Geriatric Ruleset Discussion Thread

[Mathdino]

do you guys wanna know what the single most important aspect of winning scumgames is?

convincing everyone to run and join games with the geriatric ruleset.

[Ellibereth]

lmao full circle
gj

[RadiantCowbells]

You are free to make that leap. I am not particularly compelled as of right now. They might matter if the meta got to a point of hyper sophisticated tools.
I think that if it gets to that point, that most people are consistently using tools to help their scumhunting, it'll kill mafia. I've been slow about it but I am planning to push for a large scale ban on such tools.
To me it's the same as separating TAS from normal playthroughs of video games and such, or not allowing people to use bots to play chess for them.

[RadiantCowbells]

do you guys wanna know what the single most important aspect of winning scumgames is?

convincing everyone to run and join games with the geriatric ruleset.

[Mathdino]

can't lose scumgames if towns are incapable of winning

[RadiantCowbells]

It takes a bare minimum of scum competency to win ~80% of your scum games.

[Ellibereth]

You are free to make that leap. I am not particularly compelled as of right now. They might matter if the meta got to a point of hyper sophisticated tools.
I think that if it gets to that point, that most people are consistently using tools to help their scumhunting, it'll kill mafia. I've been slow about it but I am planning to push for a large scale ban on such tools.
To me it's the same as separating TAS from normal playthroughs of video games and such, or not allowing people to use bots to play chess for them.

Computers are allowed in correspondence chess which is much more apt comparison timeline wise to mafia.

[Mulch]

do you guys wanna know what the single most important aspect of winning scumgames is?

convincing everyone to run and join games with the geriatric ruleset.

[Ellibereth]

Anyway what I don't think you're realizing is that the majority of work doesn't have to happen during a game.

Analyzing chess games with a computer IN BETWEEN GAMES isn't banned in any setting.

[RadiantCowbells]

Unless the rules have changed in recent years, that's a pretty vast misrepresentation.

Anyway what I don't think you're realizing is that the majority of work doesn't have to happen in a game.

Analyzing chess games with a computer IN BETWEEN GAMES isn't banned in any setting.

This is true but the difference between static and dynamic resources is not a one to one equivalency with mafia.

[Ellibereth]

Uh idk how it's a vast misinterpretation.
Computers are generally allowed for correspondence chess time controls and banned for classical and shorter time controls.
Games for the former case last a month or two on average, games for the latter last from minutes to hours.

[Ellibereth]

Anyway what I don't think you're realizing is that the majority of work doesn't have to happen in a game.

Analyzing chess games with a computer IN BETWEEN GAMES isn't banned in any setting.

This is true but the difference between static and dynamic resources is not a one to one equivalency with mafia.

I have no idea what you're saying here.

My points is you can't ban someone from doing research with whatever resources they see fit with on publically available information when they're not competing in that setting at the time of research.

[RadiantCowbells]

With regards to the less important argument: my understanding is that the general consensus is that anything based on midgame information (dynamic) is generally banned, anything that is not (static) is allowed.

I don't think it's a 1-1 equivalency here. And... you can ban someone from doing basically anything if you think it's the correct decision for whatever reason.

[Ellibereth]

Is this dynamic/static stuff with regards to chess?
The norm for what is and isn't allowed in terms of assistance is exactly what I said in 110.

And have fun arguing for a ban on research between games.

I'm not allowed to ask players to help me during a game with said game.
I AM allowed to get a team of as many people I want to help me when I'm not in one. Heck, the way the rules are now I think I'm allowed to get a team of as many people to help me research anyone not involved with the game I'm playing.

Keep in mind you don't even need an account or to have ever played mafia to do effective research.

[RadiantCowbells]

You are absolutely allowed to do all of those things: I am arguing specifically for a ban on using a computer to help you do those things.

Every other form of research is gated in a way that this isn't.

[Ellibereth]

I mean I don't think you'll succesfully argue for a ban on how preparation can be done when not in game, and let's not even discuss enforcing, but good luck trying.

[RadiantCowbells]

Enforcing any rule on this site is virtually impossible. If I personally wanted to cheat in a mafia game I would find it extremely easy to do so. Whether by convincing people to cheat with me or by multiaccounting.
Mafia thrives on the honor system.

That said I do have a few specific ideas of how to enforce it but I will probably not be the one to do that because I've had virtually no participation in MS coding up to now.

[Ellibereth]

Also in terms of being "gated", you realize hiring a bunch of people, paying them minimum wage or mechanical-turk style payments, and assigning them various concrete things to analyze is already more than enough to have excellent results by any standards yeah.

[Creature]

Love the roasting.

[RadiantCowbells]

Also in terms of being "gated", you realize hiring a bunch of people, paying them minimum wage or mechanical-turk style payments, and assigning them various concrete things to analyze is already more than enough to have excellent results by any standards yeah.

Absolutely this would have basically the same level of success. But this game thrives off of people

not doing that

. And I don't think it would be difficult to convince the mods to ban anyone who did this.

[Creature]

Still think the idea of a posting limit is pretty demotivating (and also the idea of being shouted at for having an above average posting).

[RadiantCowbells]

At any point in say, 2015 when I had a literal 100% winrate the entire site could have made a PT and hard analyzed my meta and come up with something. That didn't happen.
Neither did anyone paying people minimum wage. Or whatever. Actually everyone making a PT would be amusing and interesting AF.

The tool thing will keep coming up in a way that those other things don't.

[Creature]

I can see geriatric working if the mod selectively chooses inned players they think will make the game enjoyable.

[Mathdino]

I can see geriatric working if the mod selectively chooses inned players they think will make the game enjoyable.

there are a lot of players that you think will make the game enjoyable who come back after a couple years

and everyone's like holy shit [x] is back, this is gonna be TIGHT

and more people join the game in anticipation

and then they all flake/lurk/don't put their heart in it, because they remember that they didn't quit mafia because of spamposters

they quit mafia because they found better things to do with their time.

[Ellibereth]

Also in terms of being "gated", you realize hiring a bunch of people, paying them minimum wage or mechanical-turk style payments, and assigning them various concrete things to analyze is already more than enough to have excellent results by any standards yeah.

Absolutely this would have basically the same level of success. But this game thrives off of people

not doing that

. And I don't think it would be difficult to convince the mods to ban anyone who did this.

I fundamentally disagree. More people devoting more resources to doing well is more likely to make something thrive. If anything creating an economy in this game would be a good thing.

And I also think it would be very difficult to get said example banned - it's no different than a team of seconds helping someone/each other prepare for anything.