Mafia CLIV: Bigger, Medium, Smaller Mafia (Town Win)

[Happymeal]

Okay, so it's the lack of transparency that you're concerned about. Good. Keep that in mind. How does Zzzzip's plan eliminate transparency? How does everyone committing to ensuring a lynch result based on in thread votes by dogpiling the leader eliminate responsibility for those in thread blue votes? I said that it did, and I was wrong to phrase it that way. I had a specific criticism, but I don't think you're following up on that criticism really.

I was only answering your question. The plan doesn't completely rid us of transparency and that wasn't the issue I had with the plan. The plan tells people to not use their tools to lynch mafia by forcing their power to be diminished. That is the issue, the issue isn't that they aren't or are responsible, the issue is that their ability to hunt mafia becomes limited when their most valuable resource is cut in half or one third. That's of course not to say that all town are small or medium, but you essentially shut down the ability for reasonable town members to have more power against the mafia with this plan. That's the issue. Nothing more or less. A pro - town plan decreases mafia's power while increasing the town's. A neutral one basically equalizes it out. This one negatively affects the town more than it does mafia. That is what I call a bad plan.

[Zoomzip]

The issue is indeed the questions. They did not facilitate useful discussion solely because they were completely irrelevant. Perhaps his heart was in the right place, I wouldn't know, but it's not exactly easy to find out if there's a disparity between mafia being mafia and town misleading themselves. That's why I asked him questions about it. I skimmed through the pages and don't believe that he has answered them. I questioned his motives. If he has answered them, I'll return back to those answers once I possess the stability to do such (I'll probably be home in about 40 minutes). However, I do know his motives to a certain extent. He eventually revealed a plan. A genius move in order to most "benefit" the town. However, his questions bore no relevance to the plan. This means his actions bore no intention to facilitate useful discussion in the first place. Like I said, I don't know his response to the questions I asked prior so perhaps my mind could change.

Zoomzip, could you please spell out for the town what useful information you hoped to learn from those questions?

In addition to to me response to happymeal here: viewtopic.php?p=880287#p880287 let me add this: I was hoping other people had reached the same conclusions I had regarding us all being the same size, and all of us being Large. I saw some evidence to that effect as well (emphasis added below in quote:

1. I think the town's best outcome is if everyone's the same size. Removes vote weighting and harmful NK effects. Failing that, larges seem like the most dangerous of the the 3 to have in a mix due to them having the most NK effects.

2. I figure scum would want to be large against a medium/small town for NKs and small against a town with a high amount of larges for extra hides. If scum decide to play the odds on that, they probably end up assuming that most townies aren't large, so they don't choose small.

3. Looks to me like based on that we should go for either full infosec and everyone visits a scumread/the lynch runner-up like UDC's plan or full reveal to minimize the amount of townies killed by townies. I have a suspicion that if you were to game-theory this all the way out you'd end up with all large being optimal, but this could then end up being a Prisoner's Dilemma-like situation if anyone bothered doing that anyway, which is unlikely to begin with.

and

Okay, so I was thinking. "Yay! Wouldn't it be nice if we (the town) were all the same size." Like you guys said, equal vote power, and equal stomp power. The problem is....I lost my train of thought. But theres problems with that thought.

So right now, I'd say I'm against the reveal of sizes. And plus, people have been known to lie about such things before.

I should think that the mafia are small...they can carry extra voting power, and hide, while us townies stomp it out while the mafia hide. And think about it, 2 small mafia voting together have a power of 6....and there are only 7 townies to begin with. And I think most townies went larger, rather than smaller.

Just my thoughts at the moment. Convince me otherwise.

So there was some hope for me to think that multiple other players had reached the same conclusion: That the best outcome was an all large town. Sadly it seems not to have been the case.

[condude1]

There are 25 hours remaining in the day.

Vote Count:

Zoomzip (1): Happymeal

Carry on.

[Zoomzip]

Whether you agreed with my earlier listing of you as a wolf or not the fact is i had you there before you voted me. Ergo not a reaction vote.

Dude, you couldn't pull the trigger for your vote until you saw your name in lights. It seems to me you were waiting to see how things developed before you placed your vote, only you got called out and your hand was forced.

I think the stomp dogpile thing is covered innmy response tonsjg11. It occurs to me that the smalls wouldn't need to participate (since they can't kill anyway) but it's not clear to me that that occurred to you.

I was still hoping that most townies had chosen Large. Telling townies "Please do not smash your head into the immovable wall as that is injurious to your health" was not something I explicitly said. But as I pointed out to DJA, easily remedied.

You said that you thought I'd have the mafia as large, but never follow up on that. Are you sure? Look at my townread of sjg and my top two wolves. It absolutely has factored j to my thinking.

Why didn't you vote it? Why did you wait until after SJG's "ZZ and harb are scum buddies" post? As far as I can tell, your vote has as much weight as that comment had.

That being said, you are playing defense now. Very tunneled defense, but defense none-the-less. Frankly, I am not interested in voting for myself at the moment. Who else you got? Harb... for... reasons, I suppose. Anything?

[Happymeal]

@sjg

who do you plan on stomping tonight?

@everyone

Please answer the question and your reasoning why.

I am not certain about my options for stomping. I think there is only one or two small players other than me (sjg and justy) so probably one of them. I'm more interested in stomping justy so that is who I will stomp tonight.

[Zoomzip]

A pro - town plan decreases mafia's power while increasing the town's. A neutral one basically equalizes it out. This one negatively affects the town more than it does mafia. That is what I call a bad plan.

The most pro-town possible would have eliminated any possibility of a mafia night kill and town on town violence. Right? And anyone who didn't go for that plan is anti-town, and therefore pro-scum in your POV, right?

PPE @Happymeal: I will be stomping either Harb, DJA, or SF1. Leaning to DJA at the moment.

[sjg11]

Why does the possibility of large scum lying and saying they're small not come into play here?

This doesn't answer the question of why scum would choose to be the sole no participant in a D1 dogpile. Stomps done with the intention of killing should be done on people we think are wolves, not for the purpose of enforcing protown play or otherwise proving we "have a spine"

The consequences of lying are far worse in your plan than they are in the plan we are currently following. Do you disagree with that statement?

No, unless I misunderstand the plan. If skmeone who is large says they're small and gets the smalls to stomp them by not participating into he dogpile they'll kill all of them. Just the same as they do in the other.

Yes but in this plan we can spread the visiting around a little bit so the damage is minimized. As in not everyone visits the same player in their group, we spread it about a bit. Plus we then likely get an auto-scum lynch the next day if we organise who targets who on the previous day. Hence the consequences of lying are worse in your plan than mine.

[sjg11]

Okay, so it's the lack of transparency that you're concerned about. Good. Keep that in mind. How does Zzzzip's plan eliminate transparency? How does everyone committing to ensuring a lynch result based on in thread votes by dogpiling the leader eliminate responsibility for those in thread blue votes? I said that it did, and I was wrong to phrase it that way. I had a specific criticism, but I don't think you're following up on that criticism really.

I was only answering your question. The plan doesn't completely rid us of transparency and that wasn't the issue I had with the plan. The plan tells people to not use their tools to lynch mafia by forcing their power to be diminished. That is the issue, the issue isn't that they aren't or are responsible, the issue is that their ability to hunt mafia becomes limited when their most valuable resource is cut in half or one third. That's of course not to say that all town are small or medium, but you essentially shut down the ability for reasonable town members to have more power against the mafia with this plan. That's the issue. Nothing more or less. A pro - town plan decreases mafia's power while increasing the town's. A neutral one basically equalizes it out. This one negatively affects the town more than it does mafia. That is what I call a bad plan.

I'm sorry but you're wrong on this.

If the Mafia picked small or medium, their voting power is decreased just as much as the town's are.

The error you seem to be making, and I've pointed this out to you before, is that you seem to be assuming that the Mafia selected large thus that their voting power won't be hit by the plan like the town's will. I don't feel like this is a good assumption to make and I feel like you're not contemplating potential scenarios where the Mafia weren't Large to increase the voting power which this plan helps to prevent.

[Zoomzip]

Don Juan of Austria

I am cool with him or Chuck dying -- But at least Chuck has been somewhat engaged in his defense. DJA is still flitting about out there. And yeah, I kinda just tied myself for the lynch lead with Chuck. But those votes on me are terribad at this point and need to move. Could be fun.

[Happymeal]

@ZoomZip: I agree with the plan IF we decide not to reveal our sizes. If we reveal, I think we should vote as we do normally. That would offer us vote data and possibility to find players who hide their real sizes based on vote results and claimed vote weights.

I missed on out questioning this earlier. It's my bad. You had stated prior that you would only agree with ZZ assuming that sizes not be revealed. However

I understand the wish for integrity of lynch. I'm a bit worried about loosing 12 hours because of it because I assume that there's not much info to be gained from the discussions after we dogpile at 12 hour mark. Usually, the last hours of game day have been quite active, and generated lots of data to be analyzed. What if that activity doesn't appear on artificial 12 hour mark? I feel that this plan might passivate town.

This quote happened after many town members had already expressed their interest in revealing. You were already planning on adhering to the plan despite knowing there was a decently strong want to reveal from many town members. Why is that? What changed your attitude here?

Also, here you adhere to your sentiment:

I notice majority is pro reveal, so here goes: I'm small.

Two things informed my decision:
1) I know I'm town so I want as many votes I can to fight against scum who try to have mislynch.
2) I'm not high-value target for scum to nightkill, as I've recently been scum read as town and I'm definitely no town leader. So even as small, I expect to have good chance to stay alive.


Not that my role is out, I can talk about my second objection on dogpiling votes. I don't like giving away my vote advantage. I know I'm town, so basically I have an advantage over average or large scum. So if I get my vote right, it's more difficult for scum to save themselves than if I only have one vote. I'm not sure if this is rational objection though.

You still believe ZZ's plan is not optimal, yet you do this a few posts later:

Harb

Not that correction really matters with blue votes.

So, at least two times have you stated you are not a particularly big fan of the plan presented by ZZ, but follow it anyways. Why is that?