Author Topic: Yume Nikki Mafia - Waking 2 (Read 70966 times)

Carthrat · « **Reply #30 on:** May 16, 2009, 05:08:12 AM »

Y'know in fact we can break the game wide open it's not even hard.

Pick someone at random. Lynch everyone simultaneously but them. Assuming typical scum numbers, that gives town like a 70-80% chance of winning *right there*.

Carthrat · « **Reply #31 on:** May 16, 2009, 05:13:41 AM »

Although when I think about it, that won't work, since scum will delibately force a draw or sacrifice one scum to fuck everything up at the end with this route. Still, amusing.

Pesco · « **Reply #32 on:** May 16, 2009, 06:08:23 AM »

Lol

##Vote UK

Affinity · « **Reply #33 on:** May 16, 2009, 06:18:21 AM »

Hm, I forgot what actually was in the Gulliotine room.

##Vote: Alice Though, theoretically, no one really dies in the dreamworld; they are only gone for that specific dream, I guess.

Pesco · « **Reply #34 on:** May 16, 2009, 06:27:06 AM »

I just broke the room lol. Everyone ends the day with one vote on them and we all get lynched. The proper way is to have 2 votes on all the scums and we win on day 1.

Carthrat · « **Reply #35 on:** May 16, 2009, 06:33:26 AM »

lol welcome to hours ago gj

Pesco · « **Reply #36 on:** May 16, 2009, 07:07:28 AM »

I had you on ignore...not really.

We should still take advantage of being able to multi-lynch. It'll be like vigging.

Edible · « **Reply #37 on:** May 16, 2009, 07:09:27 AM »

Hrm. Regarding the "lynch everyone via the one-vote-on-everybody" method:

Town wins when all scum dies. Can't exactly count on scum playing along with this, as they have a good chance of voting another scum and then unvoting right before the day ends. This can be countered by any active townies immediately voting that person, as they're obviously scum. It becomes a waiting game, but town is basically guaranteed a scum lynch at minimum, assuming more town are around for the end than scum.

I dunno, though. Seems too easy.

Pesco · « **Reply #38 on:** May 16, 2009, 07:17:53 AM »

Too easy to screw up. That's why we lynch on 2 votes instead. It keeps at least half the players alive to analyse the game if town doesn't win immediately.

WHMZakeri · « **Reply #39 on:** May 16, 2009, 07:39:28 AM »

I know I said it first, but I'm not too certain if this is a good idea. Even with Pesco's suggestion, the worse case scenerio is still Scum auto-winning, unless they make up less than a quarter of the game's roles. (6 Townies (12 votes with one who didn't vote) dead = 7 players, 4 townie plus three mafia -> Waking phase, one townie dies -> Mafia = Town -> Mafia win)

I would suggest we stick with the only lynching 2 or three people this day phase, to get the most out of the bonus without subjecting the town's chances of winning to lottery number picking. Ergo, 3-4 votes per victim.

Also, hypothetical Question: If one person has 4 votes, and two people have 3 votes each, who dies in this scenerio?

Pesco · « **Reply #40 on:** May 16, 2009, 07:44:39 AM »

I'd assume all people in the tie will die, so 3 lynches in that case.

Let's get onto the srsbsns. There's much hunting to do.

Pesco · « **Reply #41 on:** May 16, 2009, 07:48:08 AM »

Quote from: BaitySM on May 16, 2009, 04:24:11 AM

Basically =x

---

I roll a die twice, and get two 3's. That means I choose "6". Of course, to make it fit into the 12 criteria, I've excluded myself from the sample (for now).

##Vote Affinity

##Unvote
##Vote BaitySM. FPMH

LHCling · « **Reply #42 on:** May 16, 2009, 07:51:27 AM »

Quote from: Zakeri Izayoi on May 16, 2009, 07:39:28 AM

Also, hypothetical Question: If one person has 4 votes, and two people have 3 votes each, who dies in this scenerio?

Quote

3. If a Majority is not reached before the deadline, the TWO most voted players will be lynched. If there's any ties, ALL players tied at the top will be lynched.

It says "ALL". So all 3 would die... I guess?

Still thinking on the best solution to this... But... if my (first proposed) idea goes right, ##Unvote

@pesco47: gimme a moment, dinner first.

Pesco · « **Reply #43 on:** May 16, 2009, 07:55:25 AM »

FPMH is NOT what you think it is.

LHCling · « **Reply #44 on:** May 16, 2009, 08:39:36 AM »

Quote from: Pesco47 on May 16, 2009, 07:55:25 AM

FPMH is NOT what you think it is.

>_> Now you're making me think about it.

Regardless, before anybody else decides to stack votes on me simply because of what I presume to be from this single line:

Quote

I've excluded myself from the sample (for now).

##Vote BaitySM i.e. a self-vote.

And the best question to address first is, what is better?

To (attempt to; remembering that not everybody might want to follow the scheme) lynch 6~7 people on D1,

or

to (attempt to) lynch only 1~2 people?

or even... ...just a number in between?

Pesco · « **Reply #45 on:** May 16, 2009, 08:50:38 AM »

Wut? Self-voting is not going to get you anything except more votes now.

FPMH: Choose 1
[ ]Fluffy Puffy Marshmallow Hugs
[ ]Furry Petting Much Hotness
[ ]Fail Prod Made Here
[ ]First Post Mind Hax

Your defence inclines me to the ~~2nd~~ 4th option.

No need to speculate how many lynches we'll get. There'll be as many as necessary when we get to deadline.

Pesco · « **Reply #46 on:** May 16, 2009, 09:00:48 AM »

Btw you could have just rolled a d12.

LHCling · « **Reply #47 on:** May 16, 2009, 09:07:14 AM »

Suppose that I want more votes against me. You reminded me about my role. Probability says that I'll end up damaging Town more than helping them if I get lynched on D1 though.

Quote

FPMH: Choose 1
[ ]Fluffy Puffy Marshmallow Hugs
[ ]Furry Petting Much Hotness
[ ]Fail Prod Made Here
[ ]First Post Mind Hax

Your defence inclines me to the ~~2nd~~ 4th option.

So you're simply saying that because of my defensive output on my first post (and completely baseless; it's D1, staying alive is something you want), you're concluding that I'm scum?

---

I don't have a d12 with me ;_;
I'm living on-campus.

LHCling · « **Reply #48 on:** May 16, 2009, 09:15:45 AM »

EBWOP: Yes, the probability that I'd end up for (preliminary, random) lynching was weighted; it's higher to roll a number closer to 7 than it is against the extremities (1,12).

Holy crap why did I not notice that >_>

Pesco · « **Reply #49 on:** May 16, 2009, 09:22:11 AM »

Your self-voting biases me to assume the worst about you (i.e. Wrathie, he's a policy vig). FPMH is initial suspicion that gets confirmed or refuted by your posts that follow on from your very first game post.

Rolling a d12 compared to rolling 2d6 is the range of 1-12 and 2-12. You were excluding 2 players.

Affinity · « **Reply #50 on:** May 16, 2009, 09:33:42 AM »

Baity's reactionary answer to pesco's queries are... not the slightest bit becoming. Also, he seems to thinking that excluding one's self from the random dice roll is scummy (which it isn't), and that self-voting is actually townie (which it isn't); which hints at paranoia. Being this early in the game, I don't think that's valid town-beaviour.

##Unvote
##Vote: BaitySM

Carthrat · « **Reply #51 on:** May 16, 2009, 10:12:37 AM »

Ok, in all seriousness, now.

We probably don't actually want to lynch half the game. Scum's status as an informed minority will give them a better shot than townies at avoiding taking the brunt of such an assault, probably screwing us badly. While it would be theoretically cool to lynch all but one player, that's too unwieldy and probably requires too much coordination outright to work; furthermore, it's easily stuffed.

However we do want to push through two or three targeted lynches while we have the opportunity. Multi-killing is generally good, mmhmm? No disagreement? Extremes, however, are probably bad.

Self-vote is a waste of time, but... Is Baity new to this mafia thing? Yes, it matters.

FinnKaenbyou · « **Reply #52 on:** May 16, 2009, 10:21:23 AM »

Wow, I didn't even get a chance to post before we hit serious business. >_>

Okay, firstly obligatory response to today's Dream Rules.

In short, we're begging for disaster on this setup. The only legitimate way to earn multiple lynches here is for two VERY CLEAR majorities at deadline, otherwise we're giving scum far too many chances to screw things up with a last-minute vote change. The only way anything involving multiple majorities will work is if everyone being lynched is Town, and even if we hit one scum with three lynches, adding the NK we still lose three Townies for one scum. (The odds of us hitting two scum in three lynches on D1 are pretty much zero, before anyone tries to argue otherwise.)

As for the BaitySM debate, the self-vote is just plain dumb, in all honesty. What's sad is that it's DELIBERATE -

Quote

Suppose that I want more votes against me. You reminded me about my role.

...If you're actually a PR, I think I'm going to cry. Don't see what scum could gain from this, though.

More interesting to me is Pesco's misrep of what seems to be a simple misunderstanding of the probabilities of 2d6:

Quote from: Pesco47 on May 16, 2009, 09:22:11 AM

Rolling a d12 compared to rolling 2d6 is the range of 1-12 and 2-12. You were excluding 2 players.

- No, he was excluding one player: Edible (1). Don't even TRY to argue that he should have left the self-vote possibility open.
- In terms of the probability ignorance, realise that this scum plan you're suggesting only works in one highly unlikely situation - the scum players are all near the top or bottom of the list, thus the 2d6 roll will probably (or in one case, definitely) miss them. The odds of this are also pretty small.
- There's also the point that, well, using a 2d6 for a random vote is OBVIOUSLY going to get called out for being stupid. Either the entire scumteam has no idea how probabilities work, or Baity just made a mistake. Indeed, if he'd never said 'I'm using 2d6' his random vote would've received no further thought, so why would he mention it if he knew it was a bad idea?

Feels like Pesco's taking advantage of the new guy, as usual, and he's screwing with words and odds in order to make what looks like a simple mistake metamorphose into a scumtell. Affinity's post of 'facts facts facts Vote Baity' doesn't feel very useful, either, but Pesco still wins out. ##Vote: Pesco47

Carth ninja:

Quote from: Carthrat on May 16, 2009, 10:12:37 AM

Self-vote is a waste of time, but... Is Baity new to this mafia thing? Yes, it matters.

To the best of my knowledge, this is Baity's first proper game of Mafia.

Carthrat · « **Reply #53 on:** May 16, 2009, 10:31:15 AM »

A last-minute vote change remains a really dangerous move for scum to make in general, whether one, two, or three lynches are floating around. I see forcing them to pull that as a bonus, not a flaw. They can screw regular lynches too...

Quote from: Rou

The only way anything involving multiple majorities will work is if everyone being lynched is Town, and even if we hit one scum with three lynches, adding the NK we still lose three Townies for one scum.

that's not a bad deal at this point in the game. >_>

Pesco · « **Reply #54 on:** May 16, 2009, 10:32:34 AM »

I'm sure Baity knew what he was getting himself into. Newbness is no indication for clearing players (ref Edible and FAV).

I see my waifu is suffering from PMS. Read his post, he excluded himself and player 1, which means it's 2 players. More importantly, it's got nothing to do with why he's getting voted now. Being on holiday affects your reading ability it seems

.

Carthrat · « **Reply #55 on:** May 16, 2009, 10:43:16 AM »

I'm not, people pull that shit all the time for no reason, particularly when they're new. Means nothing to me. Still useless, though.

FinnKaenbyou · « **Reply #56 on:** May 16, 2009, 10:45:41 AM »

Quote from: Pesco47 on May 16, 2009, 10:32:34 AM

I'm sure Baity knew what he was getting himself into. Newbness is no indication for clearing players (ref Edible and FAV).

Alright, let me flip the question on its head. If Baity does know what he's doing with this 'plan' you've concocted, explain to me what it's actually meant to do. As far as I see this plan can be defined as 'Okay, one of us votes using a 2d6 and gets caught being an idiot, then selfvotes to confuse Town'. Doesn't sound brilliant to me.

Quote

Read his post, he excluded himself

Okay, you honestly think removing the possibility of voting yourself counts as excluding a player? Please excuse me while I slam my forehead into a wall.

Quote from: Carthrat on May 16, 2009, 10:31:15 AM

that's not a bad deal at this point in the game. >_>

Is it really worth the risk ahead of the safe option of just sticking everyone's votes on two people, giving scum no opening to screw things up?

LHCling · « **Reply #57 on:** May 16, 2009, 10:48:03 AM »

The entire d12 vs. 2d6 is 100% my fault for completely forgetting a fundamental; I forgot about the minimum value completely. Now I fear I've completely jeopardized everything.

Quote from: Affinity on May 16, 2009, 09:33:42 AM

Baity's reactionary answer to pesco's queries are... not the slightest bit becoming. Also, he seems to thinking that excluding one's self from the random dice roll is scummy (which it isn't), and that self-voting is actually townie (which it isn't); which hints at paranoia. Being this early in the game, I don't think that's valid town-beaviour.

Since when did I ever think that voting for myself is townie? Granted, my current play-style is being perceived to be very awkward (probably even; dare I say "foreign"), but I'm trying to work something out.

Quote from: Roukanken on May 16, 2009, 10:21:23 AM

- There's also the point that, well, using a 2d6 for a random vote is OBVIOUSLY going to get called out for being stupid. Either the entire scumteam has no idea how probabilities work, or Baity just made a mistake. Indeed, if he'd never said 'I'm using 2d6' his random vote would've received no further thought, so why would he mention it if he knew it was a bad idea?

...the chance that the entire scumteam is going to fail fundamental probability involving dice would be pretty damn low. 2d6 was the only way I though about reaching "12".

Quote from: Roukanken on May 16, 2009, 10:45:41 AM

Alright, let me flip the question on its head. If Baity does know what he's doing with this 'plan' you've concocted, explain to me what it's actually meant to do. As far as I see this plan can be defined as 'Okay, one of us votes using a 2d6 and gets caught being an idiot, then selfvotes to confuse Town'. Doesn't sound brilliant to me.
Okay, you honestly think removing the possibility of voting yourself counts as excluding a player? Please excuse me while I slam my forehead into a wall.
Is it really worth the risk ahead of the safe option of just sticking everyone's votes on two people, giving scum no opening to screw things up?

I'll answer it; "Anti-bandwagon".

Before I reread over everything to see if I missed any points (which I probably have, seeing as I'm feeling like complete crap here)...

Quote

To the best of my knowledge, this is Baity's first proper game of Mafia.

First here. I've played a few elsewhere. And watched several, but that really doesn't count.

LHCling · « **Reply #58 on:** May 16, 2009, 10:49:20 AM »

EBWOP:

Quote from: BaitySM on May 16, 2009, 10:48:03 AM

Since when did I ever think that voting for myself is townie? Granted, my current play-style is being perceived to be very awkward (probably even; dare I say "foreign"), but I'm trying to work something out. See: below.

Added note in bold.

Carthrat · « **Reply #59 on:** May 16, 2009, 10:52:50 AM »

Rou: What risk? We take a risk every time we make a lynch, this isn't new. Scum have every bit as much an opening to screw things up if we lynch a single person as well. We also have an opportunity to screw scum every time we lynch!

We have a better chance of killing scum, right now, if we pull this out. It's basically.. slightly less than double the chance if we go after two, I'll grant, but the odds are increased significantly and it's actually good for us if scum feel compelled to do something crazy towards deadline to save themselves.

I am actually rereading your stuff, and a bit confused. I'm wanting to lynch 2-3 people. Either's good in my book, not too fussed over which. Are you pro-multilynch, anti-multilynch, or what?