Mini 804 - The Resistance - Mod Abandoned

[NabakovNabakov]

Honestly, the BEST way to proceed is to have NO DISCUSSION, and group THREE SPIES TOGETHER.

Honestly, the BEST way to proceed is to wear A BLINDFOLD, and hit THREE BULLSEYES TOGETHER.

Even if discussion were so evil we would want to avoid it at all costs (I don't think it is), we wouldn't be able to. Unless, of course, every player in the game spontaneously decides to sublimate their will to yours.

The fact is, we will have to get fantastically lucky to win this game without discusison. If we assume that no discussion means essentially random distrubution of plans, reasonable play by the scum could leave us with a roughly 2.5% chance of winning.*

@FL: Why do you want townies on the proposal?

*There are 126 possible combinations of 5 people to place on plans in the last round, and only one is correct. Assuming a scenario where we have three tries, the chance of finding the correct combination by guessing is roughly 1/126 * 1/125 * 1/124.

[Albert B. Rampage]

That's bullshit Nabakov.

The way to win, is to have two scum sabotage at the same time in a group of three. We then proceed to eliminate those three from the pool, which leaves us with 6 players, 5 of which are town. Much better odds.

[Albert B. Rampage]

4 of which are town, actually. This increases our odds. As it has been said countless times already, there is very little discussion to be had before the first draft in the first place.

[Fishythefish]

The way to win, is to have two scum sabotage at the same time in a group of three.

And yet you favour a proposal with yourself on it, and are supportive of going for a townie ticket. This makes no sense.

[NabakovNabakov]

EDIT: "+" not "*"

*There are 126 possible combinations of 5 people to place on plans in the last round, and only one is correct. Assuming a scenario where we have three tries, the chance of finding the correct combination by guessing is roughly 1/126

+

1/125

+

1/124.

Also, the chances of such fortiutious events as having scum sabotoge four of the five plans, etc raise our win percentage to about 5%.

@ABR: If the town commits to a strategy of no-discussion and quasi-random assignment, wouldn't reasonable play for the scum be to simply not sabotoge at all (or only sabotoge when one scum is assigned to the plans) and wait until the round of 5?

Frankly, I did not come here to vote through randomly generated proposals and furiously hope that my 1 in 20 chance of winning plays out. That's what the lottery is for.

[Albert B. Rampage]

*facepalm*

[Albert B. Rampage]

The way to win, is to have two scum sabotage at the same time in a group of three.

And yet you favour a proposal with yourself on it, and are supportive of going for a townie ticket. This makes no sense.

Btw I'm NOT aiming to group 3 spies together at this point, because Nabakov and FL have flapped their mouths far too much so its likely they have breadcrumbed their potential action already.

Let's get 3 rebels in on the plan.

[Albert B. Rampage]

"It is much more of a logic puzzle than Mafia, though traditional scumhunting skills should still help."

Logic > Scumhunting.

[Fishythefish]

If you think they have breadcrumbed, show us. Breadcrumbs must be there for all to see. They are an intolerably risky tactic for the scum.
Logic + Scumhunting > Logic

[Albert B. Rampage]

I didn't see any, but encouraging discussion when there's no need for it is scummy in and of itself.

[forbiddanlight]

Good job, you've just told you're fellow scum that "Hey, if you get grouped with Psycho, feel free to sabotage, because we'll just blame it on him!"

This post is a far better example of possible scum communication than anything Crazy has posted so far.

Seriously, stop giving scum hints of what to do, intentional or not!

Defensiveness? in MY mafia game? how can this BE!?

Actually, this just makes me more sure of a nice little chainsaw.

Def no plan giving to crazy or psycho unless we are going for 3 spies.

@FL: Why do you want townies on the proposal?

We have three bases. I want to make sure we lose as few bases as possible while destroying the imperial bases. I'd rather have the most leeway when we play pick 5 rather than have it on the wire.

For now, I'd rather try hitting three townies then give them a base for free.

That's bullshit Nabakov.

The way to win, is to have two scum sabotage at the same time in a group of three. We then proceed to eliminate those three from the pool, which leaves us with 6 players, 5 of which are town. Much better odds.

Where do you get these numbers again? If two sabotage out of three, there is a chance one of the three is town, meaning if we fully eliminate them, you are guaranteeing a scum spot.

4 of which are town, actually. This increases our odds. As it has been said countless times already, there is very little discussion to be had before the first draft in the first place.

And how can we be certain of this either? Scum can choose not to sabotage.

If you think they have breadcrumbed, show us. Breadcrumbs must be there for all to see. They are an intolerably risky tactic for the scum.
Logic + Scumhunting > Logic

I like you Fishy ^-^

I didn't see any, but encouraging discussion when there's no need for it is scummy in and of itself.

You have not adequately proven discussion is evil. Could you please get around to that?

[Crazy]

My suspicion of forbiddanlight involves Post #24... it was obvious what Fishy meant, so what FL was doing looks like fake scumhunting. Certainly that's scummier than my *ultra-gasp* OVERDEFENSIVENESS!

And I'm really liking ABR now... I didn't consider that multiple sabotages was the best option for town, but he's absolutely right.

However, I'm certainly not as paranoid about scum communication as he is. If scum had pregame daytalk, they could have came up with a good code, but they didn't. Thus, anything that scum can see in each other's posts can be seen as town as well, right? Our best bet is to just look at every single post closely and nail anything that even could be a breadcrumb, and refuse to give plans to that person until circumstances change. This must sound weird coming from the person that had the alleged breadcrumb, but you all know I was just a little offended by that. I assure you, even if I'm scum, that was not a breadcrumb.

[Albert B. Rampage]

Mod: Could the spies talk freely in the pre-game?

[Fishythefish]

If the answer to that question were yes, this game would be virtually unwinnable for the town. It must be no.

If we're going for a townie ticket, there is no reason for FL to exclude herself. Opposed as I am to a townie ticket, I could stomach something like FL/me/ort or FL/me/NabNab. I would still favour a scummy ticket- perhaps Crazy/Pyscho/veerus is the best, as people who were all in favour of my proposal yesterday (or fence sat until it was too late), and hence are correlated, and individually don't look all that good.

[ortolan]

I endorse any plan that ends in me being given a plan. ortolan's massive wall of math could either be intended to drown players who don't have time for that shit (me) or give the semblance of effort to make less active players look bad.

Nice false dichotomy where either conclusion makes me look bad. Or, it could have been to attempt to resolve the argument I was having with Fishy at the time.

Incident'ly, I cannot remember a single Veerus post all day of any substance. THerefore, I would suggest a me/Veerus/ortolan Proposal, although obviously I would be willing to compromise on one of the three in order to get at least two of them up in the spotlight.

What is the rationale behind your selection of players?

THat would be acceptable, certainly. As I say, I would like to get at least two of the three players I mentioned above into the spotlight.

Why would you like to "get these players into the spotlight"?

It's hard for scum to post content in the ways of scum-hunting

No it isn't

but talking theory is not hard... and thus doesn't need to be rewarded by having plans given.

Yah except we're not even necessarily using "talking theory" as a device to try and pick out the scummy players, we started using it in the first place to discuss and conclude what the optimal play actually is; not to try and get scum-reads from it.

1. He believes that we should try to get plans of all town.

Having all town on the plans (or at least having no-one sabotage, for that's all we'd know at that stage), is amongst my optimal results. It is not

the

optimal result obviously, that would probably be having three people on the plans all of whom sabotage. However if it is possible it is certainly a desirable outcome, and I was considering those players I nominated as having a good chance of all being town (obviously in my case I am certain).

Scum at least want

one

of their people on the plans, most likely, so they'd try to look pro-town.

Their win con is to sabotage three times. They are going to try to look pro-town regardless of any other considerations, in line with every other game.

2. Yeah, well that's me... and I'm not really going with the grain here.

Do you mean you are "pro-town"? If so, why? If not what did you mean?

3. It's because ort picked you two on the plan, and Nab. Nab didn't matter to me because he was on the plan to begin with.
4. But you changed your mind.

I'm not saying ort is obvscum, but I don't agree with his philosophy. I'd much prefer ABR's proposal.

I don't understand any of this. I am not judging players on the basis of "posting more content", I am saying scum have little motivation for suggesting non-obvious pro-town things to do or consider, which both Naba and Fish have done.

Quality of content is the most important, and if they have posted more quality content than anyone else then yes, I am going to conclude they are more likely to be pro-town.

And I don't even know why you'd need to suggest "I'm not saying ort is obvscum", you have given no reasons to suggest I am scummy at all.

Why have a fast D1 when you can have a leisurely day with a copious supply of feedback at absolutely no charge? The way the rules are structured, we could adhere directly to deadlines and still have an infintely long day. Of course, we're going to want to agree on a proposal sometime, but why not make use of the fact that we now have solid information (the voting record for last cycle's proposal) on which to build a better plan. I rejected the random assignment because there was a better path with no extra charge.

QFT. This is what the people saying "we should just go randomly" are persistently failing to pay attention to (even though it was already brought up previously, at least by me I recall).

It seems to me that ABR is trying to put together an assignment with the three players who have contributed least so far. I'm not sure exactly what the point of this is (maybe he would like to explain), but I think it goes against both the objective of information gathering (the more a player has said, the more we have to draw conclusions and directions) and the objective of ideal scum distribution (why put our money on unknowns?).

Again, QFT.

I was leaning putting ort in. I wish people would stop self nomming. It makes me nervous and more likely to reject you.

Emotion has no place in this game. Attempting some horrid reverse psychological WIFOM when you are in fact town does not seem optimal to me.

Nabakov probably her russian liaison. Definitely no plans for both of them.

?

A disturbance in the force, you have felt. If thrown in a cage with veerus I was, safe would I feel.

ABR's "gut reads" based on one line posts are of "questionable usefulness".

ABR is not doing anything to make me more comfortable about giving him plans. At all.

Well he has, you know he has kind of been calling you obv-scum the whole game, so this isn't much of a surprise. (For reference I'm inclined to view the ABR-FL thing as distancing because I don't think either are pro-town at all).

ABR is fitting his meta - oh so very angry and jackassish.
Unfortunately, this is his meta for EVERY role. So I have no idea.

What was the purpose of making this post?

ort- appears to be putting too much effort into checking Fishy's math and such. It's WIFOM, and he's probably who I'm least solid on, but I still feel he's town.

Why do you think I am putting too much effort into doing something "useless" but still feel I am town? Also what is WIFOM?

veerus- I have gotten no scum vibe from him, and overall felt he's town.

Re-read veerus' posts and tell me if you think this assessment is genuine (I don't think it is).

in me Nab and veerus I would expect veerus to sabotage, especially with FL's support for this combination.

That's...actually acceptable, with my bet on Psycho being the scum if we get a sabotage act.

So you think someone is likely to sabotage but still support the idea? Interesting.

Honestly, the BEST way to proceed is to have NO DISCUSSION, and group THREE SPIES TOGETHER.

Best case scenario they all sabotage and we have three CONFIRMED SPIES.

HOWEVER, if they can COORDINATE who is sabotaging and who isn't, then we are SCREWED.

DISCUSSION HURTS THE TOWN. FL AND NABAKOV --> EXTREMELY SUSPICIOUS.

As I said earlier, that is indeed the best outcome but realistically it is almost entirely impossible. You need to get 3 scum on the plans to begin with, WHICH IS EVEN LESS LIKELY THAN GETTING THREE TOWN, then they need to all be stupid and sabotage. Optimal play if they are all on the plans is for all not to sabotage then they end up with no saboteurs they all get confirmed town which leads to subsequent chaos.

DISCUSSION HURTS THE TOWN. FL AND NABAKOV --> EXTREMELY SUSPICIOUS.

ABR seems to have actively ignored me already arguing this is definitely not the case. Scum want to incite paranoia about coded daytalking. For your information, even after we decide on the first set of three, on all subsequent days we're going to have extensive discussion over the results anyway, which still leaves us open to the perils of "scum daytalking" on all days but this anyway.

Remember, we will know how many acts of sabotage have occurred after each plan is carried out. Scumhunting is MEANINGLESS at this stage in the game.

No.

119 is just "silly".

123 I agree with.

"It is much more of a logic puzzle than Mafia, though traditional scumhunting skills should still help."

Logic > Scumhunting.

Yes but even treating the game as a logic puzzle the approach you propose is not optimal.

And I'm really liking ABR now... I didn't consider that multiple sabotages was the best option for town, but he's absolutely right.

Incorrect. Also, if we get two scum on the plans how do ya know both will sabotage anyway?????? Same with three. Seriously this logic is horrible.

ABR: 137, it says in your pm you are not allowed to communicate outside of the game thread at any time with the other spies, just a heads up.

[Albert B. Rampage]

In my pm? In YOUR pm.

[Fishythefish]

And I'm really liking ABR now... I didn't consider that multiple sabotages was the best option for town, but he's absolutely right.

This point has been brought up multiple times by multiple players. Why is this particular instance particularly townish?

[forbiddanlight]

My suspicion of forbiddanlight involves Post #24... it was obvious what Fishy meant, so what FL was doing looks like fake scumhunting. Certainly that's scummier than my *ultra-gasp* OVERDEFENSIVENESS!

Could you quote what precisely is objectionable?

And it wasn't precisely your overdefensiveness, it was more the fact that you felt the need to assure us it wasn't daytalk.

And I'm really liking ABR now... I didn't consider that multiple sabotages was the best option for town, but he's absolutely right.

Despite everyone saying so already?

If we're going for a townie ticket, there is no reason for FL to exclude herself. Opposed as I am to a townie ticket, I could stomach something like FL/me/ort or FL/me/NabNab. I would still favour a scummy ticket- perhaps Crazy/Pyscho/veerus is the best, as people who were all in favour of my proposal yesterday (or fence sat until it was too late), and hence are correlated, and individually don't look all that good.

That's a good point I didn't consider. I was establishing the other four I think are townies, and kinda forgot the fact I should probably include myself. I could go with me, you, and NabNab. I really don't want to waste our bases too early as I said, but if I'm in a minority opinion on this, I'll put up a 3 spy proposal.

What was the purpose of making this post?

I have no idea. I didn't make it. Quote properly please?

Well he has, you know he has kind of been calling you obv-scum the whole game, so this isn't much of a surprise. (For reference I'm inclined to view the ABR-FL thing as distancing because I don't think either are pro-town at all).

That's true, but generally I'll not outright say someone is scum just for accusing me. But usually having good logic behind the accusation is a good way to prevent me from countersuspecting.

Emotion has no place in this game. Attempting some horrid reverse psychological WIFOM when you are in fact town does not seem optimal to me.

I'll play my way you play yours. Further, I didn't isolate what made me nervous about it. to elaborate, if someone self noms, it removes information about what their preferences are.

Re-read veerus' posts and tell me if you think this assessment is genuine (I don't think it is).

in me Nab and veerus I would expect veerus to sabotage, especially with FL's support for this combination.

I'll re read him soon.

So you think someone is likely to sabotage but still support the idea? Interesting.

Nice misrep. I never said he was likely to sabotage, I said if someone sabotaged it would be him.

[Crazy]

If we're going for a townie ticket, there is no reason for FL to exclude herself. Opposed as I am to a townie ticket, I could stomach something like FL/me/ort or FL/me/NabNab. I would still favour a scummy ticket- perhaps Crazy/Pyscho/veerus is the best, as people who were all in favour of my proposal yesterday (or fence sat until it was too late), and hence are correlated, and individually don't look all that good.

Why the heck is FL on a "townie ticket?!" If she nominates herself and two other people on the basis of getting 3 townies, I will definitely not accept.

@Ort: Upon rereading your posts, I have abandoned my case on you, though content still =/= pro-town for me, and I want to avoid an impressment contest here.

Incorrect. Also, if we get two scum on the plans how do ya know both will sabotage anyway?????? Same with three. Seriously this logic is horrible.

It provides a higher chance of multiple sabotages, and as Fishy pointed out, actually a higher chance of

no sabotages.

Could you quote what precisely is objectionable?

And it wasn't precisely your overdefensiveness, it was more the fact that you felt the need to assure us it wasn't daytalk.

You asked what Fishy meant in that quote, when it was painfully obvious what he meant.

What's wrong with assuring you guys that it wasn't daytalk?

Despite everyone saying so already?

Well, I missed that.

[forbiddanlight]

You asked what Fishy meant in that quote, when it was painfully obvious what he meant.

What's wrong with assuring you guys that it wasn't daytalk?

The fact you felt the need to when it really wasn't necessary.

You made it seem like it was.

Oh, and I didn't think it was obvious. Can you explain how it was scummy to not think so?

Why the heck is FL on a "townie ticket?!" If she nominates herself and two other people on the basis of getting 3 townies, I will definitely not accept.

Because I'm not scum? Or the fact that assumably, I think I'm town, so therefore, from my point of view, any proposal I make to have three townies should include me.

[Crazy]

The fact you felt the need to when it really wasn't necessary.

You made it seem like it was.

Someone says your scum and that was a breadcrumb, what do you expect me to do? Say, oh yeah, it was? What would you have expected me to do?

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.

Fishy used the phrase "if we don't spot it." How could we spot daytalk by PM? I understand you're trying to "seek a special answer" but it was obvious what he meant... so your whole thing just seems fake.

Because I'm not scum? Or the fact that assumably, I think I'm town, so therefore, from my point of view, any proposal I make to have three townies should include me.

Yes, okay, but that wasn't addressed to you, though. That was addressed to Fishy... I was asking him why you were deserving of being on a townie ticket.

[forbiddanlight]

Someone says your scum and that was a breadcrumb, what do you expect me to do? Say, oh yeah, it was? What would you have expected me to do?

Not make as big a deal out of it. You came off like you got caught.

Fishy used the phrase "if we don't spot it." How could we spot daytalk by PM? I understand you're trying to "seek a special answer" but it was obvious what he meant... so your whole thing just seems fake.

I didn't read it as such. I really can't give you any other answer because you are spinning something out of nothing :s.

Yes, okay, but that wasn't addressed to you, though. That was addressed to Fishy... I was asking him why you were deserving of being on a townie ticket.

Soooooooooooooory

[Fishythefish]

Why the heck is FL on a "townie ticket?!" If she nominates herself and two other people on the basis of getting 3 townies, I will definitely not accept.

I see no reason to suppose FL is a spy. The sole argument against her seems to be asking a question with an obvious answer. To which my immediate reaction is a resounding "so what?". I don't see any coherent scummy motivation, and really don't see what all the fuss is about. As the current proposer, it would be only natural to see her on any townie ticket, and I wouldn't have a problem with that.

[PsychoSniper]

Honestly, the BEST way to proceed is to have NO DISCUSSION, and group THREE SPIES TOGETHER.

Best case scenario they all sabotage and we have three CONFIRMED SPIES.

HOWEVER, if they can COORDINATE who is sabotaging and who isn't, then we are SCREWED.

DISCUSSION HURTS THE TOWN. FL AND NABAKOV --> EXTREMELY SUSPICIOUS.

As I said earlier, that is indeed the best outcome but realistically it is almost entirely impossible. You need to get 3 scum on the plans to begin with, WHICH IS EVEN LESS LIKELY THAN GETTING THREE TOWN, then they need to all be stupid and sabotage.

Optimal play if they are all on the plans is for all not to sabotage then they end up with no saboteurs they all get confirmed town which leads to subsequent chaos.

Ummm.....if there are 3 scums in the group and by some miracle or ultra-clever undetected communication they

all

l choose not to sabotage, it's still

good

for town. That means they lose a base, and we don't. Yes, that also means we don't know they're scum....but all we have to do is to choose them

again

on the second day (and why wouldn't we if, according to you, they'll be seen as confirmed town). They have to show their hands sooner or later, they can't afford to keep faking like this, or they'll lose. All it means is we gain an extra day to experiment with while being one base ahead, so your point makes no sense.

And why are you revealing what you consider to be "optimal scum play" for them to see? If you think you know what's best for scum, wouldn't it make sense for you to not bring it up just in case the scum hadn't thought of it themselves?

[veerus]

Psycho, you're forgetting that we would have an extra set of plans to distribute every time in that scenario.

Look, this all comes down to the fact that there is NO optimal play since there's always an optimal counterplay. According to boardgamegeek's website, odds of rebels winning are 56% and spies 44%. Results threads on there seem to confirm that. So it's pretty close to 50-50 no matter what happens. Best way to go is to randomly distribute the plans and evaluate results based on those people's posts. In fact, based on this logic, I would now support the original proposal since that was our first true random.