Open 744 - Lovers and Losers [endgame]


Locked
User avatar
volxen
volxen
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
volxen
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 1419
Joined: August 10, 2018

Post Post #591 (isolation #0) » Sun Dec 23, 2018 7:18 pm

Post by volxen »

In post 590, yessiree wrote:The first lynch was supposed to give town grounds for the second, but it didn’t really work well in this case. There wasnt much progress to be made in the 2 remaining vt claims. There SHOULD have been.
We did follow the optimal strategy: lynching strictly from the claimed VT pool. Following that strategy in and of itself gives town a 2/3 chance of winning, we just put our trust in the wrong VT.

If Clemency at least agreed with us on that strategy (even while scumreading us), he would have advocated for lynching LolWagons on day one rather than our slot, since he was convinced that LolWagons was our scum partner. Obviously Bambi would have never agreed to a LolWagons lynch, and Bambi's push for a Michael Scott lynch but refusal to join a LolWagon's lynch would have (hopefully) been a big red flag for Clemency, since Bambi publicly agreed with Clemency's sentiment that the scumteam was Michael Scott/Mcqueen/LolWagons. Clemency could have tested Bambi by switching from his push on us to pushing LolWagons instead (Bambi obviously couldn't commit to this push).

That's what I really don't get. Clemency can scumread us to his heart's content, but he had no reason to reject the optimal strategy of lynching from the claimed VT pool. He should have been pushing for LolWagon's lynch rather than our lynch on day one if he was convinced that the scumteam was Michael Scott/Mcqueen/LolWagons. That alone could have changed the entire course of the game -- if everyone aligned with the town embraced the strategy of lynching from the claimed VT pool, regardless of which players they townread or scumread.

Although in the end we did lynch from the claimed VT pool, I think things really started to go downhill for town when the idea of lynching from the claimed town lover pool was embraced by some townies.

Neither Dong nor Overkill did enough to convince either myself or Auro that we should locktown them. Wagons did an excellent job at coming across as a strategic pro-town leader.
User avatar
volxen
volxen
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
volxen
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 1419
Joined: August 10, 2018

Post Post #606 (isolation #1) » Mon Dec 24, 2018 9:08 am

Post by volxen »

In post 603, Clemency wrote:next time please play town to your win-con
Lynching within the claimed VT pool IS playing to town wincon
. Lynching within the claimed town lover pool is always going to make it more difficult to win as town. It was explained and proven why it is the optimal strategy multiple times and by multiple people (even scum!LolWagons accurately explained why it is the optimal town strategy).

From the get go {Michael Scott, Mcqueen}, {Bambi, Ruby}, {Clemency, Muh} should all have been OFF the lynch table
. Day one should
NOT
have been about whether we should or should not lynch Michael Scott. The entire game should have been devoted to sorting between LolWagons, DongEmpire, and Overkill, but that didn't happen. If everyone would have agreed to that much, then time wouldn't have been wasted on trying to get our slot lynched, and all of the VT's (including LolWagons) would have been more heavily scrutinized than they were.

Way too much of this game was about our Michael Scott slot, and there was not nearly enough analysis of the VT's.
User avatar
volxen
volxen
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
volxen
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 1419
Joined: August 10, 2018

Post Post #610 (isolation #2) » Mon Dec 24, 2018 12:35 pm

Post by volxen »

In post 607, Elsa Jay wrote:This game can be solved 2 ways. Hanging 2 VT claims or 2 Lover sets. Bambi and Clem picked the latter becauce Michael rubbed them the wrong way and tried to never be scumread because he claimed to be a lover, focusing only on the VTs. I don't see the problem there from the town perspective.
From Bambi's
scum perspective
this made complete sense. If she would have succeeded in getting us mislynched on day one, day two would have been a 4:3 town:scum ratio, which means there is no margin for error for town on day two (i.e., all four remaining townies MUST vote scum on day two to win). I don't fault Bambi at all for trying to get us mislynched, it 100% makes sense from a scum perspective, and it was a good play on her part. I'm sure Auro feels the same way -- neither of us fault scum!Bambi for anything that she did in this game.

What doesn't make sense is for a
townie
to strongly push for the strategy of lynching from the claimed town lover pool. As was pointed out many, many, many times during the game, if a VT rather than a town lover pair is mislynched on day two, then there is a 5:3 town:scum ratio on day two. That gives the town that buffer of still being able to win even if one townie votes with scum on day two.

With a 4:3 ratio on day two, 4/4 (100%) of the townies must correctly identify and vote for scum. With a 5:3 ratio on day two, only 4/5 (80%) of the townies must correctly identify and vote for scum (and get that person up to four votes first and wait out the deadline). Objectively speaking, it's easier to reach consensus among 80% of a group than it is to reach consensus among 100% of a group. And that is why, objectively speaking, lynching strictly from the claimed VT pool is the optimal strategy that maximizes towns chances of winning in this setup. Period.

The argument isn't that "town can't win if we lynch 2 claimed town lovers". It's that it's a sub-optimal strategy (I would call it an outright bad strategy) that simply reduces the chances of town winning the game.

Yes, we get it; Clemency was hard scumreading us, and that is why he pushed for our lynch. But he also knew that one of the three claimed VT's had to be scum, and we would have liked to see him put much more emphasis there. He didn't need to townread us to agree with us on the
proven
optimal strategy of lynching strictly from the claimed VT pool.

The irony here is that Auro and I had a bad read on LolWagons, but we favored and stuck with the optimal strategy of lynching within the claimed VT pool. Clemency had a good read on LolWagons, but he favored the sub-optimal strategy of lynching within the claimed town lover pool. If he didn't fight us on the strategy, that means he would have been pushing scum (LolWagons) on day one instead of us.
User avatar
volxen
volxen
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
volxen
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 1419
Joined: August 10, 2018

Post Post #613 (isolation #3) » Mon Dec 24, 2018 5:51 pm

Post by volxen »

In post 612, yessiree wrote:In a 5:3 you’d still need 5 votes to lynch someone meaning all towns need to vote together as well. So it’s still the same whether you lynch from VTs or lovers
In a 5:3 you need five votes to pull off a "proper" lynch with a hammer, yes. But what I was getting at is that with a 5:3 split, you could run into the situation where 4/5 of the townies have correctly identified scum, and 1/5 of the townies is going to be voting WITH scum (because they don't have good reads). So the game then becomes a 4 vs 4 race -- the four townies need to get scum up to four votes before the three scum and the other townie get a townie up to four votes. For example, if day 2 ends with these two wagons in a 5:3:

Scum A (4) - Townie A, Townie B, Townie C, Townie D
Townie A (4) - Scum A, Scum B, Scum C, Townie E

As long as Scum A got up four votes first, scum still gets lynched on day 2 even with one of the townies voting for another townie because of the plurality lynching rule. The four townies simply get scum up to four votes first, and wait out the deadline. But if the ratio is 4:3 on day 2 rather than 5:3, one townie voting for another townie will outright cost town the game (because the three scum will vote for that townie as well and achieve a proper lynch with a hammer).

You still have to win the race to get four votes on scum first, so it's not the ideal strategy unless it's absolutely necessary. Obviously, if you can get all of the townies to vote for scum and achieve a proper lynch with a hammer, that is optimal as opposed to waiting out the deadline for a plurality lynch. But nonetheless, 5:3 gives town that buffer that allows them to still win even with one townie voting for another townie at EOD on day 2. This buffer can never be achieved in a 4:3 though, and that's why having that 5:3 ratio instead of a 4:3 ratio on day 2 is a significant benefit to town that can potentially impact the outcome of the game.

Aside from all of that, a secondary benefit of 5:3 is just the fact that you have that extra townie around on day 2 to help gamesolve, discuss reads with, etc.
User avatar
volxen
volxen
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
volxen
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 1419
Joined: August 10, 2018

Post Post #616 (isolation #4) » Tue Dec 25, 2018 8:52 am

Post by volxen »

Yeah, day 2 was really hard from our POV because of the whole "race to get 4 votes" thing. I legitimately thought that the only way town would ever win on day 2 was to get Overkill up to four votes before either our slot or LolWagon's slot got up to four votes. So it was a double-edged sword in that it was the only way I thought town could win, but at the same time it made it easy for scum to quickhammer. I did not think it would be possible to reach consensus among all five townies, which is why I aggressively tried to get {LolWagons, Ruby, and Mcqueen} to all vote for Overkill at the beginning of day 2. See, the only thing I really felt confident about was LolWagons being town -- that was the biggest mistake Auro and I made in this game. In the thread here Auro and I publicly talked about {Clemency, Muh} being scum a lot, but we actually talked privately in Discord about {Clemency, Muh} vs {Bambi, Ruby} quite a bit. We both felt Bambi's play here was closer to her town meta than Clemency's play was to his town meta, but I never felt 100% certain that Bambi was town either, and I definitely did not feel that anything she did here was outside of her scumrange.

And I actually did catch the "scumslip" from Ruby where he said that he found both our slot and Clemency's slot towny. But I thought it was possible that he legitimately had not read through the thread, and didn't realize that Clemency and our slot were both from two different town lover pairs (and thus we could not both be town from his POV if he were town), or that he simply misunderstood the mechanics in terms of how this game works (i.e., that 2 scum would be fakeclaiming a town lover pair and 1 scum would be fakeclaiming VT).

But on day 2, I was really concerned initially that this situation might have happened in terms of wagons:

LolWagons (4) - {Clemency, Muh, Overkill, Bambi}
Overkill (4) - {Michael Scott, LolWagons, Mcqueen, Ruby}

or

Michael Scott (4) - {Clemency, Muh, Overkill, Bambi}
Overkill (4) - {Michael Scott, LolWagons, Mcqueen, Ruby}

Then Muh voted for Overkill, which was definitely one of the most surprising twists in the entire game. Unfortunately, Muh voting for Overkill did not change my townread of LolWagons. It simply convinced me that the scumteam was {Bambi, Ruby, Overkill} rather than {Clemency, Muh, Overkill}. So I still felt that I needed to keep my vote on Overkill because I was concerned that one of these two wagon situations would happen:

LolWagons (4) - {Bambi, Ruby, Overkill, Clemency}
Overkill (4) - {Michael Scott, LolWagons, Mcqueen, Muh}

or

Michael Scott (4) - {Bambi, Ruby, Overkill, Clemency}
Overkill (4) - {Michael Scott, LolWagons, Mcqueen, Muh}

This was a really fun and interesting game though. Thank you @yessiree for modding. And Merry Christmas everyone! :D
User avatar
volxen
volxen
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
volxen
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 1419
Joined: August 10, 2018

Post Post #621 (isolation #5) » Tue Dec 25, 2018 9:51 pm

Post by volxen »

In post 620, yessiree wrote:
In post 613, volxen wrote:
In post 612, yessiree wrote:In a 5:3 you’d still need 5 votes to lynch someone meaning all towns need to vote together as well. So it’s still the same whether you lynch from VTs or lovers
In a 5:3 you need five votes to pull off a "proper" lynch with a hammer, yes. But what I was getting at is that with a 5:3 split, you could run into the situation where 4/5 of the townies have correctly identified scum, and 1/5 of the townies is going to be voting WITH scum (because they don't have good reads). So the game then becomes a 4 vs 4 race -- the four townies need to get scum up to four votes before the three scum and the other townie get a townie up to four votes. For example, if day 2 ends with these two wagons in a 5:3:

Scum A (4) - Townie A, Townie B, Townie C, Townie D
Townie A (4) - Scum A, Scum B, Scum C, Townie E

As long as Scum A got up four votes first, scum still gets lynched on day 2 even with one of the townies voting for another townie because of the plurality lynching rule. The four townies simply get scum up to four votes first, and wait out the deadline. But if the ratio is 4:3 on day 2 rather than 5:3, one townie voting for another townie will outright cost town the game (because the three scum will vote for that townie as well and achieve a proper lynch with a hammer).

You still have to win the race to get four votes on scum first, so it's not the ideal strategy unless it's absolutely necessary. Obviously, if you can get all of the townies to vote for scum and achieve a proper lynch with a hammer, that is optimal as opposed to waiting out the deadline for a plurality lynch. But nonetheless, 5:3 gives town that buffer that allows them to still win even with one townie voting for another townie at EOD on day 2. This buffer can never be achieved in a 4:3 though, and that's why having that 5:3 ratio instead of a 4:3 ratio on day 2 is a significant benefit to town that can potentially impact the outcome of the game.

Aside from all of that, a secondary benefit of 5:3 is just the fact that you have that extra townie around on day 2 to help gamesolve, discuss reads with, etc.
The scenario you described with racing to 4 votes is certainly possible, but
unlikely


think about it, assuming massclaimed has happened so you have 3 claimed pairs and 3 vts, and you all chose to lynch from the vts. We know for a fact there is one goon in the vts and two goons in the lover pairs.

one VT is lynched.
Now there are 2 VTs and one goon in this pool. So naturally the VT claims will cross vote, that'd be 1:1
Now, the remaining 6 votes are held by 3 pairs of lovers. If we assume the lovers vote together in the same place, you'd never end up with 4 votes on someone, you'd always end up with 3:5 or 5:3. You would most likely end up in the scenario where votes are 3:3 split, and the deciding factor is a town lover pair
I don't think as a general rule it's reasonable to assume that both members of a town lover pair will usually vote the same way. The main difference between a VT and a town lover pair is that the latter is more informed than the former -- they know of one person (their partner) to be 100% confirmed town. That doesn't mean they will be reading
other
slots the same way that their partner is reading them, and thus may vote differently from their partner.

In the case where town follows the strategy of lynching from the claimed VT pool, the two partners may simply disagree on day 2 over which one of the remaining two VT's is scum, and therefore the two partners will each end up voting for a different VT. If Overkill had been the VT scum in this game rather than LolWagons, I think the "race to get 4 votes" scenario that I described in post is very likely to have played out in the manner that I described.
"i agree it was a good that we outed PR volxen early..it's like he suddenly transformed from an ugly duckling into a beautiful(?) swan " - xwing (Newbie 1889: Ice Cream)
User avatar
volxen
volxen
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
volxen
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 1419
Joined: August 10, 2018

Post Post #623 (isolation #6) » Sat Dec 29, 2018 9:36 am

Post by volxen »

Here is a link to the Michael Scott and Mcqueen town lover PT: viewtopic.php?f=90&t=78156
User avatar
volxen
volxen
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
volxen
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 1419
Joined: August 10, 2018

Post Post #626 (isolation #7) » Sat Dec 29, 2018 7:30 pm

Post by volxen »

Yes the setup seems townsided, since town has a straight up 2/3 chance of winning by just lynching two claimed VT's or two claimed town lovers (though I've explained numerous times already why it's much better to strictly lynch VT's only :D)

Unfortunately, we put our trust in the wrong VT, and that's why we lost. Can't win them all, right?
User avatar
volxen
volxen
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
volxen
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 1419
Joined: August 10, 2018

Post Post #628 (isolation #8) » Sat Dec 29, 2018 7:34 pm

Post by volxen »

In post 627, LolWagons wrote:What? I’m always town. Every game. You can always trust me.
I THOUGHT I could trust you man, and then this game happened... :shifty:
User avatar
volxen
volxen
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
volxen
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 1419
Joined: August 10, 2018

Post Post #630 (isolation #9) » Sat Dec 29, 2018 7:42 pm

Post by volxen »

In post 629, Auro wrote:It's not about trusting Lolwagons, lolol.
Between Bambi and Clem we had to choose which was scum. Our wrong choice there led us to eliminate Lolwagons associatively.
I meant our mistake was trusting LolWagons over Overkill and DongEmpire, since in the end we did *finally* lynch from the VT pool.

For me at least, it had nothing to do with Bambi vs Clemency, because regardless of which one of them was scum, I still thought LolWagons was town. That's why I didn't unvote Overkill after Muh voted for him. Because I thought Overkill could have been scum with either Bambi/Ruby or Clemency/Muh.
User avatar
volxen
volxen
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
volxen
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 1419
Joined: August 10, 2018

Post Post #633 (isolation #10) » Sat Dec 29, 2018 7:51 pm

Post by volxen »

In post 631, Auro wrote:I was starting to get paranoid about Lol and wanted to grill 0ver first, however the "race" mechanic meant we had to lay down our vote ASAP so I had to rush it.

If I believed Bambi was scum, I'd not let Lolwagons off so easily, it was my firm belief in Clem being scum that led me to nearly "lock" there.
Yeah the fact that I thought we had to win the "race" really sucked, because it meant we couldn't give Overkill a chance to respond and defend himself.
User avatar
volxen
volxen
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
volxen
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 1419
Joined: August 10, 2018

Post Post #634 (isolation #11) » Sat Dec 29, 2018 7:54 pm

Post by volxen »

In post 632, LolWagons wrote:Honestly I was really worried about Overk1ll coming in the thread and towntelling.

Then I would have had to convince clemency that if he thought I was scum with you two to vote you, which would have been a nightmare and would have sealed your scum read of me.
But logically this wouldn't make sense for town!you to argue for, because if you were town in this game the only thing you could have been 100% certain about was Overkill being scum. So it wouldn't make sense for you to be arguing for lynching a claimed town lover pair after we already lynched a claimed VT on day one. But yes, if you had made that argument we would have been certain of you being scum, and then we could have appealed to Clemency and Muh to vote for you.
User avatar
volxen
volxen
Mafia Scum
User avatar
User avatar
volxen
Mafia Scum
Mafia Scum
Posts: 1419
Joined: August 10, 2018

Post Post #635 (isolation #12) » Sat Dec 29, 2018 7:57 pm

Post by volxen »

@Auro, remind me again why you thought Overkill could be scum only with {Clemency, Muh} but not with {Bambi, Ruby}?
Locked

Return to “Completed Open Games”