Open Setup Certification Group

[Lord Gurgi]

/in

I am also of the opinion that Xyl or JDodge should be hauled in for this. They have a different point of view than who I expect to be on this team.

[Lord Gurgi]

/in

I am also of the opinion that Xyl or JDodge should be hauled in for this. They have a different point of view than who I expect to be on this team.

I'm not wildly enthusiastic, but I'd be willing to help.

If you're not up for it, don't do it.

[Lord Gurgi]

Something generally unregulated. One or two at a time, one or two days each, consensus, go.

[Lord Gurgi]

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.

[Lord Gurgi]

An overhaul of the Open Games section of the wiki would be a good place to start.

[Lord Gurgi]

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...

or I would edit this page on the wiki to contain that information.

the page for Open 5 http://www.mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?title=Open_5
is pretty awesome. Should it be the model for other open games?

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.

[Lord Gurgi]

Is there a reason that 2:4 nightless is a horrible idea?

[Lord Gurgi]

Is there a reason that 2:4 nightless is a horrible idea?

I thought 2:10 was already difficult for town

That has nights.

[Lord Gurgi]

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.

[Lord Gurgi]

So you guys know which nightless setups (vanilla and non-vanilla) have already been run?

Not a clue. Do you want to hock Lovers Mafia again?

[Lord Gurgi]

hock?

(sorry for deleting my post. I was trying to say something different, and failed.)

Sell for

crazy

low prices.

[Lord Gurgi]

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?

[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.

Open 1

- Pie E7

Overview:

• ¬ Patrick (
  Mafia Roleblocker
  )
  ¬ Rosso Carne (
  Mafia Goon
  )
  spectrumvoid (
  Townie
  ) - Lynched Day 1
  ShadowLurker (
  Doctor
  ) - Killed Night 1
  klebian (
  Townie
  ) - Lynched Day 2
  ChannelDelibird (
  Cop
  ) - Endgamed
  Primate (
  Townie
  ) - Endgamed

Synopsis:

Day 1

• spectrumvoid: 4 (Patrick, Primate, Rosso Carne, ShadowLurker)
  klebian: 2 (ChannelDelibird, spectrumvoid)

Night 1

• ChannelDelibird investigated klebian (Blocked).
  Patrick blocked ChannelDelibird.
  Rosso Carne killed ShadowLurker.
  ShadowLurker protected Patrick.

Day 2

• klebian: 3 (ChannelDelibird, Patrick, Primate)

[Lord Gurgi]

er, name the members of the steering committee.

Ah, yes, that would be one of the necessary steps.

[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.

Open 1

- Pie E7

Overview:

• ¬ Patrick (
  Mafia Roleblocker
  )
  ¬ Rosso Carne (
  Mafia Goon
  )
  spectrumvoid (
  Townie
  ) - Lynched Day 1
  ShadowLurker (
  Doctor
  ) - Killed Night 1
  klebian (
  Townie
  ) - Lynched Day 2
  ChannelDelibird (
  Cop
  ) - Endgamed
  Primate (
  Townie
  ) - Endgamed

Synopsis:

Day 1

• spectrumvoid: 4 (Patrick, Primate, Rosso Carne, ShadowLurker)
  klebian: 2 (ChannelDelibird, spectrumvoid)

Night 1

• ChannelDelibird (Cop) investigated: klebian (Townie) (no result -- blocked).
  Patrick (Mafia Roleblocker) blocked: ChannelDelibird (Cop) (blocked investigation result).
  Rosso Carne (Mafia Goon) killed: ShadowLurker (Doctor) (dead).
  ShadowLurker (Doctor) protected: Patrick (Mafia Roleblocker) (protected).

Day 2

• klebian: 3 (ChannelDelibird, Patrick, Primate)

Fixed.

[Lord Gurgi]

I wasn't aware. I'm not a wikiwizard.

[Lord Gurgi]

I'm in limbo at the moment, so I won't be able to talk, really. Would it be wise or feasible for us to get together on AIM to discuss this?

Anyway, I'd like to start this thing and make some suggestions. I'm going to start with the tiny setups.

1. Vengeful. Either the five player or seven player version or both of Vengeful should be certified. It's a solid setup.
   
2. California. This seems like a solid setup to me. I'd like to recommend it for certification.
   
3. Carbon-14. Not a bad setup, IMHO. It has a following, even though it's not my cup of tea, I think it's balanced.
   
4. Lovers Mafia. This needs to be certified, even if it's not my favourite.
   
5. Gurgi EC8. Can we look at this? At least to satisfy my ego, at most because I think it's a good setup.

Just a start.

[Lord Gurgi]

Would it be wise or feasible for us to get together on AIM to discuss this?

Tuesday or Wednesday.

I'm fine with either, you guys? Korts is also a consideration, timezone being an element.

[Lord Gurgi]

Great!

[Lord Gurgi]

Would it be wise or feasible for us to get together on AIM to discuss this?

Tuesday or Wednesday.

I'm fine with either, you guys? Korts is also a consideration, timezone being an element.

I could stay up late Wednesday, depending on what time approximately you intend to be up. I can be until 2-3 AM GMT+1 (8-9 PM East Coast Time) tops.

I get home at maybe 4 PM PST, that gives us 2 hours maximum window.

[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.

[Lord Gurgi]

If PM's and rulesets are going to be handed to the mods, I do not think that Open Games should be applicable for New Mod experience.

Who said anything about rulesets? Besides, writing a role PM is

hardly

all that the experience gives you. The most valuable aspect of moderation experience is the upkeep, because that's when it matters if they fold.

[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.

[Lord Gurgi]

Well... let's start by certifying some setups, and then we can work on role PMs if we run out of other things to do

I'm pretty sure we can safely certify C9 and vengeful without any major changes.

Lovers, too, no?

Anyway, I don't see why the role PMs aren't designed and submitted by the designer in the first place, if not by this group. (shrug)

[Lord Gurgi]

The JDodge problem was enabled by such a mistake.

[Lord Gurgi]

Flag Basic Twelve, please.

[Lord Gurgi]

If there are no further flags, I think we can approve that list for a first batch. shaft.ed? Korts?

I'm just a guy

You're on the list in the first post

huh, I guess that shows if you just pretend to be something for long enough, eventually you'll get your way.

Anyway, are we all for certifying this list? Then we can get to argument and abuse.

[Lord Gurgi]

Can we just make Ether join the group?

[Lord Gurgi]

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.

[Lord Gurgi]

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.

[Lord Gurgi]

I don't see large nightless games as an issue. Bigger votecounts are not exactly a mental challenge.

I support Xyl for pres, but I also think Ether has a point.

[Lord Gurgi]

Those results surprise me a bit, but okay. More scum are needed.

Behold the power of the obv-town!

[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.

[Lord Gurgi]

I'm not saying it's meaningless. What I'm saying is that three town wins isn't conclusive evidence that a setup is in the town's favor.

As I said, I'd be fine with it being run. I think it's probably close to 50-50 in practice (EV is only 1/3). I

don't

think it's in the town's favor, though.

What would you say is significant evidence?

[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?

[Lord Gurgi]

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.

[Lord Gurgi]

Short version: Peeps will never be satisfied.

I think that the power of a town is understated under the current meta.

[Lord Gurgi]

I hate statistics. We need to make a club.

[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.

[Lord Gurgi]

6-8 players: 2 scum (2:4 to 2:6)
9-12 players: 3 scum (3:6 to 3:9)
13-16 players: 4 scum (4:9 to 4:12)

Fine? Fine.

Let's get to actually doing what we're supposed to.

[Lord Gurgi]

Bird C9 (27, 98, 117)

(flagged by Xyl)

Trendy and Subversive C9 (90, 91, 94)

(flagged by Xyl)

Basic Twelve Player (3, 9, 54)

(flagged by Lord Gurgi)

Masons and Monks (12, 23, 56)

(flagged by Adel)

Strawberry (17, 46, 62)

(flagged by Adel)

Polygamist (76, 83, 88)

(flagged by Adel)

The New C9 (50, 60, 81, 104)

(flagged by Adel)

Nightless Vanilla (6, 19, 41, 79)

(flagged by Xyl)

Where shall we start?

[Lord Gurgi]

Can we stop messing with it?

[Lord Gurgi]

Somehow I think 2v2v9 is better.

[Lord Gurgi]

Somehow I think 2v2v9 is better.

That's so simple it just might work.

[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.

[Lord Gurgi]

I'm tolerating docs, you can tolerate back up roles.

[Lord Gurgi]

Can we finish up with Monks?

2v2v9 seems good enough to me, can we certify?

[Lord Gurgi]

Can we finish up with Monks?

2v2v9 seems good enough to me, can we certify?

Slow down. 2-scumteam setups need deeper analysis.

I just don't like all the jumping around. It seemed like we were finally getting somewhere, then tangent.

[Lord Gurgi]

I'm with Glork.

[Lord Gurgi]

IMHO, cop and doc versus mafia is broked or sucky.

[Lord Gurgi]

By "sucky" I meant "has a breaking strategy that is well known and simple".

I'm not sure how adding a roleblocker keeps this setup any different from all the other cop+doc/RB setups.

[Lord Gurgi]

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.

[Lord Gurgi]

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?

[Lord Gurgi]

Confusion
1 Roleblocker
1 Goon

1 of Cop/Nurse/Doc
1 of Doc/Deputy/Cop
3 Townies

[Lord Gurgi]

Point made, then.

Of course, we could have 50% chance for each one. /joke

I support Cop or Doc.

[Lord Gurgi]

What is this, "Gradually change every setup until it becomes F11"?

Curses. I've been uncovered.

Seriously though, what's the problem with the cop or doc version?

[Lord Gurgi]

I'll just vote with shaft.ed again.

[Lord Gurgi]

I suggest we just certify Bird C9 as Bird and change the role name to what I had above.

[Lord Gurgi]

I actually think that this is town favoured.

[Lord Gurgi]

I suggest we just certify Bird C9 as Bird and change the role name to what I had above.

Yes let's certify it. We could put up a poll thread on what to call it if you want. But I'm happy with Bird

Sure.

[Lord Gurgi]

I dunno. It seems like if 3:9 is balanced, why is 3:8+1 balanced?

[Lord Gurgi]

I kind of like this bring in the creator and have them explain their though process thing.

[Lord Gurgi]

More games with hydras is good.

[Lord Gurgi]

I think you just have a setup that takes hydras and let the people work it out before hand. I don't think forcing hydras will work terribly well.

[Lord Gurgi]

I don't think I am disagreeing with you.

[Lord Gurgi]

I agree with Adel.

Vote to death

[Lord Gurgi]

Vote: Die suck die.

2v2v8 or 2v2v9?

[Lord Gurgi]

Explain why it is balanced in less than 500 characters.

[Lord Gurgi]

Die suck die

[Lord Gurgi]

(know-it-all dance)

[Lord Gurgi]

Propose we cerify 2:2:9

2nd.

Sure. I recall suggesting this ages ago. :roll:

[Lord Gurgi]

I have no problem with 1:4. It seems like a good setup, to me. If we're going to be a stickler based on the number of mafia, not their nature, there's really no hope.

[Lord Gurgi]

Yay: Jungle Republic, 2:2:7, Unicycle (Wheels without the scumbus), Alternating P9

Nay: Other stuff

Xyl: While I agree with you, I think that it's the list mod's choice

which

games to run, and it's our decision which games she

can

run. If it's balanced, she ought to be able to run one.

[Lord Gurgi]

Yay: Jungle Republic, 2:2:7, Unicycle (Wheels without the scumbus), Alternating P9

Nay: Other stuff

[Lord Gurgi]

Why is random lynching with the proviso that you stop if the lynch claims a power role, in which case they are lynched the next day, should they survive, with hypocop not a good strategy? Can someone somehow run numbers?

[Lord Gurgi]

I like Ether's new multiball more than the original.

[Lord Gurgi]

I suspect D1 Cop claim may still be the optimal strategy.

It is.

[Lord Gurgi]

I prefer to drop the weak seer, then certify. The asymmetrical one is good as is. I don't see any reason why SCIENCE is imbalanced.

[Lord Gurgi]

[Lord Gurgi]

Meh. I see this as another solution that only lives as long as there is interest in it. When it dies again it will either be ignored or the system will become archaic. Frankly I support making a new list mod to be in charge of this. Where's Kelly Chen?

More new list mods! Single decision makers open to the opinions of the group are more efficient!