Data Mafia Theory Discussion

[ranmaru]

I think this is a good time as of any to discuss mafia theory. I think for me, I improved at mafia simply by playing more games, and becoming more experienced. Trial by error. Yet something else that has helped me immensely, is talking game theory with those more experienced than myself or just in general. I will come back to this once zens game is in post game, that and recent games can be topics of discussion. I encourage y'all to ask a mafia relation question to get discussion going if there is none at the current moment.

 

[pupNapoleon]

I dont understand what you want to see happen here.
We play Mafia? Is this a video game? What's the theory?

I know Mafia as a card game that... I can only imagine being played in person, since its about human interaction and eye contact.
Im lost on this thread as nothing is explained.

 

[ranmaru]

Yes, I didn't explain it because we play Mafia in this sub-forum (Decisive Games). Here's a link to what mafia is: Game of Mafia. In short, the one I refer to, isn't a video game, but a game we play on the forum. When I mention game theory, I mean to say this thread will be used as a medium for us to discuss how we think the game should be played. For example, I feel votes should always be in play, to ensure everyone is forced to commit to stances, and have a paper trail that can be looked over in future days. If you want to see how games may play out, here is a recently finished game I hosted: Flavorless Mafia III. If you are interested, consider joining Osie's Sumting Summer Mafia Game.

You are thinking of IRL Mafia, and that is as you said, based on human interaction, eye contact, facial expressions, etc. Mafia also can be played on forums via forum posts, but tells are more from wording, logical inconsistencies, actions, thread presence, etc.

 

[Pokechu]

ranmaru Sorry for hopping in a bit late! I appreciate you making this thread, though! I actually think it should be pinned since it's a general thread that can always be posted in, that will always have value. That's why you should pin a thread, right? So I'm pinning it!

##Laserguy

For now this emote only responses are going to get old real fast.

I need to read this game properly though which I will do tomorrow.

I'm not sure if Laser is really scum since doing something that annoying is a fast track way to rub people the wrong way, which scum would try to avoid. I don't see why a town does it either though so best to pressure this slot.

Here's what pinged me about Jack's post here. I'm not sure if you're referring to this post or the one about Pythag, pretty sure this one since I talked about this one more.

But he votes Laser, OK that's not wrong. It's RVS, early D1. But he says "not sure if Laser is scum," as scum would avoid rubbing people the wrong way. So Jack must think Laser is town, right? Just off this? But then he says "can't be town either, not sure why town would do it." So why did he vote the slot, if the action has nothing to do with the alignment? Like he's rendered both points he brought up so far, moot. Because it can't be scum, and it can't be town. I also thought it felt a little manufactured for someone's first post in the game because a lot of people do gambits like this D1 so Jack's intolerance here seems out of place when they can reasonably be expected. But I think I digress

So maybe it's a pressure vote, which isn't bad! But he explicitly says "pressuring this slot," which I think always renders pressure votes, moot. Because if you know it's a pressure vote, like if you're the target of the vote, then you're not going to take it seriously, because there's no conviction with the vote.

As a result this post just demonstrated a lack of willingness to solve. Jack has no ambition and doesn't take a specific stance here because he waffles around them all (can't be scum, can't be town). But if he really did think this, it's like, why not take it further? Like what do YOU gain from this besides "not scum not town." He calls no shots here, not even "null." Jack generalized when he could've made a better judgment looking at specific posts Laser made. Some players such as yourself (Ranmaru) were really going to town (no pun intended! ) analyzing Laser's posts. How Jack was completely uninvolved with Laser may have been a hint that it was SvS. Because I think a reaction this weak would only come from someone who knows what's up. If Jack was town wouldn't you think he'd react more? Even if more positively (analyzing it) or negatively (voting and saying "going to get annoying real quick" and leaving it at that).

Also I think someone called out Sabrar for not engaging Laser's posting, right? Like whoever did, said it was scummy. IMO Jack did the same thing here but in a less-obvious manner. I think in hindsight Jack was scummier because he acknowledged the gambit, without interacting with it or giving his thoughts. Nothing damning towards Jack's alignment but definitely worthy of a ping imo

 

[ranmaru]

I think it was null because of the pressure vote, and announcing it as a pressure vote. I've seen scum and town alike vote 'for the sake of pressure' while announcing it. The thing is, it's more of bad play rather than something I'd consider suspicious, which is why I ignored it. It also seemed like a policy vote to me, so I didn't really find anything telling about it. (Z and Lore both were for policying Osieorb in Sorcerer's, and they were opposing alignments)

I think lack of willingness to solve would be one of the possibilities behind that post, but another possibility could have been that they were genuine about wanting to pressure them, they just didn't know that it would fail. What's telling is what they do after that. Which I think you get into as well, and I do agree, he didn't analyze Laser to the extend I did, which may clue us in to his alignment, but that takes time to actually see. This is why I was also fine with ignoring that post, because I focus on macro reads. Basically, I would read him by his overall play, and not just one post. (This is why I don't totally focus on UP's lack of EOD presence, but things for stacking up for him, I almost would have stuck to him if Boom hadn't made that play)

One thing I did notice about Jack was that he was unfair with his scumreads on Laser and Pythag. Note this quote:

My view on Laser is pretty much the same his posts are unhelpful and is a way to avoid giving info which a town would not do. As Z25 said he has done some words in his posts so the emote restriction is a lie. Add that to a neighbourhood and me agreeing likely one scum in it he seems like the clear choice.

Just seemed off that he would feel so certain that town wouldn't do that, which is something you mentioned. Yet, again, people do react that way regardless of alignment (Jack's first post i mean) but I feel seeing Jack say this (the quote above) is actually more telling. So just something I'll be looking at in the future as a tell. Since, as scum, you'll try to force a read because your intent is to lynch the (town) player rather than actually solve them.

 

[Pokechu]

I think it was null because of the pressure vote, and announcing it as a pressure vote. I've seen scum and town alike vote 'for the sake of pressure' while announcing it. The thing is, it's more of bad play rather than something I'd consider suspicious, which is why I ignored it. It also seemed like a policy vote to me, so I didn't really find anything telling about it. (Z and Lore both were for policying Osieorb in Sorcerer's, and they were opposing alignments)

This part is true!! I have seen people announce the pressure votes before and it confuses me each time LOL but I think in conjunction with everything else, Jack's post still pinged me. Good observation about Z and Lore though! I should read that game soon.

I think lack of willingness to solve would be one of the possibilities behind that post, but another possibility could have been that they were genuine about wanting to pressure them, they just didn't know that it would fail. What's telling is what they do after that. Which I think you get into as well, and I do agree, he didn't analyze Laser to the extend I did, which may clue us in to his alignment, but that takes time to actually see. This is why I was also fine with ignoring that post, because I focus on macro reads. Basically, I would read him by his overall play, and not just one post. (This is why I don't totally focus on UP's lack of EOD presence, but things for stacking up for him, I almost would have stuck to him if Boom hadn't made that play)

Agreed here as well! It's when you can piece together things that your argument as a whole is stronger, I think. But sometimes I think starting from individual posts and working around that can help. Especially in cases like Jack since he played super well.

Just seemed off that he would feel so certain that town wouldn't do that, which is something you mentioned. Yet, again, people do react that way regardless of alignment (Jack's first post i mean) but I feel seeing Jack say this (the quote above) is actually more telling. So just something I'll be looking at in the future as a tell. Since, as scum, you'll try to force a read because your intent is to lynch the (town) player rather than actually solve them.

And I also think this was a GREAT catch!!! I didn't think of that quote like that!!! It is forcing the read, he isn't really solving it or trying to find the motivation behind it. Just "town wouldn't do this." Hawk's eye there, Ran!!

What do you think of how Jack switched to Sabrar D2? I brought this up LyLo. At the time it seemed OK because EoD jitters and all but when you remember that he had reread the game and was discussing how his read of Sabrar massively improved it seems a bit flaky.

Here's what I said then (LyLo)

And another thing that's been pinging me

I think you reread the game during D2, not sure to just get a better read on Sab or to just get a better read on everyone

UP posts during the Night bother me during reread, I feel that Sab has decent points and the way UP reacted felt way over the top for no reason. Espically after being MIA for so long.

My read on Sabrar has went up over the last 12 pages of my reread. I feel that they came off better in the litte face off with Boom and the one just mentioned at Night. I also find it hard to believe a wolf has this much follow up on his questions. A lot of scum just half arse it and never follow up. He is following up on everything which shows that the questions matter to him and he needs them to help his scum hunting. I never realized how much he actually has done until my reread.

Your opinion of Sab improved maassively

Unless someone can give me a valid case on Sabrar or show me the one that I missed, then I could go there today.

You're hesitant to lynch him here

Sabrar: I think his play has been tunneling UP, with some questioning that has seemed townie. Yet he's been keeping Boom at a distance, until now. He has been questioning Wisp on Day 1 with legitimate concerns, such as Wisp's shade on him, but he labels him as indy, and then drops it the next Day. Sabrar's play on Day 2, has been very lacking. His push on Boom seems like an omgus, because he wasn't considering Boom before he voted Sabrar. Boom was already showing signs of considering everyone but himself and UP in his reads.



This quote is in response to me asking Sabrar why he was less engaged today. I think this shows the lack of desire to find scum, and sticking to UP.

Ok that sounds fair and goes with the meta that I think laser said day one that Sabrar is more passive but agrro as town. He has being uber focused on UP for a long time and seemed to have little intrest looking elsewhere while the rest of us did. I also agree the push on Boom lacked fight to a degree and was a bit OMGUS.

On the Wisp part though would him dropping it not make sense with the lovers thing to a degree. I'm not sure what the correct reaction to that is tbh

OK I just reread everything from today that I missed. I feel ok about the Sabrar lynch feel like a bit bad voting someone who is not here, but nothing we can do about that. I agree with Wisp in not liking Sabrar last post and part of me feels that they is a scum in Wisp and Sabrar just based off that role. Its the type of thing I loved to do as a host. I townread Wisp a lot more also so a easy choice.

But with just one itty bitty paragraph from Ran, you're convinced! And you're trusting meta that Laser (your top scumread) gave! I guess meta doesn't really differ based on alignment, but I would've expected you to have more hesitance overall with voting Sab. Like it's really opportunistic to vote someone when you were really improving your read of them.

But I guess you had good reasoning with Wiisp/Sabrar TvS..... but at the same time, both have flipped town. . . . . . .

In hindsight Jack's reasoning with Wiisp/Sabrar TvS was forcing a read too (attributing the TvS to role shenanigans instead of real reads or observations). I also recall Jack being interested in a UP or Boom lynch for most of that Day but I could be wrong. So when he's hesitant to vote Sabrar one moment, after reading the game and having improved his read of him, but he still hops on anyways? I think that should've been a hint to us too.

Here's me cherrypicking a quote LMAO

Ok I'm here now and will be until end of day. We need to agree on something. Based off what I read that lies in Sabrar UP and Boom. I think I still perfer Boom, but UP no showing a lot again makes my concearns about that slot even more real. I would need to relook at Sabrar over the night phase since I keep going back and forth on that slot. So don't really want to lynch there today. The whole wisp and Sabrar thing is something I have never seen before either and concerns me.

He voices hesitation towards a Sabrar lynch and reinforces his opinion on UP especially so the move to voting Sab is a little opportunistic.

What do you think? Would be nice to hear your thoughts!!

And sorry for using you as the example again Jack LMAO but there's a lot to be learned from the game!! You played amazingly!!

 

[ranmaru]

Might as well post this here for others to discuss if they want. (Pokechu I'm too lazy to respond I'll get back to you some day I promise) I just want to have this post be easy to find for me if I want to reference it:

X1-12's Junk Post Filter

If a question does any of the following, then delete it:


1.) Creates unecessary WIFOM
2.) Has already been answered
3.) Is stupid: ie a question which does not indicate anyones alignment or connections, or is so simple that it gains nothing -i.e saying "are you scum"
4.)is rolefishing

If you find an accusation do the following, if it fails or proves to be useless then delete it:

Think through the possibility of this accusation being true, is it mechanically possible? After that you need to consider the following factors:

1.)What existing discussion there has been on this topic.
-> 1.a)What reasoning there is for this accusation, and what evidence there is to support this
-> 1.b)What reasoning against is there to this accusation and what evidnence is there to support this
-> 1.c)Is it truly scummy? What possible reasons could they have for doing this? At this point you should decided whether something is clear-cut scummy or not. Consider asking for explanations instead of accusing because you still have the option to vote if you aren't satisfied with their responses. Could they merely be wrong instead of scummy? Sometimes (only sometimes) you might suspect someone has a PR and thus its best not to mention something, for example if someone refuses to talk about someone or is calling someone town for no reasons it could be because they have an inno on them or something. Consider noting this down for later, for example if you suspect they do have an inno, or are in a masonry, and they later claim something else, question them upon it.

2.) The likelyhood based on game flavour and set-up of the accusation being true. If you suspect someone is mafia, yet has a cop innocent on them then thats a strong sign they're not mafia.
-> 2.a) At this injuntction you should remember the most important fact about mafia. Scum Lie. If the cop's claim is unverified, or partially verified, then take that into account. For example if 4 players can verify the cop claim and a miller/godfather has already flipped, then an unCC'ed cop should be taken as pretty much true, but if its an unverified claim, then that cop's result should still be an influence, but less solid a fact i.e you should use it as merely one of the factors influencing your decision.


If you find something like this "Well its possible that scum did it to fool us, but we can't tell" then delete it. If you are "just wandering to yourself" or just "thinking aloud" then DON'T If its a general question and there's no answer to it, don't ask it. Look at this from KSSU:"Either he didn't read much (therefore NOT noticing it and other things), or he is playing dumb." That is in no way useful. DONT POST THIS ****.

Once you have condensed your post down by deleting everything I tell you to here, read the post to make sure its actually coherent to anyone who can't see your thought process and try to check for at least basic grammar/spelling mistakes.

 

[Chaco]

It’s a good barebones guide in concision, but I think it takes away a lot of what makes town truly townie. Logic will carry you so far in any game, but tone, inflection, etc is what truly identifies a lot. If you take away these factors you appear very null outside of your contents direction. Not saying it is not and should not be the widely accepted way to play, I just think that it takes away a lot of tells. I’ve always played a very loose style though, and tend to gravitate towards players who do the same.