Dwarven Fortress... MAFIA!! (concluded)

[Pra]

I'm going to be quite busy for the next few days (till probably late Monday or Tuesday), so I want to get as much discussion in today as I can.

[DisgruntledGoat]

Eek, I dislike the wide spread use of previous mafia games. One, because we really don't know the context of it (well, the ones that didn't participate) and it will be damn hard for us to find said context because the thread its from is so damn long. It makes it hard then for me to weight correctly the facts being presented etc. If this is just gonna become a game based on previous games then wheres the fun of that for us newbies. Of course I can stop you from using past games it just means I won't really be swayed one way or another by a quote from another game.

[DisgruntledGoat]

EDIT to my last post. It should read

Of course I can't stop you... not of course I can. :S

[Gary88]

theres a no PM rule on the game but does that go for goblins? i know they know each others identity but if they can PM it means they can work together on strategies whereas if they cant it means they are a bit blind, although they still know who not to vote for

[Pra]

Yup Goblins can PM and contact through MSN. Also, if there are townie/Dwarf roles that can contact each other though PM and MSN or whatnot, for instance there could be two Masons who know of each other as good Townies.

[Pra]

Edit the townies that can talk to each other have to be assigned this role first.

[Gary88]

right well that could be helpful, i'm not going to elaborate but hopefully some of you may have gathered why i think its helpful for the dwarves that the goblins can PM each other.

this really isnt that sly and the goblins can work it out but meh, worth a try.

i'm off for a run but i'll be back in about 30 mins

[Pra]

This is just a thought for now.

I'd like to reexamine Pann's posting. Being an experienced mafia player has an advantage and a drawback, the advantages are always that you have more experience, but the drawback will be that people will always compare your posting habits to previous ones.

First let me just type out a few thoughts:

1.) When I accused Pann of being a little too quiet about Mim's system (something that I thought he'd naturally go after), he replied:

Mainly because I'm puzzled to the core by this system. If we were to randomly pick a victim, a bandwagon is as good a way as any, as it at least allows blame and timing to be analysed. This tries some kind of randomisation process where the randomising isn't publicly verifiable.

Seamus in particular would know of my penchant for public discussion, having vehemently argued this point in his Capo game. Even when I looked at random voting in Kung Fu Mafia, I suggested a system whereby people could verify each other, with any discrepancies easily noted.

If Mim wants to try out a system with a host, he needs to devise a system whose host isn't Mim, but is randomly chosen, or shared so we can see the process for ourselves.

The only thing I can say, is that this is a very convenient yet somewhat questionable explanation. Why would you respond to someone accusing you of being too quiet by saying you were puzzled by a system, when others who were puzzled directly asked the questions to Mim? It doesn't follow that if you were puzzled about the "core of a system" you'd try and keep it to yourself, now does it?

Plus, he was the first to pounce on Rhinosaur.

Pulling the same trick as did Sir Dinadan in the first game. It's in the town's interest to talk, it's in the mafia's interest to silence talk. Attempting to cast suspicion on others for talking, partly to try and get them lynched, partly to intimidate others into shutting up, is a mafia tactic. If others need an explanation for this, feel free to ask, but players from the previous Mafia will know the reasoning.

Unvote: Gary88
Vote: Rhinosaur

There isn't that much to go on, but I just find that he's keeping to quiet without leveling charges with actual evidence in the posts. This quietness is disconcerting to me.

Food for thought?

[sapi]

So more or less the things you accuse me of you yourself are guilty of? Maybe we both are goblins?



First: LOL at the meatball thing. Hilarious .

Second, look at the full post Chandra quoted from. He was wrongly accused of being scum by a paranoiac Pann (who removed his vote from the REAL scum to vote wrongly for Chandra).

Some interesting developments here, it's fair to say.

I won't have the chance to do that much analysis today, as I've been busy yesterday and will be today with work; but for now my preliminary vote is on Rhinosaur; while it's fine to use posting styles and general analysis from older games as examples in a new one, to quote the mistakes of a person in that game and use it for proof is not only completely irrelevant (as it's the process that is important) but smells like a way to discredit pann's analysis here.

[Pra]

Pann has said that he's been quiet in some former games of his, so this is a valid deflection, but the logical inconsistency or not voicing an opinion when Mim posted a questionable random selection process, and using the 'puzzlement' said method as an excuse to be quiet is interesting.

[pannonian]

Eek, I dislike the wide spread use of previous mafia games. One, because we really don't know the context of it (well, the ones that didn't participate) and it will be damn hard for us to find said context because the thread its from is so damn long. It makes it hard then for me to weight correctly the facts being presented etc. If this is just gonna become a game based on previous games then wheres the fun of that for us newbies. Of course I can stop you from using past games it just means I won't really be swayed one way or another by a quote from another game.

That's why I asked earlier if anyone wanted a fuller explanation of my reasoning. References to earlier games are used, perhaps overused in Chandra's case, as shorthand for general principles. If anyone is unfamiliar with these principles, I am happy to explain in more detail, from start to end. After all, the general aim is to get people hooked on playing Mafia, and helpful explanations help people to get immersed.

right well that could be helpful, i'm not going to elaborate but hopefully some of you may have gathered why i think its helpful for the dwarves that the goblins can PM each other.

this really isnt that sly and the goblins can work it out but meh, worth a try.

i'm off for a run but i'll be back in about 30 mins

A chap called Kommodus caught a mafioso with this method in the Org's Mafia 4. It involves looking at a poster's profile and seeing what he's doing. In the Org, this method even reveals whom he's replying to if he's replying to a PM he's received. Kommodus wrote a program to check everyone's profile every so often, and the patterns caught an unsuspecting mafioso (the other having been lynched, purely by accident, the round before). As a result, it is now general practice for Org Mafia players to use invisible mode, and Seamus Fermanagh even specifies this in his Capo games.

[Pra]

Edit: Does anyone else think this could be a somewhat 'convenient', but questionable explanation to be quiet on Pann's part?

Although, since Pann's accused Rhinosaur, it could be a one or the other situation.

[sapi]

Gah - Azad had to post just then

The only thing I can say, is that this is a very convenient yet somewhat questionable explanation. Why would you respond to someone accusing you of being too quiet by saying you were puzzled by a system, when others who were puzzled directly asked the questions to Mim? It doesn't follow that if you were puzzled about the "core of a system" you'd try and keep it to yourself, now does it?

While you may have a point there; I think the question that we do need to be asking is why Mim's system really was such a bad thing.

People have been rushing to criticise it with general issues of puzzlement, but in my reading I'm yet to see a fully coherent argument for avoiding randomisation, or indeed for sticking to a system that gives the mafia at least two votes, maybe three; definitely enough to turn a casual pressure bandwagon into an instant lynch under this system.

I'm not saying that the voting system is a bad thing; I'm just saying that maybe we're discounting the presence of the mafia in it, and will need to be very careful not to apply (x - m) votes, where X is the lynch number and M is the number of mafia remaining...

[DisgruntledGoat]

That's why I asked earlier if anyone wanted a fuller explanation of my reasoning. References to earlier games are used, perhaps overused in Chandra's case, as shorthand for general principles. If anyone is unfamiliar with these principles, I am happy to explain in more detail, from start to end. After all, the general aim is to get people hooked on playing Mafia, and helpful explanations help people to get immersed.

If you don't mind it would be helpful. I've never actually played via a forum.

A chap called Kommodus caught a mafioso with this method in the Org's Mafia 4. It involves looking at a poster's profile and seeing what he's doing. In the Org, this method even reveals whom he's replying to if he's replying to a PM he's received. Kommodus wrote a program to check everyone's profile every so often, and the patterns caught an unsuspecting mafioso (the other having been lynched, purely by accident, the round before). As a result, it is now general practice for Org Mafia players to use invisible mode, and Seamus Fermanagh even specifies this in his Capo games.

Can't do that here though, as the forum doesn't tell you who is pming who. Just that what they are doing.

[Pra]

A chap called Kommodus caught a mafioso with this method in the Org's Mafia 4. It involves looking at a poster's profile and seeing what he's doing. In the Org, this method even reveals whom he's replying to if he's replying to a PM he's received. Kommodus wrote a program to check everyone's profile every so often, and the patterns caught an unsuspecting mafioso (the other having been lynched, purely by accident, the round before). As a result, it is now general practice for Org Mafia players to use invisible mode, and Seamus Fermanagh even specifies this in his Capo games

Wow that's clever, I didn't catch onto that as a strategy at all.

[sapi]

A chap called Kommodus caught a mafioso with this method in the Org's Mafia 4. It involves looking at a poster's profile and seeing what he's doing. In the Org, this method even reveals whom he's replying to if he's replying to a PM he's received. Kommodus wrote a program to check everyone's profile every so often, and the patterns caught an unsuspecting mafioso (the other having been lynched, purely by accident, the round before). As a result, it is now general practice for Org Mafia players to use invisible mode, and Seamus Fermanagh even specifies this in his Capo games.

I think even Kommo has agreed that that technique is just a little bit cheap; we should be relying on analysis, not checking of people's profiles

Can't do that here though, as the forum doesn't tell you who is pming who. Just that what they are doing.

Well, now that you mention it....

[Pra]

Gah - Azad had to post just then

While you may have a point there; I think the question that we do need to be asking is why Mim's system really was such a bad thing.

People have been rushing to criticise it with general issues of puzzlement, but in my reading I'm yet to see a fully coherent argument for avoiding randomisation, or indeed for sticking to a system that gives the mafia at least two votes, maybe three; definitely enough to turn a casual pressure bandwagon into an instant lynch under this system.

I'm not saying that the voting system is a bad thing; I'm just saying that maybe we're discounting the presence of the mafia in it, and will need to be very careful not to apply (x - m) votes, where X is the lynch number and M is the number of mafia remaining...

Hmm, well good point, I was just trying to bring something to light, food for thought. Definitely, I find Rhinosaur more suspicious than Pann, but Pann's behaviour is a tad bit different.


Gary88 2 (Ferrets, DisgruntledGoat)
Pann 1 (Seamus)
Rhinosaur 2 (Pann, Sapi)

[sapi]

Hmm, well good point, I was just trying to bring something to light, food for thought. Definitely, I find Rhinosaur more suspicious than Pann, but Pann's behaviour is a tad bit different.

True. If we are to buy his explanation of 'gathering information' for now, then we'll have to remember to keep an eye on him in future rounds, to see if he does in fact come out of his shell.

[Gary88]

A chap called Kommodus caught a mafioso with this method in the Org's Mafia 4. It involves looking at a poster's profile and seeing what he's doing. In the Org, this method even reveals whom he's replying to if he's replying to a PM he's received. Kommodus wrote a program to check everyone's profile every so often, and the patterns caught an unsuspecting mafioso (the other having been lynched, purely by accident, the round before). As a result, it is now general practice for Org Mafia players to use invisible mode, and Seamus Fermanagh even specifies this in his Capo games.

wow, thats sneaky, its clever but unfair. not really in the spirit of the game. its also not what i was getting at

[pannonian]

If you don't mind it would be helpful. I've never actually played via a forum.

The mafia likes silence theory is based on the fact that mafiosi know who each other are, but townies are completely in the dark about everything. Therefore the mafia can plan and place votes on convenient persons at convenient times, but townsfolk have to cast around for evidence. Without considering special townie roles, the only way for the town to find evidence is to force discussion and look for behavioural patterns in the discussion. Since this is the best town strategy, the mafia won't like this and will seek to impede it if possible. The ideal mafia round would be a bandwagon on a townie with no discussion at all, minimising their footprint and allowing them to amass votes on the bandwagon without arousing suspicion.

Those are the basic strategies of town and mafia. Of course, in an actual game, experienced mafia will know about this and seek to obfuscate matters. Evariste did this skilfully in the previous Mafia game, when he actively voted for his fellow mafiosi to disassociate himself from them and hopefully leave him free of suspicion (mafia and town alike don't need to survive to win, all they need to do is ensure their team wins). But if the discussion is intense enough, behavioural patterns will show up under pressure, for those who are able to see them.

I think even Kommo has agreed that that technique is just a little bit cheap; we should be relying on analysis, not checking of people's profiles

Well, now that you mention it....

It doesn't matter, we found a way around it even without invisible mode anyway. Open a reply with quote window and a normal send new message window, copy the quote into the send new message window, and finally enter the name of the person you're PMing. The aim is to minimise the amount of time you spend on the reply window, since the foreground window is the one that shows in the profile. The solution was necessary because Sasaki, as moderator, can see players even with invisible mode on, and no-one with any sense trusts Sasaki (who is prone to foul play even in Battle Royale).