Mini 697: Prisoner's Dilemma Mafia {Game Over!}

[icemanE]

unsend humscunter

send: Crazy
send: OP

Those two seem random enough to justify sending. I don't think we should send spring tonight, as she came up with the plan.

[Crazy]

Oh, p.s., anyone here actually want to go to jail? Anyone here that doesn't?

I do, that's why i voted myself.
Also, I do fully support the town holding a jailee accountable if he doesn't vote no, in other words, exits with a dead protown in jail.

Yeah, definitely.

[Machiavellian-Mafia]

Prison Count #2

4 - springlullaby (Seraphim, humscunter, SlySly, orangepenguin)
3 - TonyMontana (orangepenguin, RedCoyote, TonyMontana)
3 - Crazy (RedCoyote, DragonsofSummer, icemanE)

2 - orangepenguin (DragonsofSummer, icemanE)
1 - CarnCarn (Seraphim)
1 - Albert B. Rampage (TonyMontana)

Not Yet Voted:

Crazy (2)
Albert B. Rampage (2)
humscunter (1)
springlullaby (2)
SlySly (1)
CarnCarn (2)

Remember the majority is 7 and the deadline is 6:30PM Eastern November 18th!

[TonyMontana]

mod-question: Is the "lynch" sealed on a person once we reach a majority on them, or can cotes be retracted as long as 2 people haven't reached majority?

[Machiavellian-Mafia]

mod-question: Is the "lynch" sealed on a person once we reach a majority on them, or can cotes be retracted as long as 2 people haven't reached majority?

The day only ends when there are two players who have reached majority at that time. So player X could have 8 votes and the next highest vote-getter could have 5 votes and the day would still continue, with voting and unvoting still available for everyone.

[Crazy]

Works for me.

Send: TonyMontana
Send: Crazy

[CarnCarn]

If we go with this plan, do we decide beforehand who we want investigated? I think that should be a requirement, especially if there are NKs.
If not, here is what can happen:
A scum gets into prison and only "investigates" someone they know is not on their team. Then, that prison trip is basically wasted and another night of killing ensues. Or, the scum can pull a fake-innocent on their scum buddy.
I think this plan really won't work because of the loopholes for scum, especially with NKs.
I think this should be more about townhunting and sending those people to prison to vote No-No and then letting them day kill the scummiest suspects. I really don't see a way to break this game.

[CarnCarn]

send: Crazy
send: OP

Those two seem random enough to justify sending. I don't think we should send spring tonight, as she came up with the plan.

Are you sure it's random?

send Crazy

send OrangePenguin

I have no problems with the plan at all, but it does get complicated there are night kills.

[TonyMontana]

If we go with this plan, do we decide beforehand who we want investigated? I think that should be a requirement, especially if there are NKs.

They get Daycop ability for the next day. We can discuss it then.

[CarnCarn]

They get Daycop ability for the next day. We can discuss it then.

Oh, right, good point.
Also, you mentioned punishments for people who choose "Yes" in prison. How exactly are they going to be punished? Do we actually have to waste a day sending people to prison, trusting them both to choose "No" and picking the daykill (only 50% btw) option to get rid of that person the next day? That's a really drawn out process and it basically wastes two days/nights even if that one scum gets punished.
Or, are you thinking there is some vig that will handle the punishment? But what happens if/when that vig dies? There is unfortunately no easy way to punish after that.

[TonyMontana]

Well, the only way we as town can try to kill someone is sending in someone to say "yes" against them. Of course, the scum would be aware of this, resulting in a rock scissors paper match.

If this is the best we can do, I hope we *do* have a vig.

This is what troubles me about the no-no strategy. I say undoubtedly that no-no should be played on night 1, but into the game that could be troublesome.

[Crazy]

Definitely the targets should be decided

tomorrow

, to keep the scum from swaying the night-kill.

A vig seems like a reasonable role for this game... though we should plan on "lynching" people by making someone else say yes (preferably someone unconfirmed).

[Seraphim]

I agree with Crazy on this one. Two confirmed townies are better than none at all.

Unsend, Unsend

Send: OrangePenguin

Send: Crazy

[icemanE]

Are you sure it's random?

The two people DoS selected seemed random enough, yes, so I thought they'd be good picks. I agree with sending anyone but Spring, though.

[CarnCarn]

Crazy, what happens if we send a scum and they give a fake innocent on a team member? How/when would we find out?

[icemanE]

Carn is right about the myriad loopholes in this plan, btw.

[CarnCarn]

Send: Tony Montana

[Crazy]

Crazy, what happens if we send a scum and they give a fake innocent on a team member? How/when would we find out?

Well, I don't know. Maybe it is best if the two players clear each other first. Also, the town should suggest targets to the players, and not have them decide themselves to minimize this.

But still, having multiple people checking each person, as well as both players investigating the same person, is ridiculous.

[Crazy]

And if we end up in a scenario at the end of the game where everyone is seemingly confirmed... we look for scum the normal way.

[orangepenguin]

unsend spring, send orangepenguin

Eh, whatever. Since everyone wants me there for seemingly random reasons.

[Albert B. Rampage]

Oh, p.s., anyone here actually want to go to jail? Anyone here that doesn't?

I want to go.

If you're going to send me, please specify whether you think I'm scum or town beforehand.

[springlullaby]

Well obviously Nk's, and I think you guys are right about this, make a big part of my original plan impractical because it would takes too many night/day cycle.

Though I think the revised version by Iceman is good enough, it drops the security of double checking, but it still puts the investigation results ahead of the number of NK assuming 1 per night (more would be insane I think).

If we go with the plan, I would want prisoners to check each others.

If it is decided that they shouldn't check each other, I agree that it is town who should assign investigation target to them.

And I think that people who we sent to prison today have to pledge to answer No to the question.

If we decide to randomly sent people to prison, I want dice roll.


In the meantime I'm sending people I like.

Send:humscunter
Send:TonyMontana

Btw, there was no offense intended in my trying to break the setup, I think testing the setup is part of the appeal of this kind of games, and I would expect Machiavelli to humor people who does it.

[CarnCarn]

I want to go.

If you're going to send me, please specify whether you think I'm scum or town beforehand.

Send: Albert B. Rampage

Well, I'll just say that, if anyone is actually sending someone they think is scum, I would like to know why they are doing so.

[Albert B. Rampage]

I pledge to answer no to the question.

[RedCoyote]

if anyone is actually sending someone they think is scum, I would like to know why they are doing so.

Just a general suspicion to throw out and make the town all nervous-like. I, personally, get a negative vibe off of OP. That's just a preliminary, "if I had to choose" kind of thing though.

I chose the two people I feel safest about at the moment.

If we go with the plan, I would want prisoners to check each others.

spring, did you read my post? This is what turned me against your plan to begin with. Not that I think you are delibrately trying to mess with the town or anything, but this is why I don't care for your plan. Unless the investigations take place during the day, they wouldn't be able to investigate each other because they are both jailed (refer to Rule 5).

---

Really people I think we need to focus on jailing townies who want a prison sentence and worry about planning tomorrow.

And someone brought up the idea of planning investigations before hand. That's a bad idea because I'm convinced there are NKs and if the mafia have any sort of framer-like role that can change the guilt/innocence of a person in an investigation we could be in serious trouble. Let the investigations be left the those in jail, the only bad thing that could happen is if they investigate the same person, which is improbable.