Why is scum hider not normal?

[kuribo]

You seem to be arguing that towns are stupid, and because towns are stupid, they should throw out innocent results they don't like.

What I'm saying is you can't quantify stupidity of the players in a percentage. Blindly following an unconfirmed innocent result is not good play, and no amount of percentages will change the psychology of that.

[kuribo]

And I'm saying that percentages are only relevant in a random environment.

...it is a random environment...

So you play by randomly voting and randomly taking your night actions while disregarding every post in the game?

It's not a random environment, you have (for example) 13 players who are acting in a non-random fashion to fulfil an agenda.

[Antihero]

i tmight not be EXACTLY random, but yeah pretty close

[Antihero]

It's not a random environment, you have (for example) 13 players who are acting in a non-random fashion to fulfil an agenda.

only 3 of them know what that agenda is

so yeah... close to random

[kuribo]

Towns agenda is to eliminate an unknown subset of players. They still have an agenda and are making their choices accordingly.

You don't say "I'm voting Antihero because rand(6)," you say "I'm voting antihero because he's scummy and these are the reasons I think that."

Calling Mafia a game of math disregards that people are not machines, they are emotional beings who will apply any number of factors their gameplay, usually resulting in a suboptimal choice.

[kuribo]

If a player used RNG to determine all of his actions, that's bannable, right? So why is it assumed that application of night actions or lynches is "random" or "close to random?"

Why even play the game at all if it's a game of math? Just simulate all day. The reason using math to find the "optimal choices" doesn't work in reality is because 100% of the time, someone will not play optimally.

[Zulfy]

What if if someone doesn't play optimally, they get modkilled.

[kuribo]

Then you wouldn't be able to run a game to completion.

[RadiantCowbells]

Well yes you would.

One faction would get modkilled before the other one after all.

[BROseidon]

You seem to be arguing that towns are stupid, and because towns are stupid, they should throw out innocent results they don't like.

What I'm saying is you can't quantify stupidity of the players in a percentage. Blindly following an unconfirmed innocent result is not good play, and no amount of percentages will change the psychology of that.

Yeah, but there's plenty of shit that you can quantify, and you can't throw out the mathematical elements of the game out the window.

[Antihero]

You don't say "I'm voting Antihero because rand(6)," you say "I'm voting antihero because he's scummy and these are the reasons I think that."

for most ppl, "reasons" might as well be "rand(6)"

[kuribo]

Yeah, but there's plenty of shit that you can quantify, and you can't throw out the mathematical elements of the game out the window.

I didn't say that, but it is primarily a game of psychology unless you can prove that players will always act in a reasonable or at least an expected manner.

[BROseidon]

Yeah, but there's plenty of shit that you can quantify, and you can't throw out the mathematical elements of the game out the window.

I didn't say that, but it is primarily a game of psychology unless you can prove that players will always act in a reasonable or at least an expected manner.

You're acting like probability isn't a form of math.

[BROseidon]

You don't say "I'm voting Antihero because rand(6)," you say "I'm voting antihero because he's scummy and these are the reasons I think that."

for most ppl, "reasons" might as well be "rand(6)"

On average, "reasons" are equivalent to "rand(n)"

[kuribo]

You're acting like probability isn't a form of math.

And you act as if reacting to the game state isn't a form of psychology. Whenever you assume optimum play from every player, you've started with a fallacy.

The point is, as I've said, if you're completely relying on an UNKNOWN to determine a player's alignment concretely, you've committed a fallacy.

Is your cop's sanity assured? Are you sure there isn't a Godfather? If the answer is no, you've introduced an unknown variable into your equations. If you rely on math to solve this game state, you will lose. Psychology, studying the godfather's votes, his interactions, that is the way to corner him.

[kuribo]

On average, "reasons" are equivalent to "rand(n)"

sorry, but this is the most patently ridiculous thing I've ever read on this site, and I used to play with Idiotking.

[Antihero]

Psychology, studying the godfather's votes, his interactions, that is the way to corner him.

if i'm a cop, i'm going to trust my results over my subjective opinion of voting and interactions.

and i'll make the right call almost every time.

[kuribo]

Not if your role PM doesn't say you're sane and doubly not if there is even a possibility of a Godfather.

You're "trusting your results" when they could very easily be wrong within the parameters of the game.

[Antihero]

well yeah, but there's really no way to intelligently speculate on that.

outside of just ignoring your results altogether and really who does that?

[Antihero]

On average, "reasons" are equivalent to "rand(n)"

sorry, but this is the most patently ridiculous thing I've ever read on this site, and I used to play with Idiotking.

...not really...

i mean... what people THINK are good scumtells are generally just not that great and neither is our intuition.

[kuribo]

well yeah, but there's really no way to intelligently speculate on that.

outside of just ignoring your results altogether and really who does that?

In a closed setup, you're a complete idiot if you don't assume there isn't a godfather.

[BROseidon]

Is your cop's sanity assured? Are you sure there isn't a Godfather? If the answer is no, you've introduced an unknown variable into your equations. If you rely on math to solve this game state, you will lose. Psychology, studying the godfather's votes, his interactions, that is the way to corner him.

Except there's literally math that applies here. Even in a "you know there's a godfather" state, investigating the godfather makes that lynch super suboptimal until like 3p or maybe 5p lylo.

[BROseidon]

Psychology, studying the godfather's votes, his interactions, that is the way to corner him.

if i'm a cop, i'm going to trust my results over my subjective opinion of voting and interactions.

and i'll make the right call almost every time.

Yeah this.

[kuribo]

On average, "reasons" are equivalent to "rand(n)"

sorry, but this is the most patently ridiculous thing I've ever read on this site, and I used to play with Idiotking.

...not really...

i mean... what people THINK are good scumtells are generally just not that great and neither is our intuition.

If you're still relying on "scumtells," I don't know what to tell you. Again, if psychology is irrelevant, then why play at all? Or better yet: How come GreyICE has lynched me, but you can't, for example? Mathematically, everyone on the site has an equal chance of getting me lynched. In reality, it takes a the right personality--- and indeed, the right gamestate--- to bring that about. The personalities and opinions of the other players, the mood of the other players, the mood of myself, the play of GreyICE, all of these play a bigger part than "math." If you were to ask mastin, (or even BRO), the "chances" of getting me lynched are so small as to be completely out of the question. But it has happened. Not because of math--- it's never the "optimal" play--- but because the psychology of the game aligned to it.

[kuribo]

Except there's literally math that applies here. Even in a "you know there's a godfather" state, investigating the godfather makes that lynch super suboptimal until like 3p or maybe 5p lylo.

I never said you SHOULD lynch the godfather before LYLO. I said the role is not inherently "swingy" just because people choose to fail to account for it. It's a choice they make.