Also... scumhunting, yes yes. Wii would like to draw out more information from those who explicitly imposed a you-need-to-die mentality from the near-offset of the game, even if some posts were before the official start of the Day! THE HORROR! This includes Ronike and Gheb. @Ronike:- #63, why do you stand by the idea that Swarm needs to shoot or be shot? Additionally, @Gheb: #125, what made you retract your statement of wanting Nich shot or to shoot?

Curiously:

It's far too early to say "OS should shoot the next most suspicious player." It is way too early for you to be saying that, and that sticks out for me sorely.

hmm... that phrase, "sticks out to me sorely", - we're [I'm] assuming this type of action struck a scum-hunting nerve. Considering Ronike's reason was "not enough of a reason", what intent do you see behind it consequently? This question comes from an assumption than Ronike doesn't often not have enough of a reason.

 

[CT Chia]

by other half u mean choosing who shoots right? and u want to make that as close to a standard vote system if possible? how do we do it?

 

[Omnididdle]

Vote: Omni

Day 1 - Bad Idea Mafia - Votecount
Omni (1) - Omni

Not Voting: Rockin, Mentosman8, KevinM, Chibo, Teemo, Nicholas1024, Gheb_01, Chacotaco, Xonar, Adumbrodeus, Overswarm, Thedocsalive, Chuckie, Ronike, Meta-Kirby, McCloud, Ligolski, EaxLune

With 19 alive it takes 10 to lynch.

so yea we've got our voting system back in place. now lets play mafia

 

[Omnididdle]

unvote
Vote: Overswarm

is where my vote would be technically. i'll update every 40 pages or w/e. we've got a voting system so we can leave proper trails so no johns.

 

[CT Chia]

vote chuckie

yeaaaaaa

 

[Chaco]

I'll also Vote: Overswarm, for now.

@Everyone: Policy on inactives for this game type?

 

[Ronike]

Inactives: can be a far more legit
strategy for town than in most games. I'd say use the prod system.

@chuckie: os needs to sho/ot IMO due to my disbelief that his plan having the fatal flaw of killing half the town went overlooked. In and of itself, not too scummy, but let's look closely:
the overlooked part was a relatively clear stipulation in the rules
the overlooker is os, the biggest rules lawyer in dgs
in addition, os claimed to have read the rules looking for such a hole. I don't believe he would have misses it.

By having him shoot, we are at least
eliminating his ability to quickshoot later should he be gf. Worst case? We lose a cop, a very weak role in this game. Bim games require mafia only to kill vts, as no one else has the ability to kill them. Cops are our buffers/dewirers (should they play smart). That answer your question well enough?

Also I don't understand your last sentence, but I think it's a compliment? Thanks?

 

[Overswarm]

*facedesk at Ronike's post*

I read Omni's posts and say "okay, yeah, I understand" then I read Ronike's posts and I just hear someone wearing a pot on his head running into walls at top speed.



Mentos, Rockin?

I don't like you.