I don't see why Think was so fuckin worried about saving bfdirty when he could just revive that dude if he wanted
(Think was the Nurse)
I don't see why Think was so fuckin worried about saving bfdirty when he could just revive that dude if he wanted
(Think was the Nurse)
Not true. Because of the difference in knowledge between the mafia and townspeople, the voting patterns for the mafia will always tend to be less random and to vote as a bloc.The truth is that the town doesn't gain information without lynching
Because of this, each lynching is more likely than not to vote for a townsperson, because anyone who bandwagons is almost certainly doing so with an existing mafia bloc vote (who obviously aren't going to vote for a mafia).
The absolute lack of certainly that the townspeople have about who is or isn't mafia makes them more vulnerable initially, but it's also a strength because, every townsperson should avoid acting in co-ordination with others, unless and until there is clear evidence of collusion between certain people. Anyone who does collude with others will either be mafia, or unwittingly working with them to lynch innnocent townspeople.
So the best method is to split the vote inconclusively and not lynch anyone, because besides leaving you with an extra townsperson, giving you more rounds to work with, the results will effectively divide up the town into smaller groups and individuals, which you can then track to see if they continue to try to vote as a bloc. You'll also be able to rule out any isolated individuals that a consistent voting bloc goes for as being mafia.
this is a load of horseshit. How do games get started without a bandwagon vote in the first place? It always requires more votes than mafia to lynch, does that mean everyone who votes to hang is mafia? Voting patterns only approach reliable after day 3, so voting blocs won't necessesarily show up, and any mafia who doesn't vote for a fellow mafia that played like an idiot and was obviously mafia is bad and should feel bad.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO O
yeah, you can't afford to wait that long, because the shit will be all up in your brit by the time you get reliable and clear evidence. The less communication there is between townies, the easier it is for the mafia to win.
No, Atmosfear is right. Except under very specialized circumstances, like the ones in the last game, it's always better to have a lynching. Otherwise, you're giving the mafia a free kill.
Except that if everyone is formed into small blocs, how do you know which one is Mafia? This strat relies completely on dividing the uninformed group into smaller uninformed groups. You've already divided the townies, it makes the mafia conquering so much eaiser.
Leaving out the fact the mafia might purosely avoid voting in blocs to avoid suspicion
The only time that not lynching is always the best option is when there are 3 town and 1 mafia. The town improve their odds of winning from 1/4 to 1/3 if they don't lynch immediately. Either way, they lose if they guess wrong, so there's incentive to wait.
Note if there are individual win conditions, such as Siblings or Lovers, then obviously not everyone will care to wait. Of course, if you have a pair, you should be able to guess right with 4 survivors.
And yes, mathletes, I realize that this same reduction in odds vs. mortality gambit technically occurs any time there are 2n+2 players remaining in the game, where n is the number of mafia remaining. But there is more variability in the group's ability to even gain a winning majority if there are, say 2 mafia out of 5 than if there are 2 out of 6, especially if someone is mildly retarded (see: last game) so I am sticking that it's only always smarter if there are 3 and 1.
I'm not convinced Coq and Atmo, but I guess the proof is in the pudding, so we'll see.
darn, am I too late?
I doubt it.
Sup WellAdjusted
chyeahhhh, then I'm totes down
Well hello there.
I took CD off my safari bookmark thing and I ended up not visiting for tiiiiime, though it appears I didn't miss too much.
Atmoscheer
coqauvin
infernus
KT.
MrShrike
simonj
ShitFace
Snead
sycld
WellAdjusted
zuelan
3 days for sailor jack and Think
wunnerful
murton I want to play see Casual Discourse - View Single Post - mafia 2 sign up thread
That can only be because you're dumb. Like coq said, if everyone had perfect knowledge of the game and there was a dominant town strategy (and that strategy was to not lynch), then the mafia would get a free kill and tell you nothing (because they would just follow the rest of the town's strategy and spread votes evenly away from a majority.) Then the next day would come and you still wouldn't know anything about the mafia and you'd be guessing again, this time one man shorter.
You are right about needing to see the mafia's voting patterns to expose them, but that only works if you are ostensibly working toward the goal of killing a mafia. Except in the cases I described, where the mafia already have a numeric advantage and the town must guess right on their next lynching or lose, does it help to wait for the mafia to kill someone.
Bullshit.
In the beginning, all votes by townspeople to lynch are essentially random. Because the townspeople outnumber mafia, this means a lynching is already more likely to kill a townsperson than a mafia. Add in that the mafia know who they are and any initial lynchings are almost certain to kill a townsperson, greatly increasing the advantage to the mafia.
Unless you happen to have 3 VERY cool operators playing mafia, that potential advantage in voting to lynch at this point will be almost impossible for to resist - even if the townspeople baulk.
We could argue about this all day and night, but simply consider the result from the first game.
If the non-mafia had not voted to lynch 2 innocent people unnecessarily, essentially floundering around blindly because they no real idea at that point who was mafia, what would have happened instead of the mafia winning so quickly, as they did?
Simple. There would have been 2 more innocents alive, including the nurse, and 2 more days minimum to work out who the mafia were based on their voting patterns. Not to mention the pattern of votes would be much more obvious.
Look, the whole point of the game is to kill mafia. With a field of 3/12, you have a 1 in 4 chance of killing a mafia. by not lynching on the first day, you have 0 chance as well as losing out on voting records for the day.
Ok, so what do you hope to gain by not lynching? Your night operators will get a move, but even if the investigator finds someone, he can't just come out and say 'hey, I'm the damn investigator and mr shrike is mafia' because he will get shot at night. The nurse doesn't have to believe someone claiming to be the investigator, but for the mafia, killing one townie is the same as killing any other townie. The best you can hope for is the ability to see whether or not the game will end on a day phase or a night phase, then stall voting so that it will end on a day phase, giving you the extra time you need to win. How do you even know if that's possible? If there's a small enough field of players and you have enough information to see it coming.
That's why not lynching on the first day is a bad move. Yeah, it's probably gonna be a townie who dies, but so what? Not taking the chance to kill a mafia is worse than stalling because you have no info. Nobody ever really has info in mafia.
wow reading this argument makes me think this is a little more complicated than the card game I used to play haha
I doubt it. I'm pretty sure the card game has a number of roles that we don't have.
But yeah, applying game theory always makes stimulus-response relationships appear more complex. The truth, as we saw in the last game, is that even if there was a truly dominant strategy, many players who would otherwise benefit from subscribing will disagree or ignore it, changing the way the game gets played.
Strategies are just conjecture. All you do is try and kill the mafia if you are a townsperson and try and not be killed by townspeople if you are a mafia. How you go about that is a personal choice (although, as MrShrike has shown, some personal choices are more retarded than others).
Also MrShrike seems to think that the town benefits from winning with more people. The goal of the town is to get enough information to beat the odds in their do or die rounds. There's no bonus points for keeping more alive (see also: inept mafia/lucky guess points), and even dead players "win" when the town wins.
All of the roles we play with are town-affiliated. The Nurse buys the town an extra night, while the Detective gathers additional information. Truthfully, neither is reliable until it's a Do or Die round, because of the difficulty of communicating definitively without the mafia killing you immediately.
Atmoscheer
coqauvin
infernus
KT.
MrShrike
sailor jack
simonj
ShitFace
Snead
sponge
sycld
Think
WellAdjusted
zuelan
3 Shits
11 Brits (1 Smeller)
we will start tomorrow, the guys on honeymoon will catch up (not everyone will have posted by friday anyway)
he revives townsfolk from night kills, not day lynches
no, most players vote based on how others act
so you would have stalled that game, despite the evidence against Think, until it was 4 town vs. 3 mafia with only a 1 day difference, and now the town has to make flawless decisions
Mutton this town is gonna need a Nurse
if there's consensus i'll give you a nurse
the nurse and cop become powerful once they gather enough info
That's not true. There are a number of games with dominant strategies, which mean you mathematically have the best possible play regardless of the way your opponent plays. The simplest examples (or perhaps most common) are in a Prisoner's Dilemma, you're always better off turning in the other guy, or in the Monty Hall Question, you're always better off switching doors.
He acted like a fucking mafia, lying to everyone in order to prevent a lynch which clearly benefits the mafia and then turned around and made a whole bunch of vote switches. Vote switching is usually an indicator of mafia.
I mean the town should have lynched Think immediately, but it wasn't until Think was proven innocent that it became clear that mutton was a mafia. Think also should have revealed that he was nurse immediately, because he could have proven mutton a mafia and he was already going to die, but as has been established, Think didn't play very well. I think bfdirty and simonj were guesses without much basis, but he was right about mutton.
And your argument of "you can't trust how people act" is dumb... the only thing you CAN trust is the reveal of dead players. You can to kill players to reconcile behavior with fact.
yeah i expected people to listen to Think after he got revealed (this is why we killed infernus), but they took him for a raving lunatic or are just idiots
if i got lynched, bfdirty should have been next and the mafia would win still
Yeah they were never going to get sycld. He was in the driver's seat.
Ok, so the ultimate plan is do exactly what they did last time and hope it doesn't lose them the game in the shortest possible time, just like it did last time. Right.
But anyway, let's just play already.
there will be one lynch every day
Good. Now stfu
Bookmarks