[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/ext/alfredoramos/seometadata/event/listener.php on line 114: Undefined array key 1521355 [phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/ext/alfredoramos/seometadata/event/listener.php on line 114: Trying to access array offset on value of type null Open Setup Certification Group - Mafiascum.net
Post
Post #41 (isolation #3) » Tue Mar 03, 2009 12:56 pm
Postby Lord Gurgi »
Korts wrote:
PokerFace wrote:You guys should have a member of your group willing to be devils advocate. basically its their job to break, abuse, or find flaws on purpose as much as possible in any setup so that these ideas are found and stopped before a setup is run.
If JDodge could be drawn into this this would be the perfect role for him.
(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough
Post
Post #50 (isolation #5) » Thu Mar 05, 2009 10:27 am
Postby Lord Gurgi »
Adel wrote:If I had the time right now this post would be a list of the open games in numerical order, with a link to each game, name of the setup, number of players, ect...
Am I alone in thinking that we should do the setup's wiki page (w/ links to examples) as well as each specific game page (w/ link to setup page) before we certify any?
I endorse this product or service.
(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough
Post
Post #61 (isolation #8) » Thu Mar 05, 2009 2:31 pm
Postby Lord Gurgi »
shaft.ed wrote:
Lord Gurgi wrote:
shaft.ed wrote:
Lord Gurgi wrote:Is there a reason that 2:4 nightless is a horrible idea?
I thought 2:10 was already difficult for town
That has nights.
...I knew that...
Wouldn't that equate to 2:5-6 nightless then?
Not really. The best townies will die a horrible death in 2:10. Also there's kill WIFOM. 2:4 nightless would have purely day-analysis. It would be the ideal strategy to comb over what has been said, look at relationships, and go over meta, rather than deal with any night WIFOM. I say it is fair, because each side can suffer one mislynch.
(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough
Post
Post #68 (isolation #11) » Thu Mar 05, 2009 3:26 pm
Postby Lord Gurgi »
Adel wrote:this is the direction I think we should take:
1. Name steering committee.
2. Compile completed Open Game information (including open games run by mods in the mini-normal queue?) on the wiki to enable evidence-based discussion.
3. Identify "least controversial" setups for the first round of certification.
Why is name steering important?
(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough
Post
Post #70 (isolation #12) » Thu Mar 05, 2009 3:55 pm
Postby Lord Gurgi »
This is the format I was planning on using for when I go through all these games to catalog them. Any recommendations or changes would be best before I set out to do it all.
Post
Post #73 (isolation #14) » Thu Mar 05, 2009 5:58 pm
Postby Lord Gurgi »
Lord Gurgi wrote:This is the format I was planning on using for when I go through all these games to catalog them. Any recommendations or changes would be best before I set out to do it all.
Post
Post #97 (isolation #20) » Sat Mar 07, 2009 4:21 pm
Postby Lord Gurgi »
I don't plan on repressing diversity, just stupidity. If people want to try a setup that we think shouldn't be certified, they can run it separately in the mini theme or mini normal. I don't think this will actually happen.
I think that the A's should definitely be fast-tracked.
On the subject of EV's, I think it really depends upon the game. I don't really want to set finite boundaries of what is and is not acceptable, because I can guarantee there will be games that do not follow an arbitrary rule.
I think that if we plan to improve the PMs, we should create the role PMs as well. There have been problems as a result of PMs in the past.
(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough
Post
Post #103 (isolation #22) » Sat Mar 07, 2009 6:16 pm
Postby Lord Gurgi »
I'm of the opinion that open PMs should be segmented. The flavour PM that is designed by the mod would be put in addition to the standard role PM set by this group.
(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough
Post
Post #150 (isolation #29) » Sun Mar 08, 2009 8:28 pm
Postby Lord Gurgi »
Xylthixlm wrote:
Lord Gurgi wrote:Am I alone in thinking that the relation between size and power of mafia groups is not linear?
I see 2:4 or even 2:5 as being much more balanced than 4:8 or 3:9.
It actually is linear in nightless. With nightkills, not so much.
I disagree. Increasing the size of the group allows for greater protection, culling of the weakest, bussing without crippling the group, etc. The tools of the mafia become more useful as they have more members to run through.
(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough
Post
Post #180 (isolation #32) » Thu Mar 12, 2009 5:56 pm
Postby Lord Gurgi »
Three games is all we have. If three isn't statistically significant, why bother to check the old games at all? Whether three games is a large enough sample size to determine anything is indeed questionable, but three consecutive town wins is not something that happens often.
(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough
Post
Post #184 (isolation #34) » Thu Mar 12, 2009 6:19 pm
Postby Lord Gurgi »
From what I've gotten from my Statistics AP class, which is albeit thin since the teacher spends most of the time surfing the internet or insulting the class, the hypothesis is irrelevant to the necessary sample size. Just binomial it, right?
(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough
Post
Post #186 (isolation #35) » Thu Mar 12, 2009 6:31 pm
Postby Lord Gurgi »
mith wrote:The binomial distribution depends on the probabilities; if our hypothesis is that the realEV is 1/3, that gives us one distribution (and corresponding range of statistically significant results), while if the hypothesis is that realEV is >1/2, we have another distribution.
In the latter case, the probability of getting three town wins by chance is at least 1/8 (12.5%). Statistical signifcance is a fuzzy concept, but generally 5% or 1% is used.
One more win gets to 6.25% which is somewhat close, but of course this is t test, and I don't want to bother with the calculations.
(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough
Post
Post #202 (isolation #38) » Fri Mar 13, 2009 3:51 pm
Postby Lord Gurgi »
I think a good idea might be to run these setups that we want run a lot more during marathon days. A rough gauge of balance at best, it might help us make a decision.
(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough
Post
Post #226 (isolation #44) » Mon Mar 16, 2009 9:31 am
Postby Lord Gurgi »
I don't really see that as a problem. It's swingy, yes, but you have two scumgroups. If the scum are dumb enough to annihilate each other, they deserve to lose.
(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough
Post
Post #250 (isolation #51) » Tue Mar 17, 2009 9:15 am
Postby Lord Gurgi »
Xylthixlm wrote:
mith wrote:After some discussion in Site Ideas, I am starting to implement some of the suggested changes in the way we choose Open Setups to be run. The first change is a split in the discussion thread. The (renamed) Open Setup Ideas and Discussion thread remains open for posting new setup ideas. This thread will continue discussion of these setups, with the goal of "certifying" certain setups which meet some number of basic criteria.
Among these criteria are:
The setup must be Open or Semi-Open.
The setup must qualify as "Normal".
For the most part, approved setups should be small (5-12 players).
Setups must retain the basic premise of Mafia; the outcome of the game should depend primarily (though not necessarily entirely) on whether or not the pro-town players can determine the identities of the Mafia through their posting and behaviour.
"Broken" setups (setups where the town has a strategy which maximizes their chances of winning through "Following the Cop" or similar methods should not be considered.
(Note: This item probably needs clarification.)
This list should not be considered complete or final in any way; rather, it is a starting point for discussion.
Part of our mandate is deciding what criteria we use for approving setups.
(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough
Post
Post #255 (isolation #52) » Tue Mar 17, 2009 9:49 am
Postby Lord Gurgi »
shaft.ed wrote:Those are
Bird C9
2 scum
1 macho cop
1 doc
3 townies
and
Trendy and Subversive C9
1 goon
1 mafia RB (can RB and kill simultaneously)
1 of Cop/Nurse
1 of Doc/Deputy
3 townies
Fixed. I see no problem with either setup that sticks out to me. Except questionable balance, since T&C is obviously less powerful town, so what's the band for this?
(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough