Open 316 - Hard Boiled (Day Two)

[Hoopla]

Hi everyone.

Mod: to clarify, the Tracker/Vig gets a choice between roles, but the Detective/Psychologist is chosen randomly by the mod pregame, right?

[Hoopla]

I'll do my best. My posts are always readable though...

[Hoopla]

Are you reading this post?

[Hoopla]

I have a question to ask the town before we begin.

If there was/is a way to significantly increase the town's chances of winning through a massclaim and synchronization of actions, would you be in favour of doing so?

[Hoopla]

Hoopla, I think you've confused quite a few people. Were you intending for the massclaim to happen D1?

I believe there is a method claiming/organising actions that will yield the town a very strong chance of winning. I'm mostly inquiring about people's reservations because I know there would be some who think it would cheapen the game, even if it were favourable. Personally, the reason I joined this game was on the hope I was town, so I could try and break this game.

Anyway, I figured I'd lay this idea out here as a basis for discussion, BUT I don't think it should actually happen until much later in the day.

This is true - I also want to get some information on the table first, so we're not just randomly picking a player to lynch from the pool of VT's.

~~

Mild town read on neil from his opening post - displays a lack of understanding that would be ignorant and reckless to post as scum. If he were scum who feared a massclaim plan, I'd expect a more calculated or rhetoric-based response to quell the idea, as opposed to nonsense.

Muffinman's post of laying down a massclaim plan, and investing effort in brainstorming the net value of such a plan indicates an eagerness to corner scum - an inherently town motivated action. If he were scum, he'd have had to have thought about the true consequences much longer, found a loophole or theory that gives scum decent chances of winning, and pass it off as a town-looking plan OR be game enough to make a big bluff and push scum into a suboptimal plan (for them) and try and ride off town points for being pro-plan. I think neither of those situations are as likely as Muffinman being town.

Mildly suspicious of swankidelic for his early attempts to shut down a massclaim idea. Could just be town not prepared/capable of understanding the benefits of a plan, or scum understanding the benefits and wanting out. Post 38 reads slightly artificially, in particular the language shaping the vote for Quilford.

Amrun's reluctance is understandable, given the knowledge she has of some of my scumplay. Luckily there are no numbers in this game!

~ Early days, I know, but this is how I'm seeing things so far.

[Hoopla]

Hoopla (and all) what do you think of littlegrey's vote shenanigams?

I am interested in hearing Hoopla's gamebreaking plan for evaluation.

zmuffin is on the right track as far as a plan goes. I can go into more detail when everyone has responded to the possibility of a massclaim/partial massclaim.

Looking back on LittleGrey, it is a little unusual to present an opinion in that manner, yet random-vote elsewhere. It could easily be interpreted as scum trying to tick boxes by appearing to have suspicions - you need to invent stances. Yet, upon the invention, he doesn't realise he needs to attack in that direction. If he were town, you'd expect him to be more deeply connected to his reads, as these reads would be genuine, thus improving the chances of him lining them purely due to them being believed, rather than invented.

That is a big leap in logic - it could just as easily be explained by him being careless. But it's noteworthy nonetheless.

~~

You sound genuine in your desire to break the setup, though. I'm tempted to give up hopes of winning and follow through with your proposed experiment. In the end, I don't really have any metaknowledge of you, I simply don't trust you.

So, I sound genuine in my desire to break the set-up? Yet you simply don't trust me? That doesn't really match up - as "breaking the set-up" is something only town can do (something you believe I was genuine with).

[Hoopla]

Let me put it this way, then: any towntell there might be in your interest in breaking the setup isn't enough to make me hand the reins over to you.

I don't know how you can come to the conclusion of "not wanting to hand the reins over to me", when you haven't even heard what I have to say. It sounds like you're preemptively positioning yourself to be against it no matter what, rather than waiting to evaluate it from a balanced perspective.

[Hoopla]

Littlegrey; do you have much experience playing mafia online? Have you played in real life?

[Hoopla]

This is an open game. What I propose can be fact-checked, critiqued, refined (or abandoned altogether if deemed suboptimal). There are no hidden roles or mechanics that can screw things over behind the scenes, with scum secretly maneuvering things in their direction, forcing town to place trust in certain people or roles. We have all the information - we can project, and we can work out how favourable a plan could/should be for each alignment.

Risk aversion isn't a valid out - if we deemed a plan to have an 80% chance of being successful, or a win if we can eliminate all but 1 or 2 of the VT-pool, then it is a viable play when compared to playing it straight, which is at best a 60% chance (probably closer to 40-50% since this set-up has gone 1 for 4 so far for town). You don't need to bet I'm not scum any more than you need to bet on every other player's alignment. We only have ~3 mislynches - we have to make a lot of bets on certain people being town throughout the game. That is just how it goes. However, I'm decently confident that a plan is workable

even if

I'm included as one of the deaths at some point.

[Hoopla]

The Tracker/Vig is allowed to choose their role on N1.

[Hoopla]

Hoopla, you've been mighty discrete. I believe most if not everyone is willing to try your crazy strategy, but you seem to be keeping it underwraps. You even said that after you say it, we don't have to do it, so why are you so hesitant?

From a reads/information standpoint, I had a vested interest in hiding the strength and details of the plan. Slow-cooking it allows scum to get nervous, make stances prior to my plan, as opposed to me just dumping the plan in my first post and scum acting according to it's strength. I have some theories about how scum may have acted in the build-up, but I'll reveal my plan now.

~~

When designing an open game, the threat of a Day 1 massclaim being beneficial is always a factor you need to compensate for. Most set-ups prevent this strategy by having a high amount of VT's to minimise the ratio of unique roles to non-unique roles. By massclaiming in a game with a low ratio of unique roles, the scum have a big enough pool of VT's to hide within, and can eliminate the unique roles faster than the town can eliminate the pool of VT's. Another way for mods to prevent massclaim being a breaking strategy is by giving scum abilities that can manipulate other powers, or provide a set-up with slight uncertainty (ie; two possible set-ups, or certain roles possibly not existing, which gives scum fakeclaiming space). In this set-up, we have complete information - the only way for scum to fakeclaim is to set up a 50/50 between them and one of the power roles.

This set-up in particular has an unusually high amount of unique town power roles. This is what we want to capitalise on. The fact that the scum has no daytalk and is vanilla in every way makes crafting a plan even more viable. Essentially, we are trying to create a pool of confirmed town PR's and a pool of VT's/scum, and are racing scum to eliminate the VT pool faster than the PR pool.

Hang on, you say. If we're dividing the players into groups of 4 and 8 - how are we suupposed to whittle down that group quicker than the scum? This is where the vig comes into play. As opposed to having a kill cycle that operates like this; T/S/T/S, a vig changes it to T/T/S/T/T/S. The only problem here is that outing the vigilante Day 1 means we don't get to cash in on that cycle of improved town to scum kills - the scum can just kill off the vigilante N1. This is where zmuffin was on the right track. We keep the vigilante hidden from scum. However, I want to go one step further and keep it hidden from town too.

Having the Hider/Hider Tracker/Detective-Psychologist as the only claimers means we have a new problem to solve. We run the risk of running the vigilante up on D1, essentially outing it for the N1 kill, meaning we can't cash in on the improved kill cycle long-term. We also now create a fakeclaim option for scum - they can claim Vigilante D1 upon being wagoned to lynch. Although the real vig will kill this scum N1, we now don't get the chance of lynching scum D1. Coupled with potentially outing the real vig, we need to find a better way to organise the lynch, whilst still keeping the vig hidden. Here is how we do it;

After the three town PR's are claimed, we have scum locked in a pocket of 9 players. Voluntarily, four players (not the vig) will claim they are a VT and not the vig. And we only lynch from that pool of VT claimers. The vig then shoots from the pool of non VT claimers. This means that scum now has to choose which sub-pool to position themselves in. If they go all in the lynch pool, they essentially guarantee one of them being lynched today. If they all go in the vig pool, they essentially guarantee being vigged N1. The only rational play here is for scum to split 2 and 1 across the two groups.

This doesn't matter to the town, really. We're purely focused on our PR group outlasting the scum group. And we give ourselves a very good chance of doing so by hiding the vig. A false scum kill targeting a VT (if they attempt to hit the vig N1) all but loses the game for them, as that is a two-player swing. One VT gone, plus one PR still alive. Unless scum want to gamble on going for vig N1 (and losing if they're wrong) we force their hand into killing from the pool of PR's. Fortunately, we have a Hider, which we can use strategically to avoid scumkills and/or pinpoint scum. It's preferable in this instance, if the Hider DOESN'T die from hiding behind scum, as this gives scum a free PR kill, even if it does yield us scum the next day.

My plan for Night 1 entails the Hider flipping a coin between hiding/not hiding. If it hides, it is to hide behind our pool of claimed VT's, because we don't want it to hide behind the Vig - and it is likelier than the scum are divided 2:1 in the 5:4 pool respectively, making the VT pool a lower chance of dying. Now that I've said this, scum could easily tailor a plan to have two scum claim VT and nominate themselves for the lynch - in which case, I welcome it. We now have a 50/50 chance of lynching scum today, and the vig is even more well hidden, as there are more VT's in that group.

This should be enough margin for error to make shooting at the Hider a gamble too - if scum miss, they've just killed another VT falsely (or got no kill if going for the Hider), which is enough for us to lock down the game. Scum's only real NK options on N1 is to kill the Hider Tracker or the Det/Psych. Neither of these are net losses for town. We either get an investigation from the Det/Psych, or confirmation from the Hider Tracker on what the Hider did (this is handy if the Hider flips hide, and chooses to hide behind scum).

In most instances, we should wake up tomorrow with 9 alive. There is an outside chance of the Hider failing - if the Hider flips hide and hides behind scum, leaving us with 8 alive tomorrow. Even if that were to happen, we still have a 50/50 chance of the Hider Tracker being alive, netting us a guaranteed scum from that info. Really, we stand a strong chance of hitting scum Day 1/Night 1 as well, so if we wake up with 9 alive and one scum down, we're in a supremely advantageous position. I'll elaborate on what happens from D2 onward after I dump this plan. I just want to make sure everyone understands everything so far, as it is complex.

~~

Of course, to get into that position, we need to ensure that scum DON'T counterclaim one of our roles on Day 1. I think it is more beneficial for us in the long-run if they do, but I haven't thought this path through as deeply as I have the other. But locking themself into a 50/50 claim with a player means they cannot kill that powerrole without outing themself. It isn't viable for scum to counterclaim the Hider, as the Hider playing as an investigation role has a chance of dying on its own, proving the other player to be scum. It isn't viable for the scum to counterclaim the Hider Tracker, as the scum now has to fake results on what the Hider did - something scum cannot know. It's not viable (but the most viable of the three options) to claim Psych/Detective, as we can leave these two players alive until deeper in the game, knowing one is scum, forcing them to constantly produce results. We should get to a stage where scum cannot keep clearing/incriminating players.

As the Psych/Detective is the only rational counterclaim option for scum, we should have this role claim first WITHOUT the other roles claiming. If no scum counterclaims, great. We can move onto the massclaim idea. If scum does, and we have two Psych/Detective claims, we still have the Hider/Hider Tracker/Vigilante hidden and we've forced scum into going into a 50/50 for no gain. The beauty of that situation is that scum cannot kill the Det/Psych, meaning we can generate results for free and take the 50/50 chance later in the game when we get results either way. Surely by then, we should be good enough as a town to work out which player is likely the liar. I also have some ideas on how to play it so we protect the vig if scum choose this path, but I'll let you all read this post before I continue.

Sorry for the giant wall.

[Hoopla]

Also, this circumvents the issue I had with your plan (that all 3 scum could hide in the possible-vig pool and aim the vig tonight) because we'd be building a pool of confirmed townies outside of the possible-vig pool.

If scum were to all hide in the vig pool, we still get one vig-shot from it, have a 50/50 chance of scum missing, and guarantee that the Hider doesn't die when it hides within the VT pool. Since we are in even numbers we either want one death at night or three to maximise our chances at winning. One death at night is free. Two deaths costs us a mislynch, whilst we get three night deaths for the cost of one mislynch. We should be aiming for three vigilante kills - we can't get that with a Hider death.

If the scum decide to all hide within the vig-pool, they're signalling their intentions that that's where they are hiding. They are not going to shoot there if they have a 1 in 4 or 1 in 3 chance of being right - as they lose the game in almost all situations where they miss. If they have a 1 in 2 chance at hitting the vig, they could take it, but once the Hider and Hider Tracker claim an innocent target, we'll have probably had one scum vigged and one player in the VT's cleared - it isn't a viable strategy for scum.

Hider claiming target prior to the Night is dim. We give the scum two free kills and get no information from the Hider. The Hider should claim a pool of players (ie; the VT pool) and hide behind whoever it thinks is the towniest player (if we're ruling out not-hiding as an option).

[Hoopla]

To clarify, if the Hider announces a town target - then the scum just need to target that player to net a townie/hider double kill. We don't get any confirmed innocents from that situation, as the Hider's target doesn't live.

[Hoopla]

This would be optimal for town.

Hider/townie dying while the vig takes a shot, the det-psych gets a check and the HT is a confirmed townie alive D2? I'll take that.

Absolute worst case scenario, we'd be down to 8 people with 3 scum still alive, 2 confirmed townies, 1 vig who could claim D2, and we'd be in a really, really good position to win the game.

I'm not sure if it would. Two vig kills, one Hider death isn't bad. But it pales in comparison to three vig kills, because that is nearly enough brute on it's own to win the game. We should use the other PR's as bait to take the NK away from the vig.

Of the three town-aligned night kills we're awarded, any three of those kills can be scum if the vig uses them all. In a situation with two vig kills and one Hider-related death, the cap is reduced to two. One of those three kills has to be town from the outset. In the situation where the Hider/Townie dies, that is obviously suboptimal when you compare it to allowing the scum to kill the Hider for free and the vig taking a shot at a VT. As the Vig has a chance of a scum death - the Hider doesn't. Are you following me?

[Hoopla]

It's not a bad thing, it's just less optimal.

The thing with 12 player games is, they're bound by the typical metric of three mislynches to lose, three correct lynches to win. Being in even numbers, you need to no-lynch at some point. An alternate method to no-lynching is by having a vig-kill. You still get three mislynches, but you get a vig kill for free. Say that vig used its kill on Night 1 - great! We just got that kill for free, without being at the expense of the town losing a mislynch. However, if it were to kill again on Night 2, we wouldn't get three mislynches. The vigilante is cutting into that supply by taking a second kill and putting us back on even numbers. We now get two mislynches and two vig-kills, which many would argue is less desirable than three mislynches and one vig-kill. If the cycle continued once more (the vig is still alive and able to have a third shot), the town attains two mislynches and three vig kills, which is obviously more desirable than the first two options, as they only allow four town aligned lynches/kills throughout the game.

In the worst case scenario where we mislynch twice and misvig three times - we lose the game. The only way this happens is if those five kills are on all five of the VT's, which is extremely unlikely. If we lynch scum D1 or D2 without hitting scum at night, our second available mislynch is still in tact on D3 enabling us a third vig kill that night. If we kill scum N1 or N2, and don't hit scum during the day, we gain a third available mislynch for Day 3, enabling another vig kill that night.

Our whole strategy should be predicated on netting the town five possible wrong guesses. We can do that with two mislynches/three misvigs or three mislynches/two misvigs. But the only way we can attain the magical five shots is if the Hider doesn't take one of the kills. The Hider dying costs us a mislynch or a misvig. That Hider death isn't worth losing an extra shot at hitting scum with our vig, because in most situations where a Hider/Townie dies, that's a guaranteed town death for the cost of a mislynch/misvig. That isn't worth it.

All we need to do to get five shots is protect the vig until Night 3 and be correct at least once in our first four shots (D1 lynch, N1 vig kill, D2 lynch, N2 vig). In every other situation with the Hider dying, we only get four.

[Hoopla]

No, because a confirmed clear will go a hell of a long way.

The reward of gaining a confirmed innocent isn't worth the risk of cutting into our total mislynch/misvigs. I'll explain;

In a situation where we don't use the Hider at all (other than being bait), and use the vig to get us three NK's - the only way we lose is if scum take a risk and go for the vig (and succeed), or if we're wrong four times in a row (D1/N1/D2/N2) before hitting scum. We essentially need to nail

all

the townies and leave the the last scum alive. If we get down to the last scum, that scum player needs to outlive EVERY other townie in the game (it should come down to a 2:1 with a confirmed PR at worst). This means we have to gamble on one alignment of a player in the game. What is the point of gambling with the Hider straight up, than in a 50/50 in lylo? We might not even get to that stage where we need to gamble on someone's alignment. Doing it earlier in the game with less information is suboptimal, and doesn't really reap any benefits. It only has risk.

[Hoopla]

@Hoopla,

One last thought. Your objection to the Hider claiming who he would hide behind is that scum would be able to take out the VT he hides behind and we'd have one less mislynch/misvig available, right? But if scum take out one of the potential mislynch/misvigs anyway, is this really a problem?

My analysis factored in the scum nightkill. They only get to kill one player each night. The Hider taking a player with it at night is the additional kill messing up the cycle. We don't want that extra kill.

We should essentially be treating the Hider/Hider Tracker/Det-Psych as named townies, and disregard their abilities.

But losing the utiliiity of the hider and ht also doesn't seem good. :/

This is tempting logic to follow, and using the Hider as NK bait to protect the vig could even feel counter-intuitive to some, but the plan is sound. I think all you need to do is look at the last two Hard Boiled games to see how the PR's in this setup can go wrong. Securing a stable, predictable amount of benefit from the PR's we have (in this instance, using them as NK bait to protect the vig) is a superior option to the boom/bust nature of unplanned/unclaimed actions.

[Hoopla]

I think we should wait and see what everyone else says. I have some pretty good reads though. I'm hoping the obv-townies aren't the PR's.

[Hoopla]

Again, I really don't like the idea of the plan. Dark explained why a little better then I did. It's a good plan, but not a sound one. And with one lucky shot, our vig could wind up dying night 1. Then what Hoopla? Also, what if the vig doesn't exactly know of the pool of people who to vig? Just take a lucky guess and cross your fingers?

We have two pools - 9 players in the non-PR pool, and 3 players in the claimed PR pool. For all intensive purposes, those three claimed PR's are confirmed town if nobody counterclaimed. It is like a 3-player open masonry. This is an especially threatening prospect for scum, because if they don't get rid of this "masonry" quicker than we can pare down the other pool, then we win - this is the whole premise behind the Friends and Enemies setup. If scum attempt to shoot the vig, it will lose them the game if they miss. They missed an opportunity to remove one of our 3 PR's,

and

helped further town's goal by minimising our pool, which is all we need. We essentially force them to play our game unless they want to gamble.

Having said all of that, it might be more efficient to keep the vig pool slightly larger so scum have less idea about who the vig is. 6 in the vig pool and 3 in the lynch pool (for D1 at least) seems wiser.

[Hoopla]

Amrun, I didn't say the vig wouldn't know which pool to vig from. I said what if the vig doesn't have a clear choice, out of the people in the pool to vig? Does he just make a random shot, and cross his fingers?

Sure. Or we can nominate players from the vig-pool who would make better options, and the vig can go off that advice.

[Hoopla]

The Hider taking a player with it at night is the additional kill messing up the cycle. We don't want that extra kill.

This I disagree with, because if scum are taking out one of the VTs, it means we don't actually need the additional kill in the cycle. I want to run through some scenarios and think about this before I say anything else.

It's not scum taking out the VT. The scum only get one kill each night. If they choose to nightkill the Hider, that's all they get. The Hider electing to hide behind a player is what is causing the extra death. The scum still kill their PR, but the other death is guaranteed. It also runs the risk of the Hider claiming to hide behind a scum, and the mafia killing another PR - meaning we lose two in one night. Yes, we get a scum lynch the next day, but the scum have all our PR's dead by N2 (except the vig).

Both plans are railroaded to get four chances of being wrong

initially

, but once one scum is down, we get two more chances to be wrong under my plan before we need the next one dead, as opposed to one. That's because using the three nightkills as all possible vig scum kills is better than using the three nightkills for two vigs and one Hider-related death, as the Hider related death guarantees a town player's death regardless (and the possibility of a PR). They look similarly beneficial when you project to Day 2, but it is less optimal the deeper you go into the game.

[Hoopla]

You're right that if we do hit scum in your scenario, we have a bit more leeway, but the chance of hitting scum by D3 in my scenario is also much higher. Which is why I want to think about it first.

That's valid - it has a slight benefit for the short-term, but is worse in the long. I think if we aren't able to hit 1 scum from 4 tries with 3/8, 3/7, 3/6, 3/5 odds we deserve to lose. I don't see how we wouldn't hit scum at least once with those odds - especially when you factor in reads.

[Hoopla]

I don't think it's as simple as looking at odds and 'reads'. You're discounting how scum would interact based on knowing a mass claim is likely at this point, and knowing they may have to bus their scum buddies. An example of this is you; I assume if you're a VT, you'll be nominating yourself for the non-vig pool, right?

It absolutely is. Playing independent of a coherent plan is just as much leaving it to chance, if not more (I believe a lot more). Playing the game out normally, we have to gamble on some players being town throughout the game - we cannot kill everyone. I've devised a plan that enables us to kill more than usual and guarantees a set, predictable return from the power roles, as opposed to leaving it to chance that they don't kill each other.

If I'm a VT, I'm not sure what I would nominate myself for. I don't think I need to commit to any stance right now.

Not to mention if you are scum, your buddies probably knew you'd be doing this, and any reads based on the game so far aren't really reliable.

If I'm scum, I wouldn't lock us into a suboptimal play. I believe this game is scum-sided when played straight, and breakable for town when a plan is formed. That is why I chose to pick this game - because I had good odds either way regardless of what role I was given. I just wouldn't have organised a plan if I were scum.

[Hoopla]

No, 3/6 split is better. It almost guarantees scum in both pools.

I'm starting to come around to the belief that 3/6 is more beneficial since the Hider isn't doing anything. It means even if scum all hide within the no-claim/vig pool, they've only narrowed the vig down to a 1/3 chance. If scum want to take that 1/3 chance of hitting the vig, I welcome it, because a miss all but guarantees a town win, as they've just closed down our pool without closing down the other PR's.

It also means that they have a 3/5 chance of being vigged, unless they want to give us a 1/3 chance of lynching them today, which I expect is their "safest" option.

[Hoopla]

Okay, well if no one really cares that I am against this then why don't you all start mass claiming and get it over with...

What are your objections?

[Hoopla]

I think there is a point. For one thing I would feel better about participating if this was the brainchild of a townie

But we can't continue with the plan if we lynch myself or anyone else in a normal manner, as the game conditions will have changed (read: more people will be dead). The whole plan is predicated on hiding the vig so we can maximise the amount of town-aligned kills in the game, and we run a severe risk of not getting it by playing it straight.

By lynching normally Day 1, we're essentially throwing the plan away. This is an open setup. There are no hidden roles that can manipulate a potential plan. The plan stands alone, and can be evaluated from an objective level - that's the beauty of it. We need everyone on board for it to operate efficiently, though.

~~

The plan itself isn't making the game unplayable. On the contrary, we need to be lynching and vigging based on reads. The plan is merely framework - an alternate lynching/vigging scheme. The fundamentals of the game don't change. We still lynch the scummiest players (of the players nominated), and then vig the scummiest players (of the players nominated).

[Hoopla]

then go forward with the plan- and I want you lynched today

Fair enough then. You realise that would require you participating in the claiming as well, right?

[Hoopla]

We're not going to be claiming our roles explicitly. We'll likely be claiming Det-Psych/Not Det-Psych first. Then once that round of claims is over, we'll move onto the Hider Tracker, which will be done in a similar fashion, and then the Hider. This is to minimise scum's options with fakeclaims.

[Hoopla]

Great.

Has everyone weighed in on the plan then?

[Hoopla]

I'm interested.

And I've been interested in what others have had to say too, which is why the plan has evolved to its current state. It's been mostly accepted, but refined based on peer review. The reason the plan was decided upon was because most embraced it, deeming it a better chance of producing a town win than playing it straight, and of those who disliked it, they didn't provide reasons why. We can't abandon something most of us want if there is no rational reason why.

[Hoopla]

I'm interested in the plan, but what if the person who is det/psy happens to be away(like me) for a while and they lose their chance to roleclaim and scum end up taking it? Then scum could be pretending to be a PR and everyone would be believing them?

This is why we wait and get everyone to claim Det-Psych/Not Det-Psych. It shouldn't take more than a day or two. If anyone in this game is only onsite and prepared to post once every two or three days, they probably shouldn't be playing...

[Hoopla]

One player isn't going to hold the town hostage to play the game her way, when the whole town wants to play by a plan. This is just giving scum an easy out, when a plan has cornered them. I'm not suggesting glowball is necessarily scum, but she is making it easier for them.

This is kind of getting ridiculous. Glowball, unless you can pick faults with the plan as to why it's less likely to yield a town win than normal, you're going to have to comply. Saying no for the sake of saying no, when the plan requires EVERYONE on board is just foolish. You shouldn't get to have your way if you're not going to do a thing to prove it is better.

~~

We should start to do the Det-Psych/Not Det-Psych claims once everyone is ready.

[Hoopla]

The vig cannot die by a "random NK". By hiding the vig in a pool of non-confirmed players, we essentially assure it can't be lynched without exposing who it is to scum. If we have three PR's out in the open, scum NEED to kill those players, because if they shoot for the vig and miss, they lose the game because we can close down the VT/non claimers quicker than they can close down the PR's we have claimed, thus equaling a town win.

This means it's a REAL risk if scum go for the vig, as them missing loses them the game. And when they have at best, a 1/3 or 1/4 chance of hitting it tonight, there is no rational way they make that play if missing equals losing. This means, scum are forced to shoot at one of the PR's, giving the vig a free shot tonight and tomorrow (and likely the next night too). Which is exactly what we want, because it supremely benefits town, as it gives us extra chances of hitting scum via the method of killing MORE players.

The more players the town gets to kill in the game, the better chance we have of hitting all the scum. You cannot argue that the town has a better chance of winning if we have three mislynches available, than if we have three mislynches and two/three misvigs available.

[Hoopla]

Once jake checks in, we should go through with the plan if he has no objections.

[Hoopla]

I think glowball can manage to get through the cycle of Det-Psych/not Det-Psych and so on.

[Hoopla]

The vigilante is by far the best powerrole - that's why we're working very hard to keep it alive as far into the game as possible.

[Hoopla]

I'm concerned about outing all the PR's except the vig. This is what gives the vig protection (we're baiting scum away from it), prevents scum from fakeclaiming deeper in the game (where a 50/50 situation is less damaging to a scumteam), enables an open masonry/town voting bloc, and prevents any of our PR's having the vig kill wasted on them, and instead gives us extra kill(s).

[Hoopla]

Hold on.

Lots of stuff, I have briefly skimmed, but I'm considering Quilford's idea. It is a nice touch, and counter-claims still aren't an issue if we do this (if we have more than 3 people claiming PR, we can go through and deal with CCs). Plus it makes it harder for scum to decide on their NK.

I think it makes it easier for scum to counterclaim, as they can choose to claim to be a PR based on the strength/scuminess of the actual PR claimers. They don't get to analyse this as much if we do it one at a time.

[Hoopla]

But then if we get 4 PR claimers, we can choose a popcorn of who says their role.

Alright, I guess we can do it this way. If we get no counterclaimers, it means we're in a better position than before as scum has less info on our roles. I think it might slightly raise the chance of a CC as they stand to lose a bit more, but I still think that isn't a viable choice for scum either way.

[Hoopla]

@Hoopla,

What Amrun said. Minus popcorn.

We deal with proper claims if, and only if, there are more than 3 people claiming PR. In this case, we do det-psych claim/s first, HT claims second and hider claims third, within the group of people claiming PRs.

Yeah. I'm down.

We'll do it like "PR" or "not PR" - obviously the vig claims to not be a PR.

Should we popcorn for this initial sequence of claims, or get a list from scummiest to towniest going?

[Hoopla]

Neil, we are waiting on jakesh. We might as well discuss while we wait for him to post or get replaced.

Discuss... what, exactly?

Our favourite Disney films.

[Hoopla]

Alice in Wonderland.

Popcorn to Amrun.

[Hoopla]

T

[Hoopla]

Jake, you're making this game very tedious.

[Hoopla]

In order; neil, andrew then LittleGrey.

[Hoopla]

I'll elaborate once we get this claim through.

Also, didn't you express a townread of neil early on? What changed?

I did.

[Hoopla]

T

[Hoopla]

I doubt those three are all scum together, by the way. Of the players I didn't list, I wouldn't be surprised if one of DarkFlashlight/zMuffinMan make up the trifecta.

[Hoopla]

I'm hoping the obv-townies aren't PR's, so we trap scum even more.

[Hoopla]

jake: unless you're going to lift your activty rate by 400% (I mean, be capable of posting nearly every day and keeping up with the game), I'd suggest replacing out, because you'll just fall behind again and hurt town deeper into the game, which is worse than cutting your losses now.

[Hoopla]

And... momentum's dropped again. I'm not sure if I like that. I'm starting to get paranoid that Hoopla and jakesh are scumbuddies, and they're stalling a lynch....

Um.

Okay then.

[Hoopla]

@Hoopla....why did you feel the need to reply to Swank?

Because it's a silly thing to say. And I thought it should be quoted in all its glory at the top of the new page.

Why did you feel the need to ask me that question?

[Hoopla]

Yeah, I'm pretty unimpressed. He's completely killed this game's momentum. Send in the pacman please, so we can all start playing.

[Hoopla]

Claim: Not PR

[Hoopla]

Is it possible that the three holding up the claiming are scum? I mean none of them were on my scumdar but they have all been online since we started claiming and for them to overlook this thread is kind of hard to believe especially for Swank because he was contributing quite a bit.

I don't think that's realistic - the plan is going through regardless. Stalling and making themselves the ones responsible for the hold up isn't really a viable scum-strategy.

[Hoopla]

Any luck with replacements? If you want, I'll get some people for you?

[Hoopla]

Holy shit. We might have a game on...

[Hoopla]

If Swank doesn't post soon, I'm lynching him IRL.

Me too. Especially since he has the nerve to join a new game and neglect this one.

[Hoopla]

more replacements. oh joy.

can someone give me an up-to-date list of the claims along with which player replaced who? muffin?

<.<

[Hoopla]

*shrug*

I'll volunteer.

[Hoopla]

lol.

[Hoopla]

Neil, you're an idiot, really. I expected better from you. I hope you at least listen to the town and vig from the right pool of players, because I will be really pissed off if you continue to troll the game. You made a mistake, don't make another.

Muffinman is obviously town. I'm kind of surprised he is even being considered. He's claimed a PR, so at best, he has a 1/4 chance of being scum.

[Hoopla]

>:( well at least it eliminates me from being lynch and gives us another confirmed townie.. at least until night. I don't think it really matters if I even try to vig someone, considering I'm going to be dead tonight anyways. So all I have now is a vote.

UNVOTE:

VOTE: Coventry

Let's do this.

That was the entire purpose of a voluntary lynch pool. To keep the vigilante immune to the lynch. You ruined it. I'm not happy about it. And I don't want you to ruin it even more tonight by shooting someone you shouldn't.

[Hoopla]

VOTE: Coventry

Coventry lynched today. Quilford or chkflip vigged tonight. We can sort the PR mess out tomorrow.

[Hoopla]

Since the vig is known, there is zero reason to have a lynch pool, because its only function was to keep the vig hidden from scum. We should just lynch whoever is scummiest from the lynch/vig pool, since they're both the same now.

[Hoopla]

Yes. Please vig me. So tired of this garbage already.

Oh, wait. Vig is dead tonight. Stop playing stupid Hoopla.

We still get a vig shot tonight.

[Hoopla]

Vig and scum kills resolve simultaneously - you still get a shot if you get shot tonight. One kill isn't better than another.

[Hoopla]

glow, niel: come to the andrew wagon.

niel: vig whomever you have the strongest scum-read on. I'm sure I'll be here until the painful end where scum mops this town clean.

He isn't permitted to shoot one of the PR claimers though.

[Hoopla]

I have a plan in regards to how we sort out the PR-claimers tomorrow, by the way.

[Hoopla]

LYNCH COVENTRY FFS.

Neil, announce your shot now.

[Hoopla]

1. Hoopla introduced one of the most anti-town “guaranteed town win” plans ever on day one. While the plan itself makes a certain amount of sense to me, it proposed to eliminate scumhunting until day two or even later. This was CERTAIN to create problems for town, since most of us play Mafia in order to scumhunt. As a result, lack of interest has been the hallmark of this game up til now. Town has been given no reason to participate and with the timely addition of zMuffin’s contributions, has been berated, insulted, and ignored when they did try to post anything. I find it amusing that at this point zMuffin is complaining about lurkers, since it seems to me his abusive and petulant tirades have more or less guaranteed that no one wants to post and be subjected to them. “Just do what I want!” does not constitute an actual argument and piling insult on top of it does not make it one.

That's bullshit, and you know it. The plan was never a substitute for scumhunting. It was merely a framework to maximise the amount of opportunities to lynch and vig - all of those lynches and vigs are being determined by who is the scummiest. Boxing scum into predetermined categories and narrowing the pool by having a core of confirmed or psuedo-confirmed townies was always a pro-town endeavor. It was never meant to be a "guaranteed win", but it was meant to maximise our chances over playing the game straight - I don't think anyone can feasibly argue against that.

The reason this game stalled is because your predecessor flaked at the worst possible time when we needed everyone to okay the plan. This plan would have NO problem of succeeding if we weren't battered by replacements and Neil wasn't an idiot. You cannot pin that against me or the plan. Opportunities to scumhunt still exist within the framework of the plan. Stop making out that the plan took that away, because it didn't and you know it.

I'm kind of pissed off so many people have flaked from a committment and that few people are thinking the plan through objectively. If you think I'm scum trying to lock town into a suboptimal play, then you're in dreamland. Yep! It was totally my plan all along to have the vig out himself for no reason. It was totally my plan to have jake stall the game for three days (and for the mod to take even longer to find a replacement), just so I can stop the town from scumhunting. Ha Ha! Success!

Or, you know. Another conclusion is that this plan is/was capable of delivering the town a better chance of winning than random, and I proposed it because I am town and want to improve my chances of winning. But that would be too simple, wouldn't it?

[Hoopla]

Lol. Everyone loves a conspiracy. THAT was the plan all along! Scum went to all that effort to concoct a town-looking plan that secretly is beneficial to the town, despite the plan being completely public and prone to dissection. You're dabbling in such outlandish tinfoil territory, it's not funny. Do you really think this is the likeliest explanation for the motivations behind how the plan has unfolded?

I've been lurky because I can barely read people on Day 1 in most situations, much less in situations where we get shafted by replacements - that's the reason why I crafted a plan to give us more opportunities to hit scum (something not dependent on the town's skill). The game isn't enjoyable right now. I haven't been paying much attention in the last week or so because I haven't cared. Sorry, but it's true. I won't try and deny that.

When I proposed the plan, it was a draft. I thought about it a lot, but there were ways of tweaking it to make it better than I overlooked. Those changes made it better, so I agreed.

We need to just get on with it and pick a lynch. If you guys want to lynch me, I'll be disappointed, because I think it's obvious my motivations were pure. I think once we get the game to Day 2, it'll be a lot easier for everyone.

[Hoopla]

Lol, oh dear.

Each PR claims - it doesn't matter what order. It's game over for scum. We lynch the matching claims back-to-back.

[Hoopla]

Claim your role, yoyo.

[Hoopla]

My guess is that it's glowball.

[Hoopla]

This is a rare opportunity for a

true

town sweep as well. I've only seen one before (with 3 or more scum).

[Hoopla]

I assume that's what happened to neil too. The scumteam just imploded. I feel sorry for Coventry, because she was starting to play well. I started thinking she was town by the end of yesterday.

[Hoopla]

Meh, it's obvious Oversoul and zMuffin are town, so I'm just going to vote now.

VOTE: glowball

[Hoopla]

Hoopla, are you going to actually try to do your plan in the next game now that you have a basis for its results?

Don't think I'd play the setup as it is again, mostly because games shouldn't come with prepackaged strategies to improve your chances. There are a lot of unbalanced or just plain bad setups floating through the open queue. So, I want to use this as an example of one.

I think it's obvious this plan (in whatever iteration) improves town's chances over playing it straight. Perhaps not to the point of sweep after sweep - but scum would have a difficult time countering it, as they need to be in the select one or two unconfirmed players that don't die.

[Hoopla]

I think it could be won by scum with strong town-looking play and lots of bussing. +a bit of luck with PRs.

Sure, it could be won by scum in some situations, but it's no doubt they'd enter as underdogs. All it takes is one or two or the unconfirmed players to look really townie (or just more town than scum), and it's over.

Also Albert suggested adding a scum roleblocker after the last hard boiled. Which would hinder this plan a lot.

I think that'd help somewhat, but I'd still favour the town playing with some sort of plan over playing normally. The amount of unique town roles is just too high - it's not about how powerful they are, it's about the ratio of player slots they take up. Because they essentially confirm themself as town or cause a 50/50 in every claiming scenario.

[Hoopla]

what if every scum fake claimed....it'd take up a lot of time lynching...

Then we'd have a vig, 2 Hider Trackers, 2 Hiders, 2 Psych/Dets. We'd know that scum are lurking within 6 slots, with every lynch clearing/confirming another player. There's no way scum would win that.

[Hoopla]

What did you think when neil fakeclaimed vig?

[Hoopla]

Hoopla's strategy was complicated to read -__-

Essentially, 4 VTs claim, breaks up the group 4/8, town lynches one of the 4, vig kills one of the 8?

The basic gist of it is, have the Hider, Hider Tracker and Det/Psych claim "PR". If no scum counterclaim, great! The three Goons are located in a pool of 9 players. The three PR's are now essentially an exposed masonry, forcing scum to NK from that group of players. This enables town to get very nice odds for the lynch, and the subsequent vig N1. The only danger here is that the vig is potentially exposed by getting run up to L-1. So having a 3p voluntary lynch-pool enables the vig to stay hidden, without risk of being lynched. The vig then kills from those not in the lynch pool.

The scum need to either take a risk and go for the vig, but if they miss, they auto-lose, because the lynch/vig narrows the unconfirmed pool down quicker. Or they need to off the PR's, which gives the vig free reign, and an opportunity for three NK's which should be enough to close down the scumteam. It doesn't give a guaranteed win, but the odds far eclipse playing it straight, and hoping the PR's click rather than fucking each other over.

If scum elect to counterclaim on D1, it gets a whole lot more complicated, but I suspect in most instances the possible pathways benefit town just as much, if not more than no scum counterclaiming. I think the right thing to do is have the scummiest of the four claimants to claim their full role, and nobody else to say a thing, then divide the pool in the same way again. The only difference is the scum have decided to go 2/9 and 1/2, rather than 3/9.

With one player fully claiming a PR, if you picked scum, there is a good chance they'll NK their matching counterpart and prove themself as scum. If you picked town, then nothing is lost, and you still have to decide on a 50/50 at some point in the game, but as long as your game plan is centered around getting the vig three shots, there should still be enough time in most cases.

~~

I don't think the setup is bad, as such - it's probably just underdeveloped. In Open games with a whole slew of unique roles, there's always a risk of a claiming strategy providing greater odds. The ratio of unique roles is just too high in this game - it might be better served to go to 13p as well as dropping/merging one of the town PR's.

[Hoopla]

Your solution to every problem is to go 13p, you put that sh*t on everything.

I don't always - in this instance it makes sense, as it's an easy way to improve the ratio of vanilla to unique roles. Don't know why you're arguing for 12 other than familiarity.

[Hoopla]

That's a relief.

[Hoopla]

[Hoopla]