Mini 804 - The Resistance - Mod Abandoned

[Crazy]

Meh, I'm fine with random. Not much else to say.

[Albert B. Rampage]

All in favor of FTF's plan?

[PsychoSniper]

Also, the longer the day goes on, the more the scum can try to daytalk- which is an immensely powerful tool for them if we don't spot it.

Do you mean in thread or by PM? This is important.

Rishi stated in the first post that spy can't communicate outside this thread.

So yeah, I agree with Fishy. Daytalk in the thread is the only way for scum to communicate, and there's nothing concrete for town to discuss until we see the results of the first porposal, so short day benefits town today.

Is the 48hr time limit mandatory? Or can it end prematurely?

So does this mean the less talk from town (just for Day 1), the better?

[forbiddanlight]

Rishi stated in the first post that spy can't communicate outside this thread.

Thank you for telling him the answer I was looking for and effectively ruining any plans I have.

Could people, maybe, in the future not answer questions not directed at them?

Hell, actually, you merit an FoS for that.

FoS Psycho

[ortolan]

I think Fishy is a Spy

It's a pathetic chance we manage to get no scum on the plans. I want to get a number of scum other than one on the plans, so I'd advocate giving plans to scummy people. I do not want a set of plans.

It's true that if you choose randomly you don't have a particularly good chance of getting 3 Rebels:

5/9 * 5/9 * 5/9 = 17.2%

However as with other mafia games, it is assumed you can increase the odds above chance by using logical deduction/induction etc.

Furthermore, do you know whether the "chance" odds increase substantially on subsequent days anyway? If we play it like a game of chance we're more than likely going to lose.

By choosing randomly you not only confine yourself to these odds, but you also deny us the opportunity to form opinions about your motivations in selecting the players you did.

I do not want a set of plans.

What is your rationale for excluding yourself? (Please no-one else answer for him).

If more than one scum receives plans, we have a chance of one of two things happening:
-More than one chooses to sabotoge, and we get closer to identifying the Spies. (Remember, we're going to need a solid idea of who's who when it comes to distributing the last 5 plans to all 5 townies.)
-They WIFOM into inaction, and we win a round.

I don't see how this is a good outcome. Even assuming there are say 1 or 2 spies out of 3, and they WIFOM themselves into not sabotaging, it's likely to cause chaos on subsequent days when we think we have a confirmed group and in fact do not. The potential for these "sleeper cells" is not a good outcome (although potentially unavoidable).

We may as well get a bit of information before starting the discussion.

The information comes at a price though. It's exactly the same as random lynching day one, complete with no reactions to the day one lynch to judge people on, as Naba said.

Also, the longer the day goes on, the more the scum can try to daytalk- which is an immensely powerful tool for them if we don't spot it.

Daytalk in the thread is the only way for scum to communicate, and there's nothing concrete for town to discuss until we see the results of the first porposal, so short day benefits town today.

Is the 48hr time limit mandatory? Or can it end prematurely?

So does this mean the less talk from town (just for Day 1), the better?

You're kidding right? If any rebels have the attitude "we must make the day as quick and random as possible because scum might day-talk and we might not be able to catch them" we may as well give up now. It's no different to any normal mafia game in this regard.

[ortolan]

Put simply- regarding the argument that we should "randomly lynch" or "randomly attribute plans" (for the two are analogous) for information, the response is that it is better to simply have discussion prior to this event- which both increases the chances of success and/or gives us more information for subsequent days. It's quite simple, really.

I suspect forbiddanlight also.

Also, the longer the day goes on, the more the scum can try to daytalk- which is an immensely powerful tool for them if we don't spot it.

Do you mean in thread or by PM? This is important.

If you were indeed asking a question which was supposed to catch someone in a slip, why would you signpost it so obviously with "This is important."?

There is also the fact that contrary to what she seems to be implying, there was no opportunity to "catch someone in a slip" here. Scum cannot daytalk, it says so in the rules.

Fishy could either have replied "no, they cannot day-talk, it says so in the rules", or "they can day-talk". Neither of these constitutes a "slip" though. The former is simply true, and the latter is hardly a slip on his part- it is just wrong, but doesn't prove his towniness because it's still subject to WIFOM like every apparent instance of "not reading the rules" is. I therefore question the basis of her FoS on PsychoSniper.

[PsychoSniper]

Meh, IMO this

is

different from a normal Mafia. I'd equate it more to the Dethy Mafia. It's a logic puzzle, where each night result gives us an extra piece of puzzle to work with. Right now we have zero pieces of puzzle, there's nothing to work with. The only way this differs from a Dethy is that ther's more than 1 scum, and they have a plan to collaborate set up false clues if we give them he chance to communicate.

I maintain that Day 1 talk accomplish little to nothing in this game. Throwing suspicions around means nothing right now. For one thing, without the voting system scum has no reason to feel any pressure about defending themseves. THAT makes it much different from a normal game. After we get some of the puzzle,

then

there's much to talk about. That was the point I was emphasizing on, and I saw no better way to do that than reiterating the no-outside-communication rule.

[Albert B. Rampage]

FOS: forbiddanlight

No one pass a set of plans to her please.

[forbiddanlight]

If you were indeed asking a question which was supposed to catch someone in a slip, why would you signpost it so obviously with "This is important."?

Was it supposed to be a slip? It still might be salvageable.

There is also the fact that contrary to what she seems to be implying, there was no opportunity to "catch someone in a slip" here. Scum cannot daytalk, it says so in the rules.

Again, I never said that

Fishy could either have replied "no, they cannot day-talk, it says so in the rules", or "they can day-talk". Neither of these constitutes a "slip" though. The former is simply true, and the latter is hardly a slip on his part- it is just wrong, but doesn't prove his towniness because it's still subject to WIFOM like every apparent instance of "not reading the rules" is. I therefore question the basis of her FoS on PsychoSniper.

I question ortolans need to spoil the plan.

FoS ort

.

Seriously, I wouldn't confirm Fish over it, but it would have made me feel better about him.

[forbiddanlight]

FOS: forbiddanlight

No one pass a set of plans to her please.

FoS ABR

I felt like OMGUSing.

[Albert B. Rampage]

O.K. so forbiddanlight basically outed herself as imperial spy.

[forbiddanlight]

O.K. so forbiddanlight basically outed herself as imperial spy.

And your logic about this is?

I don't think it's so hard to understand why Psycho and ort are scummy, but apparently people's brains on in the off position tonight.

[veerus]

I don't think it matters wheter we random or wait a few days while we discuss the various outcomes. It's nearly impossible to know whether or not someone is scum on D1, so in the end the distribution will be mostly random anyway.

However since we only have 3 bases to play with, we can not afford to take many chances. For that reason, I think we should have some discussion because, if anything, it may benefit us down the road when we do have some information to work with.

[ortolan]

Also, the longer the day goes on, the more the scum can try to daytalk- which is an immensely powerful tool for them if we don't spot it.

Attempting to incite paranoia about the scum day-talking or communicating via code is a tactic I've seen previously used by scum in a nightless game:

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... c&&start=0

See Corvuus' 368

It basically amounts to just blindly declaring "well scum might find a totally secret way of communicating which we won't be able to spot and somehow the benefits for them will severely outweigh the risk of being caught; so we'd better just do everything randomly and without discussion." This ignores the fact, of course, that random lynches/ plan distribution is always the worst possible manner of playing. I ask you how you propose the scum are going to be able to day-talk while keeping it totally invisible to us, having not had the chance to co-ordinate themselves at any point prior to the game. It's exactly the same thing I asked Corvuus (who was scum) in that game, and received no satisfactory reply (because he was scum).

I don't think it's so hard to understand why Psycho and ort are scummy, but apparently people's brains on in the off position tonight.

You are willing to declare us both scum because we "sabotaged" your plan (although you already claimed it was entirely ruined before I at least posted, anyhow) which amounted to an attempt to "confirm" a player which 1) was unlikely to garner the desired response and 2) would have been pretty much entirely worthless due to rule-misunderstanding-WIFOM anyhow and 3) you had already made enough attempts to sabotage it yourself by signposting it so blatantly

[Fishythefish]

Do you mean in thread or by PM? This is important.

Thread.

[Fishythefish]

I think Fishy is a Spy

It's a pathetic chance we manage to get no scum on the plans. I want to get a number of scum other than one on the plans, so I'd advocate giving plans to scummy people. I do not want a set of plans.

It's true that if you choose randomly you don't have a particularly good chance of getting 3 Rebels:

5/9 * 5/9 * 5/9 = 17.2%

Actually, 5/9*4/8*3/7=11.9%. And ok, suppose you thought you could raise this, double it even. Then what are your chances that you are just a little bit wrong? One spy on the plans is a terrible outcome. I don't believe there is a method which is substantially better than randomness for not getting exactly one spy today.

Furthermore, do you know whether the "chance" odds increase substantially on subsequent days anyway? If we play it like a game of chance we're more than likely going to lose.

By choosing randomly you not only confine yourself to these odds, but you also deny us the opportunity to form opinions about your motivations in selecting the players you did.

I’m not proposing chance planning every day. Today, I see no reason to discuss anything, since I can’t see that there could be a decent strategy to choose the planners. By being demonstrably random, I remove the worry that I am picking an advantageous set for the scum.

I do not want a set of plans.

What is your rationale for excluding yourself? (Please no-one else answer for him).

Covered this. The wrong number of spies on the plans is one. Excluding myself reduces that possibility (to be precise, from 47.6% to 42.9%)

We may as well get a bit of information before starting the discussion.

The information comes at a price though. It's exactly the same as random lynching day one, complete with no reactions to the day one lynch to judge people on, as Naba said.

No. It’s completely different. Reactions to today’s decision are going to be stilted hugely by the fact that there is no sound logic to make it in any particular way- in fact, it’s hard to see how they could be more informative than the reactions we are getting right now. If we had talked a while, I would have ended up making a random or arbitrary decision (certainly, I would have refused to go for a protown set of planners). Conversely, simple thoughts about scumminess, unrelated to planning, can wait until tomorrow, so we don’t lose anything there either. Also, it will be hugely easier than in a normal game for scum to guide the decision when it’s being taken three times- and just once would be very damaging. And we are not losing a player by randoming today.

Also, the longer the day goes on, the more the scum can try to daytalk- which is an immensely powerful tool for them if we don't spot it.

Daytalk in the thread is the only way for scum to communicate, and there's nothing concrete for town to discuss until we see the results of the first porposal, so short day benefits town today.

Is the 48hr time limit mandatory? Or can it end prematurely?

So does this mean the less talk from town (just for Day 1), the better?

You're kidding right? If any rebels have the attitude "we must make the day as quick and random as possible because scum might day-talk and we might not be able to catch them" we may as well give up now. It's no different to any normal mafia game in this regard.

Yeah, this was a bit of an afterthought. I’m certainly not advocating this in general. I think it is a little different, as daytalk hints are so powerful in this game.

Also, the longer the day goes on, the more the scum can try to daytalk- which is an immensely powerful tool for them if we don't spot it.

Attempting to incite paranoia about the scum day-talking or communicating via code is a tactic I've seen previously used by scum in a nightless game:

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... c&&start=0

See Corvuus' 368

It basically amounts to just blindly declaring "well scum might find a totally secret way of communicating which we won't be able to spot and somehow the benefits for them will severely outweigh the risk of being caught; so we'd better just do everything randomly and without discussion." This ignores the fact, of course, that random lynches/ plan distribution is always the worst possible manner of playing. I ask you how you propose the scum are going to be able to day-talk while keeping it totally invisible to us, having not had the chance to co-ordinate themselves at any point prior to the game. It's exactly the same thing I asked Corvuus (who was scum) in that game, and received no satisfactory reply (because he was scum).

The problem with this game is that one tiny hint about intent to sabotage or not sabotage, perhaps in the form of thoughts about scum tactics, could do a huge amount of damage. We must all look out for these, and treat them as enormously scummy. Anything that could be construed as a hint is very dangerous, and townies should be careful not to make them. In the game you reference, there was no way in which the scum could make an enormous gain with minimal communication. Your appeal to history is totally unjustified.

[ortolan]

Fishy's reaction makes me feel better about him

[ortolan]

Actually, 5/9*4/8*3/7=11.9%.

You are correct, good point.

And ok, suppose you thought you could raise this, double it even.

Any attempt to do this is arbitrary.

I don't believe there is a method which is substantially better than randomness for not getting exactly one spy today.

Ok, but how is using a non-random method

worse

than random for not getting exactly one spy? Plus, using a non-random method gives us more information for subsequent days.

By being demonstrably random, I remove the worry that I am picking an advantageous set for the scum.

Can you define in definite terms what comprises "an advantageous set for the scum"?

Actually, I just did the maths, and they look bad for Fish:

If you randomly select players, the odds of only one player being a spy are 4/9 * 5/8 * 4/7 = 15.87%

If you exclude yourself and are a rebel, the odds of only one player being a spy are 4/8 * 4/7 * 3/6 = 14.2857%

If you exclude yourself and are a spy, the odds of only player being a spy are 3/8 * 5/7 * 4/6 = 17.857%

So basically, if you actually are a rebel, by excluding yourself you make it 1.3 percentage points less likely that we will have a scenario where only one Spy has the plans. This is hardly a worthwhile difference in exchange for getting no information out of your choices.

However, if you are a Spy, you're actually making it 2 percentage points

more

likely that we will have a situation where we have only one Spy on the plans. Basically, your maths doesn't check out, at all. And having the "worst" outcome (it is not clear how much "worse" it is either than the alternatives) very, very moderately more likely to occur is worth getting absolutely no information out of day one how exactly? Your maths don't check out at all as I've looked at them. Plus your "worst case scenario" only has about a 15% chance of happening

anyway

.

FoS: Fishy

based on current calculations, I urge you all to vote nay to this distribution.

The problem with this game is that one tiny hint about intent to sabotage or not sabotage, perhaps in the form of thoughts about scum tactics, could do a huge amount of damage. We must all look out for these, and treat them as enormously scummy. Anything that could be construed as a hint is very dangerous, and townies should be careful not to make them.

This is partly true, but "anything that could be construed as a hint" is not very dangerous, it has to actually

be

a hint to be dangerous, for obvious reasons.

In the game you reference, there was no way in which the scum could make an enormous gain with minimal communication. Your appeal to history is totally unjustified.

Please name a conceivable way in this game scum could attempt to co-ordinate with minimal risk this game. No, it is not scummy to ask for this (as was again suggested in that previous game). I do not believe there is one.

[ortolan]

I will also make the point that assuming we are going to do things non-randomly from day 2 onwards, and assuming that it is always undesirable to have a situation where only one person sabotages; who's to say by choosing non-randomly day one you are not decreasing the likelihood of this outcome on subsequent days due to the information it provides (especially when the odds give your position such minimal benefit to begin with)

[Fishythefish]

I don't believe there is a method which is substantially better than randomness for not getting exactly one spy today.

Ok, but how is using a non-random method

worse

than random for not getting exactly one spy? Plus, using a non-random method gives us more information for subsequent days.

I believe it will be worse because the scum have to guide just one of three decisions. The information factor will be severely reduced by the fact that there is no rhyme or reason to the decisions being taken.

Can you define in definite terms what comprises "an advantageous set for the scum"?

Exactly one scum is advantageous. Beyond that, I imagine 2 scum is rather better than three or none.

Actually, I just did the maths, and they look bad for Fish:

If you randomly select players, the odds of only one player being a spy are 4/9 * 5/8 * 4/7 = 15.87%

If you exclude yourself and are a rebel, the odds of only one player being a spy are 4/8 * 4/7 * 3/6 = 14.2857%

If you exclude yourself and are a spy, the odds of only player being a spy are 3/8 * 5/7 * 4/6 = 17.857%

So basically, if you actually are a rebel, by excluding yourself you make it 1.3 percentage points less likely that we will have a scenario where only one Spy has the plans. This is hardly a worthwhile difference in exchange for getting no information out of your choices.

However, if you are a Spy, you're actually making it 2 percentage points

more

likely that we will have a situation where we have only one Spy on the plans. Basically, your maths doesn't check out, at all. And having the "worst" outcome (it is not clear how much "worse" it is either than the alternatives) very, very moderately more likely to occur is worth getting absolutely no information out of day one how exactly? Your maths don't check out at all as I've looked at them. Plus your "worst case scenario" only has about a 15% chance of happening

anyway

.

I'm afraid your maths is dodgy again. You need to multiply all your numbers by three. Explanation follows in a largely irrelevant maths post.

This is partly true, but "anything that could be construed as a hint" is not very dangerous, it has to actually

be

a hint to be dangerous, for obvious reasons.

Far from true- I want to be able to treat potential hints as scumtells, so I don't want townies accidentally dropping them.

Please name a conceivable way in this game scum could attempt to co-ordinate with minimal risk this game. No, it is not scummy to ask for this (as was again suggested in that previous game). I do not believe there is one.

Any reference to potential scum night tactics would be the most obvious example.

[Fishythefish]

EBWOP:
Actually, I don't have time for the maths post right now. I'm sure someone else will back me up, otherwise I'll explain. To convince yourself; work out the probabilities of 0,1,2,3 scum in that way- they won't add up to 1.

[ortolan]

You are correct, I should clearly remember to walk before I can run with my somewhat "limited" maths education

0 = 5/9 * 4/8 * 3/7 = 11.91%

1 = 4/9 * 5/8 * 4/7 = 15.87%
Or 5/9 * 4/8 * 4/7 = 15.87%
Or 5/9 * 4/8 * 4/7 = 15.87%

2 = 4/9 * 3/8 * 5/7 = 11.91%
Or 5/9 * 4/8 * 3/7 = 11.91%
Or 4/9 * 5/8 * 3/7 = 11.91%

3 = 4/9 * 3/8 * 2/7 = 4.77%

This puts the odds of there only being one spy in the group if drawn entirely randomly at 47.61

If you exclude yourself and are a Rebel then chances of one scum are:

4/8 * 4/7 * 3/6 = 14.29%

4/8 * 4/7 * 3/6 = 14.29%

4/8 * 3/7 * 4/6 = 14.29%

Overall 42.86%

If you exclude yourself and are a spy then chances of one scum are:

3/8 * 4/7 * 3/6 = 10.71%

4/8 * 3/7 * 3/6 = 10.71%

4/8 * 3/7 * 3/6 = 10.71%

Overall 32.14%

I can see your reasoning now.

Any reference to potential scum night tactics would be the most obvious example.

There are no "night tactics" in this game though.

[Knight of Cydonia]

So. Much. Math.
There's a reason I gave it up after GCSEs, dammit, and now it's all here again. Makes KoC sad.
I think we should almost certainly not random-distribute, especially given the reactions of some people to that idea - I don't know if Fishy was deliberately reaction-fishing, but it's worked rather well.

[forbiddanlight]

You are willing to declare us both scum because we "sabotaged" your plan (although you already claimed it was entirely ruined before I at least posted, anyhow) which amounted to an attempt to "confirm" a player which 1) was unlikely to garner the desired response and 2) would have been pretty much entirely worthless due to rule-misunderstanding-WIFOM anyhow and 3) you had already made enough attempts to sabotage it yourself by signposting it so blatantly

Actually, I had realized it wasn't completely ruined...Until you ABSOLUTELY explained the whole damn thing. Subtlety will not work. You've pinged my scumdar, as well as Sniper.

Do you mean in thread or by PM? This is important.

Thread.

Matters not now. But thank you.

FoS: Fishy based on current calculations, I urge you all to vote nay to this distribution.

Could you suggest what we do instead?

I'm not sure I understand the math, but I also tend to try to avoid thinking about it since I don't like it much. However, I'm tentatively

UnFoS: ortolan

because it feels less likely ort would work so hard to get the correct math. Of course, it could be WIFOM and all, but yeah...

[Crazy]

Wow, math. Though I can't say I wasn't expecting it in this setup.

When I signed up, I always thought that the first decision would be rather arbitrary.

Either:

a) Nobody sabotages and we destroy an Imperial base. 1/3. We don't get much information, but getting a point can't be a bad thing.
b) Somebody or multiple people sabotage, in which case we gain information to use in following rounds.

In subsequent rounds, I definitely think we should try to get as many pro-town people as possible, but here, I don't think it matters that much, because whatever happens, we benefit. Fishy might be right that the least ideal situation is exactly one spy in the group; I don't know about that, and I don't think it's necessarily true that that spy will always sabotage. *shrug*

Basically, I'll approve any proposal the first day, because I don't think it will make much of a difference in the long run.

And FL, Fishy's use of the phrase "if we don't spot it" made it painfully obvious that he was talking about scum using secret conversation in the thread.