Medio, I agree with basically everything you said regarding Occam's Razor. In case you misinterpreted what i said as how I believe it should be applied, that isn't what I was trying to do. I was simply answering camo-man's simple question of "What is it?" so i provided its basic definition.
As for win conditions. I operate on the assumption that in order to win the game, you must eliminate all other factions. Normally, you don't see games get to this point via actual gameplay. Why is that? It's because mods just end games once the mafia/independent whittles the town down to its size, and kills the rest in "endgame". Some mods just do this indiscriminately by actually changing the win conditions to be what would normally trigger endgame, even if the circumstances in said game WOULD NOT trigger endgame, upon further consideration.
For example, in a basic mafia game with only vanilla townies and vanilla mafiats, endgame is triggered when the mafia has numbers equal to the town. This is so because assuming rationality from both sides, the absolute best scenario for the town is that they manage to figure out who each other are and will not vote for one another. If this happens, it is impossible for either side to gain a majority, since mafiats wont vote for one another and neither will the townies, and it is necessary that someone vote for a teamate in order to achieve lynch. This causes stalemate, and the day must be forcibly ended with no lynch. Night comes and since the townies are vanillia, assuming rationality again, the mafia are guaranteed to kill a townie, which gives them the majority the next day, thus allowing them to easily lynch and nightkill the remaining townies. Instead of letting the players do all of this themselves, mods just trigger endgame to save time and assume all of that will happen by assuming rationality.
Here are some examples of late game situations that should not, in my opinion, trigger endgame.
1.) Equal number of un-nightkillables on both sides. No one can die at night so one of the opposing factions HAS to win by getting the other side to mislynch. If the game deadlocks, it's a tie.
2.) A town double voter can keep the town in the game even if they have even numbers with the mafia, i.e. two town, two mafia, one town is a double voter. The game is basically decided by who the double voter decides to vote for.
3.) Two town and two mafia are still alive, all except godfather are vulnerable to night death, one town is a vig one is the doctor. This game can go both ways. Obviously no lynch can occur so the game deadlocks and forces night phase. If the mafia targets vig and doc protects, and the vig correctly targets the non GF, the town can pull out the win when day phase comes around since they now have numbers on the mafia. Obviously though that game is lost for the town if they miss that protection no matter what.
Get the idea? I don't like setting those majority or equality oriented win conditions because it can cut out some nice juicy endgame metagame. I prefer to leave those possibilities open and only end the game when all the opposing factions are dead.
As for win conditions. I operate on the assumption that in order to win the game, you must eliminate all other factions. Normally, you don't see games get to this point via actual gameplay. Why is that? It's because mods just end games once the mafia/independent whittles the town down to its size, and kills the rest in "endgame". Some mods just do this indiscriminately by actually changing the win conditions to be what would normally trigger endgame, even if the circumstances in said game WOULD NOT trigger endgame, upon further consideration.
For example, in a basic mafia game with only vanilla townies and vanilla mafiats, endgame is triggered when the mafia has numbers equal to the town. This is so because assuming rationality from both sides, the absolute best scenario for the town is that they manage to figure out who each other are and will not vote for one another. If this happens, it is impossible for either side to gain a majority, since mafiats wont vote for one another and neither will the townies, and it is necessary that someone vote for a teamate in order to achieve lynch. This causes stalemate, and the day must be forcibly ended with no lynch. Night comes and since the townies are vanillia, assuming rationality again, the mafia are guaranteed to kill a townie, which gives them the majority the next day, thus allowing them to easily lynch and nightkill the remaining townies. Instead of letting the players do all of this themselves, mods just trigger endgame to save time and assume all of that will happen by assuming rationality.
Here are some examples of late game situations that should not, in my opinion, trigger endgame.
1.) Equal number of un-nightkillables on both sides. No one can die at night so one of the opposing factions HAS to win by getting the other side to mislynch. If the game deadlocks, it's a tie.
2.) A town double voter can keep the town in the game even if they have even numbers with the mafia, i.e. two town, two mafia, one town is a double voter. The game is basically decided by who the double voter decides to vote for.
3.) Two town and two mafia are still alive, all except godfather are vulnerable to night death, one town is a vig one is the doctor. This game can go both ways. Obviously no lynch can occur so the game deadlocks and forces night phase. If the mafia targets vig and doc protects, and the vig correctly targets the non GF, the town can pull out the win when day phase comes around since they now have numbers on the mafia. Obviously though that game is lost for the town if they miss that protection no matter what.
Get the idea? I don't like setting those majority or equality oriented win conditions because it can cut out some nice juicy endgame metagame. I prefer to leave those possibilities open and only end the game when all the opposing factions are dead.
.