Mini 876 - Tree Stump II [Day None] (Abandoned)

[Shanba]

I don't either, but I assume the stump before lynch is so that we can keep talking and lynch someone else without giving scum a NK, right? Seems pretty obvious, but I've learned not to take stuff for granted, especially in odder setups.

I read a little bit of Tree Stump 1 a while back, and iirc this is exactly it. Essentially it gives us the dual advantage of scum not getting a nk until we lynch scum and townies still being able to contribute after lynch.

[Chinaman]

kinda unfair to the lumberjacks eh?

[Tjoe Min Ja]

I'm a lumberjack and I'm O.K., I sleep all night and I work all day....

kinda unfair to the lumberjacks eh?

vote chinaman

detah to all lumberjack!

nb: are you really chinesse?

[Sudo_Nym]

vote chinaman

If the quotes Tjoe has mean anything, you're either a lumberjack or a crossdresser. I'm not sure I'm comfortable either way...

[Empking]

Unvote

Vote; China

[Chinaman]

Wow, 3 votes already! I did good!

First off, to the 3 of you who voted for me, please answer...

A: Did you know that the first quote is from a Monty Python skit/song

and

B: Do you disagree with the statement I made about p25 as in do you think it IS perfectly balanced for trees and lumberjacks?

[The Fonz]

I read tree stump 1. Kinda dull. Bunch of VIs who got stumped. I dunno if it was really required reading.

I think it's useful, in a kinda 'what not to do' way. Also to see how the mechanics affect things. Also, how Jdodge and Scotmany spent their whole time as stumps howling for my stumping because i pressed for theirs.

I was gonna vote Chinaman for an entirely pointless post, but then flipping the page I see he has three already, and has posted some kinda rebuttal.

Wow, 3 votes already! I did good!

First off, to the 3 of you who voted for me, please answer...

A: Did you know that the first quote is from a Monty Python skit/song

and

B: Do you disagree with the statement I made about p25 as in do you think it IS perfectly balanced for trees and lumberjacks?

a) Presumably, since the PMs reference the lumberjack song, and the stumping formulation mirrors it, they did. More to the point: Why do you feel the need to make a completely irrelevant post?

b) This game is effectively halfway between a vanilla 9:3 and a nightless 9:3. Vanilla 9:3 is obviously hugely scum-favouring. Nightless 9:3, town needs three scum lynches, scum need 6, 7, or 8, mislynches- Depending on the number of scum who die. That's balanced, probably a little town-favouring.

Here, the total number of scum town need to lynch is the same, the number of town the scum need to get killed is the same as the nightless one, minus one for every dead scum because they get a nightkill. That's six mislynches, however many scum die.

Town wins if it lynches correctly more than one-third of the time- ie, have a ratio better than one dead scum for every two dead town. The scum proportion is 25%. Assuming random lynches, the town usually loses. The town has no power roles. So, no, the setup is actually scum-favouring.

Set against that is the possibility that the stumps help the town. Well, last time, they didn't until Glork replaced in. SensFan has changed the rules for this one to disallow replacement of flaked stumps and allow continuous scumtalk, both of which are advantageous to the scum (ie, he's taken a scum-favouring setup and made it more scum-favouring. Ack, I love a challenge).

c) Can you explain why a town player would want to bitch about a game being unfair to the scum?

[Sudo_Nym]

b) This game is effectively halfway between a vanilla 9:3 and a nightless 9:3. Vanilla 9:3 is obviously hugely scum-favouring. Nightless 9:3, town needs three scum lynches, scum need 6, 7, or 8, mislynches- Depending on the number of scum who die. That's balanced, probably a little town-favouring.

Here, the total number of scum town need to lynch is the same, the number of town the scum need to get killed is the same as the nightless one, minus one for every dead scum because they get a nightkill. That's six mislynches, however many scum die.

Town wins if it lynches correctly more than one-third of the time- ie, have a ratio better than one dead scum for every two dead town. The scum proportion is 25%. Assuming random lynches, the town usually loses. The town has no power roles. So, no, the setup is actually scum-favouring.

Set against that is the possibility that the stumps help the town. Well, last time, they didn't until Glork replaced in. SensFan has changed the rules for this one to disallow replacement of flaked stumps and allow continuous scumtalk, both of which are advantageous to the scum (ie, he's taken a scum-favouring setup and made it more scum-favouring. Ack, I love a challenge).

While I agree with most of your post, there's something about this that bothers me. It's not really a scum-favoring game. It's not halfway to nightless mafia; it practically is nightless mafia. It would seem the proper strategy is to stump yourself instead of letting yourself be hammered if you're town. I haven't worked out the math on it yet, so I'm not too up in arms, but I have trouble believing the setup can be truly scum favoring.

[The Fonz]

Er.... OF COURSE the correct strategy for town players is to stump when lynch is otherwise inevitable. How on earth can you get anything else from that post? That's the underlying assumption behind the whole thing!

Therefore, the scum will only get to kill up to twice, when one of their number is lynched. However, that the scum do get to kill immediately after one of their own is lynched is an advantage compared to actual nightless mafia. Hence, as I say the scum need six town lynches and the town need three scum lynches.

[Sudo_Nym]

Er.... OF COURSE the correct strategy for town players is to stump when lynch is otherwise inevitable. How on earth can you get anything else from that post? That's the underlying assumption behind the whole thing!

Therefore, the scum will only get to kill up to twice, when one of their number is lynched. However, that the scum do get to kill immediately after one of their own is lynched is an advantage compared to actual nightless mafia. Hence, as I say the scum need six town lynches and the town need three scum lynches.

To be completely fair, your math would likely have made more sense if I wasn't trying to figure it out after staying awake for 38 hours.

[Empking]

Wow, 3 votes already! I did good!

First off, to the 3 of you who voted for me, please answer...

A: Did you know that the first quote is from a Monty Python skit/song

yes

and

B: Do you disagree with the statement I made about p25 as in do you think it IS perfectly balanced for trees and lumberjacks?

no

I think the game seems balanced enough though.

[The Fonz]

Mmmkay. Yeah, that's not easy.

Basically, it comes down to a tradeoff of lynches vs power roles. The town can't ever confirm anyone- that helps the scum a ton. However, the town gets twice as many 'lynches' to play with as in a normal 9-3. Doubling the length of the day game makes it much harder for scum to avoid connecting themselves to one another, which will hopefully make the town able to lynch with better than random odds. Two town VIs imploding, for instance, doesn't put you straight into lylo.

We now return you to our regularly scheduled edition of 'What the hell is Chinaman trying to pull here?'

[sam.samhorn]

I'm here.

[sam.samhorn]

vote The Fonz

because I'm not going to read any of his posts up to this point

[Sanjay]

vote: sensfan

good ol' mod BW

Are you usually such a jokester, saberwolf?

[saberwolf]

vote: sensfan

good ol' mod BW

Are you usually such a jokester, saberwolf?

you obv haven't played enough games with me.

[Sanjay]

Working on it.

[Chinaman]

So p27 and p28 have a joking feel to them as they are seemingly RVS banter still.

p29 by Empking peaked some interest though. Empking, care to explain your vote? As for now it looks like a BW vote with zero explanation.

The Fonz p31: Really? You are pointing at me for irrelevant posts in RVS? Are you serious? If so, why did you decide to pick up on my irrelevant post vs. anyone else's? To answer your question, it's RVS and I was having fun with it.

As for your explanation of balance, I'm still of the opinion the game is slightly in favor of the trees. I will add here though, that I'm not exactly unhappy about that. I will say though that I prefer a challenge vs. a win that had me favored to begin with. It's like when the Colts beat the Patriots vs when the Colts beat the Raiders. I'm happier about the win over the Pats since it's more of a challenge. I can see your math though and it does make it seem a bit more balanced than I had originally thought.

As for the last part, please point out where I was "bitching" about the balance. I think this is a little extreme and a bit of a stretch. It also paints me in a more negative light than what really occurred. Is there a reason you would want to exaggerate the facts in order to make me look scummy? But again, to answer as to why I made the comment, I believe I address that in the paragraph above this one.

[Sanjay]

You have fun fake-claiming scum?

[saberwolf]

You have fun fake-claiming scum?

who is this referenced to?

[Sanjay]

Chinaman for this:

I'm a lumberjack and I'm O.K., I sleep all night and I work all day....

Obviously, it's not a relatively unserious scumclaim. But it is a scumclaim. Chinaman is saying he was just having fun with the random voting stage, and that seems a little fishy to me. It is a little hard to believe that Chinaman didn't realize that saying he was a lumberjack was a little fishy, Monty Python song or no.

Could I see him believing that? Yes. But I still don't like it.

The scumclaim itself is kind of a null tell to me. But playing it off as just having fun is what I really have a problem with.

[Sanjay]

Typo there: It IS a relatively unserious scumclaim.

[Quagmire]

Sanjay, that's not a tell.

[Sanjay]

Vote: Chinaman

[Cybele]

Four votes on Chinaman already? Bound to be scum jumping on this by now.