/Invitational 11: Pick your Poison 5 (Game Over)

[mith]

Sorry for the double post, not awake enough yet and I forgot a couple things.

Herodotus: Given that you are tossing around the idea of a massclaim, I find it odd that you ignored the whole Hider-claim discussion and jumped right into a L-2 Roleblocker vote. I'd like some thoughts on Troll's idea, please.

In case it wasn't obvious to everyone else: My previous question to Herodotus was more of a "So you're scum who was trying to figure out whether to give us a Hider or two?" thing. Other things that bug me about posts 90 and 96...

1. Given that the discussion was about whether we should do a Hider-claim so as to possibly avoid giving scum a Roleblocker, I'm not sure how he could miss that no one was assuming the Hider was unblockable (possible I missed something from someone assuming just that, or that he only skimmed enough to see the latter part of the Hider-claim discussion and missed the Roleblocker stuff).
2. In point 2. he said he has no synergy-related ideas... yet point 3. is a synergy idea (that is, Janitor and Assassin don't have synergy).
3. And, of course, what I mentioned earlier in this post regarding post 96 (if he's aware enough of the Hider claim discussion to feel the need to mention post 90 point 1., and if he's going to suggest a massclaim, why is he sidestepping the Hider discussion and voting Roleblocker?).

(Admittedly, those are all pretty weak points. But hey, it's not even day 1 yet and I've got two suspects whose names start with H.)

[Patrick]

Votecount

Janitor (5) -- SpyreX, Kmd4390, DrippingGoofball, Ellibereth, Papa Zito
Rolecop (1) -- ooba
Roleblocker (9) -- Hoopla, Ellibereth, Kmd4390, Papa Zito, ooba, VasudeVa, SpyreX, Rhinox, Amished
Assassin (4) -- VasudeVa, Rhinox, Hoopla, Amished

20 alive, 11 votes to choose.


Deadlines

Number one (2) -- Rhinox, VasudeVa
Number two (9) -- Hoopla, SpyreX, Papa Zito, ooba, Elmo, ekiM, zoraster, Amished, My Milked Eek

[Herodotus]

Herodotus: I don't want to say too much about the numbers I have on this, in case the Mafia don't know what the optimal play is, but I don't think massclaim is likely to benefit us as much as having the power roles functioning normally would.

At this point, I agree. But I don't know for certain that there isn't a good strategy that does involve a massclaim.

Sorry for the double post, not awake enough yet and I forgot a couple things.

Herodotus: Given that you are tossing around the idea of a massclaim, I find it odd that you ignored the whole Hider-claim discussion and jumped right into a L-2 Roleblocker vote. I'd like some thoughts on Troll's idea, please.

Being not awake enough yet seems to have made you not notice that it was Amished, not I, who made the L-2 RB vote.

In case it wasn't obvious to everyone else: My previous question to Herodotus was more of a "So you're scum who was trying to figure out whether to give us a Hider or two?" thing.

and then I decided to draw attention to that? No, there's no tell here.

1. Given that the discussion was about whether we should do a Hider-claim so as to possibly avoid giving scum a Roleblocker, I'm not sure how he could miss that no one was assuming the Hider was unblockable (possible I missed something from someone assuming just that, or that he only skimmed enough to see the latter part of the Hider-claim discussion and missed the Roleblocker stuff).

In fact, the mod stated that any hypothetical hiders could be roleblocked in the thread before my post 90; but as I hinted, I hadn't read the game yet. But I've never seen blockable hiders before, and I noticed the mod hadn't updated the "clarifications" in post 2, so I wanted to make sure everyone was aware. I had noticed that roleblocker was ahead in the votecount.

2. In point 2. he said he has no synergy-related ideas... yet point 3. is a synergy idea (that is, Janitor and Assassin don't have synergy).

Yes, that's a synergy-related idea. I should have said that I didn't have any positive preferences/suggestions. While the Janitor/Assassin don't have synergy, I don't think I want us to choose that pair.

3. And, of course, what I mentioned earlier in this post regarding post 96 (if he's aware enough of the Hider claim discussion to feel the need to mention post 90 point 1., and if he's going to suggest a massclaim, why is he sidestepping the Hider discussion and voting Roleblocker?).

I don't believe that Troll is rolefishing, however I'm a little concerned if the scum gave out a hider, discussion from too many people about hider claiming will reveal to the scum who their best NK targets are.

[mith]

"Being not awake enough yet seems to have made you not notice that it was Amished, not I, who made the L-2 RB vote." - Bleh, I see something bolded and my mind immediately equates it with a vote. My mistake, and you gave a further reason for not discussing Troll's idea, so we're cool there.

However: Isn't that ("discussion from too many people about hider claiming will reveal to the scum who their best NK targets are") potentially a problem with your massclaim suggestion (if it were discussed further), or Hoopla's "lynch claimed power roles" idea, or pretty much any discussion we could have day 0 about power roles? I agree we should be careful, but given the wide range of ideas and opinions on optimal strategy I don't think we're going to give anything away to the scum.

Regarding the Hider/Roleblocker question, it felt to me that you were trying to present yourself as helpful, but without really adding anything to the discussion (and so you weren't necessarily thinking about it from a "scum probably want to know this and would need to ask if they were unsure, town are less likely to think to ask it until day 0 is underway" perspective, but rather a "this is something rather innocuous that I asked/could have asked that could make me look helpful" thing). As I said, it's a pretty weak point.

Wondering: Can you reference any games where you've seen an unblockable Hider?

[Herodotus]

I don't believe that Troll is rolefishing

Well, he is seeking a PR (by claim). One could call that rolefishing. I mean he wants a claim, but I don't think he's trying to fish for tells.

@mith: Yes, it's hypothetically possible that people discussing a massclaim could give out info about their role. However, I expect we can all consider the question in the abstract, without giving consideration to any role we may have. The difference between this and the hider claim issue is that if someone says "I agree that all hiders should claim", but doesn't claim hider themself, then the scum will pretty much know that player isn't a hider.

Wondering: Can you reference any games where you've seen an unblockable Hider?

May I first ask why you're asking? If I can't find any examples, does that make me scum?

[Herodotus]

I have to go out for about fourty minutes, but if you could explain that question by then, I will answer as soon as I get back.

[Elmo]

Suppo.

A question for everyone: Offhand, to what extent do you think the scum chose town power roles based on what they thought we'd choose?

The "game breaking benefits" only come if we have two hiders and I would bet money that we do not. Scum would have to be fools not to notice the synergy, and I doubt we have four fools as scum with this player list.

I think I would broadly agree with this. I think a lone hider claim is interesting, but it means if we want to consider them confirmed and for reals, we can't give out the roleblocker or the janitor (I think?). So we're looking at rolecop & assassin - I'm not discounting it, but I'm not really enamoured. I'm a bit skeptical of the value of confirmed townies early in the game, personally.

For what it's worth, my initial thoughts (ie giving out two hiders) were formed before I saw cross-hiding protected both, I assumed the opposite and missed the clarifications on the first time through.

The chances of having two hiders in the game be slim but them exist. If them be there then we be fools not to use them.

I really do not like this one bit. Acknowledging a possibiliy as extremely unlikely but urging us to consider it anyway is pretty sketchy in my book. I'm not saying you're pushing this exclusively, but still.

From memory, there seem to be people going "X is bad, so we should give them Y". That doesn't actually establish that X is worse than Y; we already know that giving them anything helps them, so in a sense "X is bad" isn't saying anything new.

I'm more firmly against the Janitor this morning for the following reason: Without the Janitor in play, we are at the very least able to keep power role claims accountable by the knowledge that there are exactly four of them.

This is pretty important and something I'd like to see addressed by pro-janitor crowd (if it even exists?). This is something I could easily see seriously pissing me off in the future.

Unless I'm mistaken, an assassin combined with the normal mafia kill can go through a single protection effect. Thought I'd mention that.
I think people looking at assassin as "extra scum kills" are looking at it wrong. They're not kills unless they identify a PR, which should be hard to do. It's wrong from both directions; they have to do a lot more than just use the kill, but it's extra bad when they do.
Rhinox's point about the assassin being weakened by most of the town power roles is interesting.

Discussion is slower than I thought it would be, I'll try to post every couple of days.

[Herodotus]

Unless I'm mistaken, an assassin combined with the normal mafia kill can go through a single protection effect. Thought I'd mention that.

I'm pretty sure that's not the case. The town role PM's all suggest that they prevent all NK's on the person protected.

[SpyreX]

As "pro" janitor versus some of the other combinations (namely daycop + assassin) I still don't see the inherent distaste in claims: if we get 4 and 4 exact PR claims it doesn't matter who was janned.

Otherwise it is exactly as per normal. Evaluate and eliminate. Just like every other aspect of a single missing flip.

I'm a bit skeptical of the value of confirmed townies early in the game, personally.

I really need this one explained too.

I could see merit in janitor + daycop with a massclaim forcing the hand early working out well.

[mith]

Herodotus, it can't

make

you scum if you're

already

scum... (Partly just curious, partly think it's odd to use the phrase "I've never seen blockable hiders before" if you've never seen unblockable ones either.)

I think it would be pretty stupid on the part of a Hider to claim before we have consensus that a mass-Hider-claim is a good idea; I'm not seeing how someone expressing a pro-mass-Hider-claim (or con-) leaning without claiming Hider gives the scum any information at all (nor how discussing a Hider-claim in the abstract is any different from discussing a PR-claim in the abstract).

Elmo: Not ignoring your question, but want to see answers from a few of the less talkative people before I give an answer. (Likewise, I have some more to say on the Hider-claim issue, but I'd like to see something from Herodotus and from the pro-Assassin camp on that first.)

SpyreX: Can you rewrite that first sentence? I've read it three times and still don't know what you're trying to say.

[SpyreX]

Fair enough:

A janitor only alters the PR business if they claim a PR. If we only get 4, its the same. Further, it'd be the same issue without the janitor in regards to the number of claims versus the validity of them: 4 is 4.

That seems much, much less damaging than the daycop + assassin combination mentioned in the same post. That is the one combination I am 100% adamantly against.

[DrippingGoofball]

But the scum won't know who they're janitoring, right? So they may janitor a PR as much as a vanilla, and they won't know. They could get caught that way.

[mith]

SpyreX: The Janitor potentially alters the power role count if the Janitor uses that ability on a day we lynch a claimed power role (whether the lynchee is actually a power role, or scum). Say we later massclaim, and end up with four power role claims (or four claims + already dead power roles) - because of the Janitor, we don't know whether all four all telling the truth (because we lynched scum earlier in the game and don't know it), or whether we already lynched a power role and have a lying scum among the claims. We might only get three claims (plus the original one), and we're good - but I think it most cases it would benefit the scum to take advantage of the missing reveal (if we lynched a power role earlier).

Without the Janitor in the mix, we would of course already know whether that power-role-claim lynch was a good one or not, and thus know whether we still have a fake claim in the midst of the real ones.

(I still kinda feel like I'm reading gibberish from both you and DrippingGoofball, probably because I've been wiring today and my brain is fried. I hope what I think your saying and have responded to is what you are actually saying - that if we only get 4 total power role claims, the Janitor ability is irrelevant because they're all confirmed. It's true, but it's problematic because scum can screw with us with a single fake claim.)

[DrippingGoofball]

(I still kinda feel like I'm reading gibberish from both you and DrippingGoofball...

After I read your post, mine read like gibberish to me, too. Never mind...

[SpyreX]

Lets look at this in perspective under the basic assumptions:

1.) Someone about to get lynched is going to claim.
2.) Town isn't going to lie about their claim.

Lets say D1 is a "pr" lynch that gets janned:

a.) It was an actual PR.
--- Scum, to utilize this, has to have at least one member claim a PR. Otherwise, 3 cleared at massclaim.
b.) It was a scum faking.
--- Scum are given a conundrum - claim vanilla and ride the "one is scum" wagon at massclaim or claim and make it apparent that at least one is scum at massclaim.
----- Depending on values, this turns into clearing swaths of vanillas, forcing the kills that way.

So, this is fairly straightforward but leaning town to begin with: we know the absolute number of PR's which is a concession not often present. Net result? Analysis and lynching as per normal.

NOW, lets say we eliminate assumption 1 and not allow claims before lynch:

Scum now have a conundrum - they don't get to know if they are in scenario a above. Which is, again, good for town.

The other anti-janitor argument is the "2 day 1s" issue which perplexes me because absolute information isn't something I ever count on for a progression. Interactions can be examined as per normal. Wagon analysis can be done dual on the binary value. Its not concrete but its not like there isn't a days worth of value to be found.

Further, we know its there. Its not a surprise banking on a flip that doesn't come.

And ultimately?

It all becomes moot the second we lynch a scum that flips. The other pieces fall into place. Janitor is -really- only going to screw things up to a high level if we're already screwed by

multiple

mislynches.

The others alter the game in different ways by neutering the PR's that exist - daycop directing kills, roleblocker stopping the pr's, assassin is straightforward. The janitor at least can force a gamble that if the balloon is popped doesn't matter.

Again, if this wasn't a 1-shot we'd be having a whole different discussion but as it sits I think the risk reward here is pretty damn solid.

[mith]

"Scum, to utilize this, has to have at least one member claim a PR." - Yes, and my point was that

scum almost certainly will utilize this

. You haven't answered this, you've just hidden it in a flow chart.

(Note that if we were certain the Janitor was going to Janitize day 1, we could avoid the power-role-counting part of the problem by not lynching power role claims - but unfortunately, we don't know that for certain.)

[Don't understand the "clearing swaths of vanillas" line, either.]

[DrippingGoofball]

Scuse me for spewing more gibberish, but aren't we losing sight of the forest because of the trees? We're picking a scum power role, it's going to be inconvenient. The real question, is what we feel is less inconvenient.

Are the potential PR-shenanigans of a 1-shot janitor worse than, say, a dead PR from an assassin?

We have to concentrate on the relative inconvenience of each PR, not absolute inconvenience.

[/ignore gibberish]

[SpyreX]

Knowing its what is going to happen by nature weakens the move.

Yea, its bad if we're at all the PR's left alive and no scum dead when massclaim happens but that is a bad scenario no matter how you cut it. Knowing PR's aren't inherently trusted because of their claim is fairly standard and lynching even A scum that flips breaks this wide open.

And the swaths of vanillas is more of the same we will actually be able to find and lynch a scum: even with 3 scum left the claims have to be split to PR's / not PR's (in this setup I'd assume 1 PR claim 2 not) which means trying to lynch in the PR and clear that set.

However, if there are two scum left at massclaim and its an obvious 1/1 and the vanilla scum is found that's all but game right there.

So I guess my answer is tied into the mentality behind the discussion - if we can't lynch scum then the janitor is REAL bad. If we can lynch scum then the janitor becomes weaker by comparison - and I don't think the existence of the janitor actively hampers that pursuit near the level that is presented.

[Patrick]

In response to a prod Slicey has told me he's V/LA until Monday. I'll replace him if he doesn't post very soon after returning.

[zoraster]

Knowing its what is going to happen by nature weakens the move.

Yea, its bad if we're at all the PR's left alive and no scum dead when massclaim happens but that is a bad scenario no matter how you cut it. Knowing PR's aren't inherently trusted because of their claim is fairly standard and lynching even A scum that flips breaks this wide open.

And the swaths of vanillas is more of the same we will actually be able to find and lynch a scum: even with 3 scum left the claims have to be split to PR's / not PR's (in this setup I'd assume 1 PR claim 2 not) which means trying to lynch in the PR and clear that set.

However, if there are two scum left at massclaim and its an obvious 1/1 and the vanilla scum is found that's all but game right there.

So I guess my answer is tied into the mentality behind the discussion - if we can't lynch scum then the janitor is REAL bad. If we can lynch scum then the janitor becomes weaker by comparison - and I don't think the existence of the janitor actively hampers that pursuit near the level that is presented.

Thinking on it, the jan is only

really[/b] bad if we have a vigilante on our side. If not, then we'll know that the death is a townie. We may not be able to count power roles as effectively, which is definitely bad, but we'd at least know the alignment.

A vigilante would not have been terrible to give us, so there's certainly a chance that's out there.

[Ellibereth]

Oh whatever, I'm fine with Roleblocker + Anything.
and I think the jan is only for lynched peoplez, not Nk's.
ANYWAYZ
Time to get to something that matters.

TOWN
KMD
Vas
DGB
Mith
Troll
Zor
Hero
Plumen
ooba

PEOPLE LEFT
Amished
ekiM
Elmo
Hoopla
My Milked Eek
Papa Zito
populartajo
Rhinox
Slicey
SpyreX

[mith]

SpyreX: You do understand that with a Janitor in play, we wouldn't know how many scum are left (and thus the split)... right?

(I agree that the Janitor power loses its effectiveness as we kill and reveal more scum; and if I've gotten you from a stance of "Janitor? No biggie." - which is where I started out as well - to "Janitor is potentially real bad, but probably weak", then that's all I'm looking for out of this argument. While I do think an accurate count of power roles is important, on top of the other information we might potentially lose to a no-reveal, I'm not completely set against giving them the Janitor; the only thing I am confident of at the moment is that the Roleblocker is the weakest of the four.)

DrippingGoofball: I think we're already attempting to answer that question (I am, at least). Arguing about the strengths of individual roles is both providing me with ideas for countering those roles that I might not have thought of yet, and challenging me to defend my current leanings (both to persuade others and to persuade myself). The "whys" of various players' leanings are also important (for example, I might be able to convince myself that the Assassin is less bad than the Rolecop, but if a choice of Assassin is necessarily coupled with the "lynch all power role claims" plan, I won't be voting for it because I think that plan is flawed).

As to your question: I would say that an extra scum kill (on a power role) is worse than a single no reveal; but also that we are nearly guaranteed some shenanigans with a Janitor, while the Assassin's ability to kill anyone is uncertain. At the moment, I think the Janitor is probably the lesser of those two evils.

[Herodotus]

Herodotus, it can't

make

you scum if you're

already

scum... (Partly just curious, partly think it's odd to use the phrase "I've never seen blockable hiders before" if you've never seen unblockable ones either.)

Taking refuge in semantics?

---

In this game, the mod said:

Night abilities will resolve in the following order of precedence:

Hider
Mafia Roleblocker, Jailkeeper (if two blockers target each other, both are blocked from using any other abilities - this includes the Jailkeeper's protection ability).
Everything Else

^^^ People should check that link out...

Here is the full role reveal of a game where the hider was RB-immune. There wasn't a roleblocker, but I told the hider they couldn't be blocked so that they wouldn't doubt their information.

Those are the only two games I can recall that I was involved with that included or were semi-open and could include hiders. I'm pretty sure I've seen other examples, and I believe there has been a MD discussion or two in which the RB-immunity was presumed. I consider Natural_action_resolution the standard, and anything else a deviation.

---

I see your point about discussing a hider claim in the abstract, but I didn't interpret this as something we were going to vote on as much as Zorblag making a recommendation for players to either follow or not.

[Herodotus]

Thinking on it, the jan is only

really[/b] bad if we have a vigilante on our side. If not, then we'll know that the death is a townie. We may not be able to count power roles as effectively, which is definitely bad, but we'd at least know the alignment.

The janitor is a daytime ability.

[mith]

Heh... not that I think the question any less valid (if you were making things up, you might not have had that game in mind, nor remembered that I did the resolution that way), but I really should have remembered you played that game (since you were a Magic Traaaaain with Shabba) and wouldn't have bothered to ask if I had.

(FWIW, while I don't recall ever having the potential for a Hider and a Blocker in any other game, I wouldn't rule out deciding to resolve things differently - the intuition that inspires Natural Action Resolution breaks down a bit when it comes to Xyl's list, and it would be pretty easy to argue for any ordering of the first five.)

I've read Troll's posts as an argument for a town strategy, not as a recommendation to individual players. It's not a strategy that makes any sense if not everyone follows it. I suppose I can see where you're coming from, but do you have any objection to discussing it on the basis of "this is something under consideration only as a whole-town strategy, and would only be implemented with a consensus"?