Open 703: Masons and Mafia Town Win!

[humaneatingmonkey]

However, if I think that the wagon I'm on is town-driven and righteous, why the fuck would I back off?

[havingfitz]

If the people I read as town unvote, I will. And so should you.

I wouldn't support an un-cc'd mason wagon.

[humaneatingmonkey]

If a mason claims, he's dead anyway.

I think your POV of this game is coming from a different win-con but I'm not sure yet.

[humaneatingmonkey]

VOTE: havingfitz

I'm probably right.

[TwoInAMillion]

Un-cc'd masons can still be scum.

[havingfitz]

If a mason claims, he's dead anyway.

I think your POV of this game is coming from a different win-con but I'm not sure yet.

hem...

Normally a fake claim would come from scum under duress. A fakemasonclaimingscum might expect to survive unless/until a real mason decided to cc. Which I would argue...a mason should claim for the 1 for 1 exchange of scum and mason which imo results in advantage town.

Enter Gamma's suggestion...VTs should claim mason. This puts the real masons into the quandary of deciding whether a fake claim is from a VT or scum. Masons don't know which it is. They can't discuss amongst themselves because there are no PTs per the mod. Do they cc to get into a 1v1 potentially with a VT? Do they "just wagon that shit" and possibly lynch a VT? All the while helping scum narrow in on them. Under Gamma's suggestion masons should be more likely to not CC and should be LESS likely to "wagon that shit."

How is encouraging VTs to fakeclaim going to help town if it could either result in masons unnecessarily claiming OR provide an umbrella of uncertainty for scum to possibly claim mason and get further in the game?

I see no advantage to encouraging VTs to claim mason (to trick scum into shooting them) when at the same time it opens up the possibility of scum safely fakeclaiming mason to save their ass.

What Gamma's suggestion has also done imo is made a situation where a real mason might feel the need to claim less valid. Under Gamma's suggestion why should town suspect of a player believe a real mason claim?

I'm open to being convinced otherwise but I do not see any value atp in suggesting VTs should fake claim. It's not going to entice scum to shoot said mason claimer (unless scum are idiots) and it only adds fogs up the claim for town.

So please elaborate on how my thought process is off and how my wincon pov is different from yours?

[havingfitz]

Un-cc'd masons can still be scum.

Possibly....but I'm never voting an un-cc'd mason claim.

[TwoInAMillion]

I'm confused as to why scum would claim a partner that would be CCd.

[Almost50]

That's it. I'm never gonna vote fitz ever in this game.

[CommKnight]

Since you guys don't seem to understand the set-up fully and already fucked one plan completely, let's get this out onto the table.

There are NO night kills. Masons and Mafia cannot talk with each other. They may leave hints in some of their posts that the other members of their team will be more observant of.

We can actually force the mafia's hand. Pick one person to be hammer and pick two people to be at L1. If one or both are scum, they'll be forced to use their daykill attempt or completely risk being lynched without attempting one.

We ensure this method works because anyone who steps outside of two people to put at L1 is immediately lynched the next day, no waiting period, no time for scum to decide to attempt their daykills to kill masons, they get lynched for mishammering.

Any objections?

[jzhenson93]

Since you guys don't seem to understand the set-up fully and already fucked one plan completely, let's get this out onto the table.

There are NO night kills. Masons and Mafia cannot talk with each other. They may leave hints in some of their posts that the other members of their team will be more observant of.

We can actually force the mafia's hand. Pick one person to be hammer and pick two people to be at L1. If one or both are scum, they'll be forced to use their daykill attempt or completely risk being lynched without attempting one.

We ensure this method works because anyone who steps outside of two people to put at L1 is immediately lynched the next day, no waiting period, no time for scum to decide to attempt their daykills to kill masons, they get lynched for mishammering.

Any objections?

I like this thought process, but I'm not sure it's completely foolproof. It could lead us to "clear" people undeservedly (like if we happen to put two scum at L-1, or scum uses the hammer to bus).

[Almost50]

Since you guys don't seem to understand the set-up fully and already fucked one plan completely, let's get this out onto the table.

There are NO night kills. Masons and Mafia cannot talk with each other. They may leave hints in some of their posts that the other members of their team will be more observant of.

We can actually force the mafia's hand. Pick one person to be hammer and pick two people to be at L1. If one or both are scum, they'll be forced to use their daykill attempt or completely risk being lynched without attempting one.

We ensure this method works because anyone who steps outside of two people to put at L1 is immediately lynched the next day, no waiting period, no time for scum to decide to attempt their daykills to kill masons, they get lynched for mishammering.

Any objections?

Let me tell you what I did understand (and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong):

1- You want to run 2 random players up to L-1
2- You want to pick a random player to be the one to decide between the two
3- You think that will force the scum of the two (or both if they're both scum) to shoot

Hmmm... this looks like a good plan on face value, but I need to take my time thinking about the probabilities.. like what if both players we wagon are Town? And what if the hammerer we choose is Scum?

[TwoInAMillion]

I don't see how this will force scum to do anything. There is a 30% chance of any given player being scum, so if my math is correct a 60% chance of any two players having one scum in it. That means there is a 40% chance of both players being town. There is a chance this could be successful but there is also a chance it might not be. I'd rather have a better than 60% chance of winning.

[Almost50]

OK, so if I had to do the picks myself... wagon Comm & Jz and have 2InAMill be hammerer.

Any objections?

[Almost50]

^That is judging by responses to Comm's plan, btw.

[havingfitz]

I'm not a fan of the Comm plan.

No guarantees both people brought to L-1 will be scum. And as long as one (or both) of them aren't scum...the potential exists for the person hammering (regardless of their alignment) picking the wrong wagon to hammer.

What happens if one of the L-1 wagons is town and the hammerer mislynches? Are they held accountable for the mislynch? Does the person who wasn't hammered get paired up again the next day?

If one of the pair put to L-1 is a mason do they reveal so?

I'm all for figuring out ways to find scum that take the guesswork out of things but I'm not seeing how this is a good plan.

Also...odds of picking both scum for the pair are 4/13 * 1/4. I.e. 4/52 OR 1/13. So just under 8% odds.

I'm heading out for holiday stuff and will be

v/LA until Monday.

Will chime in if/when I get the opportunity.

[MawhrinSkel]

I don't get the plan, if we just pick 2 random people aren't the odds against us?

[Almost50]

That's why I suggested Comm to be one of the two wagons

Comm's plan had me PMing the mod for clarification, as Comm stating "they'll be forced to use their daykill attempt or completely risk being lynched without attempting one." had me wondering if I misunderstood and the goons each were 1-shot. (otherwise "risk being lynched without attempting one" makes no sense).

The response I got confirms any goon can shoot any number of times throughout the game (provided -of course- they're not shooting a VT), so Scum can strategically sacrifice 3 goons in order to identify the Masons and the one surviving goon could still win the game for them.

As such, the Comm plan becomes obviously flawed and is indeed an attempt to identify "who's willing to vote whom".

VOTE: CommKnight

[Almost50]

Let's all wagon Comm and :force him to shoot or risk bla bla bla"

[MawhrinSkel]

I also don't get how fake claiming helps, masons can't CC or they will get killed, so any scum can also fake claim mason and wont be CC so I have no idea what the point of this is.

[MawhrinSkel]

@almost50 while I agree it was a stupid plan wouldn't the goons know that they aren't 1 shot from their role PM, and thus wouldn't make such a statement to me this makes me more likely to think comm is a townie

[TwoInAMillion]

the odds improve as townies are lynched but that's not a winning game plan.

[Gamma Emerald]

11 is one of my favorite numbers

VOTE: havingfitz

VOTE: Hongzi

Get off the hero that won the previous game for the town (as in the last game we played together, not the same setup)

VOTE: Gamma Emerald
Didn't like post 21. Encouraging town to fakeclaim enables the option of scum claiming mason and not getting cc'd as real masons won't know if fakeclaims are town or scum.

I was just spitballing ideas pal. Probably wasn't the best idea in hindsight.

[Gamma Emerald]

That's it. I'm never gonna vote fitz ever in this game.

Why?

[jzhenson93]

the odds improve as townies are lynched but that's not a winning game plan.

That would also improve the odds of scum shooting a mason.

Honestly, as much as having some kind of algorithm to approaching the game would be helpful, I'm not sure that there are any possible plans that would give us a higher probability of winning other than good old fashioned scumhunting. Taking the guesswork out of the game like that greatly reduces the amount of content in thread to draw reads from, allowing scum to hide behind "following the plan."