NY 170: Georgetown II (Game Over)

[Thesp]

I'm all for short posts - I appreciate brevity! Long walls can be detrimental to a game. However, sometimes single emoticons for a response don't bring clarity the way a single sentence could.

[Thor665]

I'm all for short posts - I appreciate brevity! Long walls can be detrimental to a game. However, sometimes single emoticons for a response don't bring clarity the way a single sentence could.

[Thesp]

I'm all for short posts - I appreciate brevity! Long walls can be detrimental to a game. However, sometimes single emoticons for a response don't bring clarity the way a single sentence could.

[The Fonz]

I've got to side with Huntress on the replacement/modkill issue. There are no good answers (especially in a game this insanely long) when you can't get a replacement after two weeks of actively searching, even offering to cross-replace. (The only reason I replaced in was to help the mod in another game I was in, and Huntress replaced into that game.) I'm having a hard time imagining a circumstance where a modkill after a full game day of two weeks of fruitless replacement

isn't

warranted. It's not a perfect solution, but it's the least bad one there. (Notably it shrunk the number of lynches the town would get over the course of the game, so it hurt the town, but we seemed to recover okay.

But PJ's objection, and mine, weren't to the fact there was a modkill. It was the fact that there were two slots that had needed to be replaced for a reasonably long time, and she arbitrarily chose to modkill

only one

of them, in a scenario where the first modkill would cost the town a lynch and the second one (assuming the player was, as in this case, town) would not cost an additional lynch.

[Thesp]

I've got to side with Huntress on the replacement/modkill issue. There are no good answers (especially in a game this insanely long) when you can't get a replacement after two weeks of actively searching, even offering to cross-replace. (The only reason I replaced in was to help the mod in another game I was in, and Huntress replaced into that game.) I'm having a hard time imagining a circumstance where a modkill after a full game day of two weeks of fruitless replacement

isn't

warranted. It's not a perfect solution, but it's the least bad one there. (Notably it shrunk the number of lynches the town would get over the course of the game, so it hurt the town, but we seemed to recover okay.

But PJ's objection, and mine, weren't to the fact there was a modkill. It was the fact that there were two slots that had needed to be replaced for a reasonably long time, and she arbitrarily chose to modkill

only one

of them, in a scenario where the first modkill would cost the town a lynch and the second one (assuming the player was, as in this case, town) would not cost an additional lynch.

Matias's last post: .
Huntress announces replacement sought for Matias: March 4th (immediately after Great OM NOM of '014)
Huntress modkills Matias: March 13th -

21 days after last post, 9 days after replacement announcement

DisCode's last post: March 5th.
Huntress announces replacement sought for DisCode: March 15th (after N3 passes)
Huntress gets DisCode's replacement (me!): March 18th -

13 days after last post

(which included 3 days of Nighttime),

3 days after replacement announcement

I'm not convinced it was as comparable. I think a modkill is as last a resort as possible, and I don't think it becomes more tolerable if the modkill just doesn't hurt the town as bad.

[Huntress]

Discode only became eligible for replacement just before the end of the Day and I added him to my post in the replacement thread when I removed ABR's name from it after the lynch.

I couldn't start the new Day with two players missing as this would have given away the fact that they couldn't both be mafia. The ideal way to deal with it would have been to keep the game in night until a replacement had been found but I thought the wait might have an even worse effect on the game than the modkill.

I did consider taking them both out but I was afraid that if I did, and then had the same problem again, it would affect the balance too much.

[petroleumjelly]

I think a single modkill would have been fine had a rule been announced along the lines of, "if a replacement is not found within X days, the slot will be modkilled." The whole problem was that there was no explanation for why one slot was modkilled and not the other slot that was in the same position. Such a mod decision necessarily leads to players wondering why one slot was preferred to be kept in the game over another slot. Without clear reasoning to accompany the modkill, the choice was (as I said before) to either modkill both slots or neither slot. Since, as Huntress has noted, not modkilling either would confirm that at least one of the slots was Town (assuming there was a nightkill that night), the choice necessarily should have been to modkill both slots.

[Thor665]

If she had indicated the time deadline reasoning only when making the modkill would that have solved your issue with it?

[Thor665]

'Time deadline' being 'this slot has been empty for X days while the other has been empty for X-6'

[yessiree]

All vacant slots should be subject to modkill if replacements can't be found within a reasonable period of time since day start.
1) No point in delaying day start and wasting time if no one is interested in replacing in.
2) No personal involvement from moderator to compromise game integrity.
3) The justification for the cases where the modkills would significantly compromise game balance is that the modkills are not the root of the problem; the replace outs are.

[Zdenek]

Considering that I think mods have almost never explained the reasons why a player get's modkilled in the times I've seen it, it doesn't bother me that one slot was killed. I think the goal should be jointly limiting the effect of inactive slots and modkills. Killing just one seems to have done that.

[yessiree]

Considering that I think mods have almost never explained the reasons why a player get's modkilled in the times I've seen it, it doesn't bother me that one slot was killed. I think the goal should be jointly limiting the effect of inactive slots and modkills. Killing just one seems to have done that.

No, modkill should be an automated process with no regard to game balance, because personal involvement from the mod introduces a heavy load of WIFOM on the slots's alignment.

[Zdenek]

Considering that I think mods have almost never explained the reasons why a player get's modkilled in the times I've seen it, it doesn't bother me that one slot was killed. I think the goal should be jointly limiting the effect of inactive slots and modkills. Killing just one seems to have done that.

No, modkill should be an automated process with no regard to game balance, because personal involvement from the mod introduces a heavy load of WIFOM on the slots's alignment.

I don't really see how that fits with solving the problem in this game.

[Zdenek]

I mean there was no rule specifying when a slot could be modkilled. So the options were to make a rule, which would violate your principle of the mod having no personal involvement or to wait for replacements, which would have been fine, but irritating.

[yessiree]

Considering that I think mods have almost never explained the reasons why a player get's modkilled in the times I've seen it, it doesn't bother me that one slot was killed. I think the goal should be jointly limiting the effect of inactive slots and modkills. Killing just one seems to have done that.

No, modkill should be an automated process with no regard to game balance, because personal involvement from the mod introduces a heavy load of WIFOM on the slots's alignment.

I don't really see how that fits with solving the problem in this game.

that's my point, it shouldn't cater to solving issues in particular games

[yessiree]

I mean there was no rule specifying when a slot could be modkilled. So the options were to make a rule, which would violate your principle of the mod having no personal involvement or to wait for replacements, which would have been fine, but irritating.

new laws are added when odd cases pop up every now and then, after it has been resolved, so that when similar cases happen again it may be better settled.

[Aegor]

The modkill was fine. It was a judgment call that made perfect sense and was totally legit and did not reveal info about the game.

Anything could invite speculation; good players do not attempt to outguess the mod. Criticisms leveled against huntress make no sense.

[yessiree]

There was never any criticism leveled against huntress, Aegor

I was making suggestions on handling vacant slots across night phases in a way that doesn't compromise game integrity

[Aegor]

yessiree,

There absolutely was during the game:

@ petroleumjelly:

Re your post 2297.

1) I am offended that you think I would show partiality in this way.
2) I had to choose between mod-killing Matias or leaving the game in night until I had found a replacement as I couldn't start the new Day with two slots unfilled. In view of the length of time I had already been looking I decided on the first option and so removed the earliest one to require replacement. Any further discussion of this must wait till the game is over.
3)

9. Any requests/points addressed to me in the thread (including problems with vote counts) should be bolded.

If you have any complaints/problems with this game, please send me a PM rather than posting them in the thread.

[yessiree]

I didn't realize you were referring to that; thought you talked about post-game

but yeah, it worked out this case since both slots' were town

would've been an entirely different story if one of the slot was scum

[petroleumjelly]

Had a modkill ruling been explicitly made in-thread, then I would have no problem with the modkill.

I didn't realize you were referring to that; thought you talked about post-game

but yeah, it worked out this case since both slots' were town

would've been an entirely different story if one of the slot was scum

Actually, I still drew conclusions from the modkill, but my opinion changed when I realized the modkill preceded daybreak by minutes.

In my first read of the game, I thought the Matias slot was modkilled in the middle of the night, which heavily suggested the other slot was Mafia. However, when I realized a slot was daykilled moments before daybreak, I similarly realized that the Mod would be forced to take action if both slots were Town (because if both lived during the night and there was a nightkill, then the Town could conclude that at least slot must be Town). Since Matias was modkilled and Town, it actually suggested that Thesp's slot was also Town.

Huntress had explicitly reserved the right to add or modify to her ruleset as the gamestate required. The gamestate at that time required a rule to be introduced to explain why one slot would be modkilled. It's that simple. The

lack

of an explanation to differentiate between two otherwise identical situations is what invites speculation. And even if speculation is not

openly discussed

, it is still something that savvy players who pay attention and know how modding decisions work are going to think about. I actually preferred not to discuss the subject at all in-game, but I could not deny that it influenced my thoughts.

[Burning_Earth]

I think you all did very well both in keeping up, for the most part, and in finding the scum. It was interesting how all three of them were under suspicion from very early on.

Would shorter deadlines have helped or hindered this game? I'm in two minds about this.

I'm wondering now how 15/4 would play out.

That was actually my first planned setup for this game but I was advised it would only have a 17.8% chance of a town win, so I dropped it to three mafia/14 town then added two more town as that was deemed to be more balanced. In retrospect I think 14/3 might have been more even but it's hard to judge based on one game.

16/3 is utterly hugely townsided.

[Burning_Earth]

Also, I think a four player mountainous should be about 17-4 or 18-4.

[Thor665]

16/3 is utterly town-sided and you think 18/4 is a good option? By that logic you should be behind the idea of the 14/3. In Mountainous the only factors that matter are number of days each side needs to achieve wincon and both of those have the same ratio of town needing one more day than scum (with 14/3 being the closest to the default 13/3 w. PRs mini setup) Then toss in that scum cannot be busted by PRs and that there are no PR clears, and come with an awareness that a 13/3 w. PR setup does not result in lopsided town advantage and I'm not sure why you think 16/3 is utterly town sided. I could see calling it as in favor of town, certainly, I would agree with that. But utterly and hugely? Nah.

[Thor665]

10/3 not 13/3 - mental typing gaff. Point holds.