US States Mafia DP2

Author: Vader

Posts

Total: 191
#151
Buddamoose
Buddamoose's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 3,178
2
3
6
Buddamoose's avatar
Buddamoose
2
3
6
Depending on player count and kill rate, the game may end up with an extra night phase due to a no-lynch in mylo,

*this assumes both a successful scum-lynch the proceeding DP, but also assumes a doc save in cojunction. Once ur at MYLO ur stuck there at best unless you lynch scum AND get a doc save..

VTNL'ing itself does not cause that extra night, nor does it provide town with an additional mislynch in itself. Nor does it provide town any better probabilities than already present in a 1/2(50%) "CC". 

This is why in classic set-up you VTNL. Because you can guarantee it's a true CC in whuch there is only one cop. And you can guarantee there is a doctor in the game that has 1/4 odds of protecting the NK target. 

Neither of those two can be guaranteed here. Nor, again, does no-killing or VTNL'ing itself cause an extra mislynch. The risks are there, but they're minimal in closed set-ups. 

Just like there is a minimal risk we're both town, and VTNL'ing presents the opportunity for scum to kill one of us, leading to the lynch of the other and a town loss. If the above is scummy because I disregarded such risks as minimal, then you are doubly scummy for disregarding the risk of both of us being cop. Especially since, unlike the risks of no-killing which require a doc save in conjunction with a successful lynch for those risks to come to fruition. 

The only thing that need be true here is we are both cops. Nothing else need happen in conjunction for that to backfire. So arguably the risks is less minimal than the risks of no-killing, although arguing still in the "minimal" range. 
#152
Buddamoose
Buddamoose's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 3,178
2
3
6
Buddamoose's avatar
Buddamoose
2
3
6
Do i think we're both cop? No, unlike ur WIFOM, shoddy vote analysis, and blatant misrepresentation of my posts. I actually, given the above, have reasons to hold you as scum. 

Because that vote analysis paints you as scummy as previously outlined. And your latant misrepresentations and reliance on WIFOM is itself indicative of you manufacturing your read on me. 

Case in point

Saying im scum siding because I pointed out what are basic mathematical deductions, themselves the basis for theorycrafting. 

And if you honestly think theorycrafting has no part to play in winning a game. I again, challenge you to put together a basketball team that doesn't know how basketball is played and the strategies of the game. While I put together a team that does, and watch as the team you put together gets trounced 100% of the time. 



#153
Buddamoose
Buddamoose's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 3,178
2
3
6
Buddamoose's avatar
Buddamoose
2
3
6
To continue the basketball example. Your position would be the same as, "fouls are bad because they send the opposing player to the line for free shots" that would be the position that doesn't factor in mathematical probabilities and optimal game strategies. 

Meanwhile I would be telling my team, "if they drive the paint, foul them and foul them hard. Make them think twice and hesitate to drive the lane. Also, they're gonna be shook when they take those free throws and miss one or both unless they're cold blooded and don't care about that contact."

Guess what, the second, and actually optimal strategy in most cases, is a result of theorycrafting 👏👏. The first observation is facially correct, but actually abysmal if you are trying to win the game.
#154
Buddamoose
Buddamoose's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 3,178
2
3
6
Buddamoose's avatar
Buddamoose
2
3
6
If you wanna present like ur trying to play to win the game, arguing against a fundamental part of creating optimal strategies to winning a game is nonsensical. 

No, i find it more likely you are actually playing to win the game. But ur playing to win the game as scum. I'm not gonna assume ur stupid and don't comprehend this. Instead I'm going to assume you actually do comprehend this fully and ur arguments are coming out ur rear. 

You are free to correct me otherwise at any time regarding this comprehension.

#155
drafterman
drafterman's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 5,653
3
6
9
drafterman's avatar
drafterman
3
6
9
Theorycrafting in a game is pointless because you can't be sure that any individual is arguing in good faith or, you know, deliberating presenting misleading arguments to lead town astray. This is why, in DDO, actual, real, theorycrafting happened outside of the game in its own threads. If you want to do that. Sure. I'm all for it. Start your own thread.

Also, and I repeat, theorycrafting is shit without being rooted in the real world. You know another thing they do in sports to help develop strategies? Watch recordings of actual fucking games.

If you're going against a team that always plays a given strategy, no amount of back-of-the-napkin scribblings is going to convince a coach that they are magically going to behave in the exact opposite way.

In other words:

Reference a single DDO game where mafia waived a kill at MYLO, or GTFO.
#156
TheHammer
TheHammer's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 211
1
2
4
TheHammer's avatar
TheHammer
1
2
4
What the heck
#157
TheHammer
TheHammer's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 211
1
2
4
TheHammer's avatar
TheHammer
1
2
4
Alright, this is MYLO, 5-1 (which would mean MYLO tomorrow if we do lynch), or we're already dead. So VTNL obviously, someone give me the TL;DR on why this hasn't happened yet
#158
Buddamoose
Buddamoose's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 3,178
2
3
6
Buddamoose's avatar
Buddamoose
2
3
6
-->
@drafterman
If you're going against a team that always plays a given strategy, no amount of back-of-the-napkin scribblings is going to convince a coach that they are magically going to behave in the exact opposite way

Except this isnt what's happening here. This isnt the same team(players) with the same coach and the same front office establishing a track record over time. It's you trying to present that various teams have always done this, as a reason for why it could never happen here. 

This is bullshit. The practice of fouling in basketball when a player is driving the lane was a result of theorycrafting. The practice of fouling at end game when down, a result of theorycrafting. 

The practice of going for it on 4th down in football when inside the opponents 50, was a result of theorycrafting. 

Smallball in baseball, something that has encompassed the entire sport at this point and is attributed as being the chief reason why the Oakland Athletics as a small market team even won the world series they recently did, was entirely theorycrafting off mathematical probabilities and statistics.

All of these were once back of the napkin scribblings that are now the standard, specifically because the theorycrafting itself orginally bore out the truth and sensibility of those theories. 

Last i checked, you don't have any evidence put forth that no killing isnt generally beneficial to mafia at MYLO. Just that, "oh they've never no killed here at MYLO." 

Well I'll tell you what. At one point in football nobody had run a pass play, despite it being totally legal. The first teams that started doing so saw huge success. 

Nobody in football at one point had run a flea flicker, end-around, or statue of liberty. Worked great as a consequence the first few times because of the exact kind of thinking you are using, that being. 

"It hasn't happened here yet, so it's just not gonna happen" 

Depsite the benefits of such plays being obvious, just from that opinion alone.
#159
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 12,832
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@drafterman
Calm down bro, there’s something called school
#160
Buddamoose
Buddamoose's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 3,178
2
3
6
Buddamoose's avatar
Buddamoose
2
3
6
I could understand if no killing was just a generally foreign concept totally unknown to the game in general. But it's not. The concept of no killing is common knowledge. From there it's only basic mathematical probabilities to realize killing at MYLO helps town and harms mafia unless very specifically conditions are present, such as being an open set-up game, you can guarantee it's a true CC, can guarantee there is a doc in the game, and there is a player present that if killing, would greatly advantage scum in their death. 

As stated, at one point there were no passing plays in football. The concept itself was considered absurd and preposterous. By your reasoning because no AFL games used passing plays, that passing plays in football should never have been used because it lacked in game substantiation to hold it was possible. 

This is erroneous tho because the only thing that's relevant to whether or not something is possible in a game is whether or not it breaks the rules. Passing never broke any rules in football, stodgy and specious fools like you just held it was absurd to even consider, despite it not actually being against any rules and mathematically far smarter than running purely HB run plays and sweep options with the HB and Quarterback. 

Yet here we are today. With an NFL that is primarily focused on passing the ball as opposed to running. Almost as if theorycrafting can and often does trump past behaviors. 

Particularly in mafia, where future collaborations will always trump past behaviors. 
#161
drafterman
drafterman's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 5,653
3
6
9
drafterman's avatar
drafterman
3
6
9
UVC

Drafterman (1/4) - Budda ← Vote here if you are dumb/scum
VTNL (2/4) - Drafterman, TheHammer ← Vote here if you are smart/town

#162
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 12,832
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@drafterman
You have one post to explain to me why we should VTNL. Address it directly to me as an undecided 
#163
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 12,832
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@Buddamoose
You have one post to explain to me why we should vote for Drafter. Address it directly to me as an undecided
#164
drafterman
drafterman's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 5,653
3
6
9
drafterman's avatar
drafterman
3
6
9
-->
@ILikePie5
2 scum. 4 town. If we Lynch wrong and mafia nks, it'll be 2 scum w town. We lose. If we VTNL, it gives other investigative roles a chance to gain additional information.
#165
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 12,832
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@drafterman
what other investigative roles do you think exist?
#166
drafterman
drafterman's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 5,653
3
6
9
drafterman's avatar
drafterman
3
6
9
-->
@ILikePie5
I exist. I am investigative role. Scum won't kill me as that'll result in Budda's insta death. Chances are I'll be roleblocked if there is a roleblocker, but gotta take that chance.

I have no idea what other investigative roles are likely to exist, so I can only articulate what investigative roles could exist.

  • Watcher/Lookout
  • Role Cop/Detective
  • Follower (rare, but not unheard of)
There are other, non-investigative roles that may have some utility, too. A town-sided roleblocker could potentially prevent mafia from roleblocking me, allowing me to investigate.

Masons could recruit and confirm a townie.

Bomb could blow up a mafia if the target of the NK.

Vig could shoot, but I wouldn't recommend it for the same reasons I wouldn't recommend lynching today.

And remember when talking to Budda, his reasoning is that Mafia won't NK tonight. That basically means town gets a free round of investigations tonight if we NL.
#167
Buddamoose
Buddamoose's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 3,178
2
3
6
Buddamoose's avatar
Buddamoose
2
3
6
-->
@ILikePie5
VTNL'ing just puts the game back in the hands of mafia. Appeals to additional results ignores that neither me nor Drafter can be trusted and we'll be right back to this same choice tomorrow. 

Probably with no additional deaths and neither Drafter nor me dying fmpov. This assumes Drafter is scum for the following reasons:

1) Drafters analysis has been disgenuinely shading posts and/or blatantly lying about said posts. 

2) His first and initial analysis on me was mainly WIFOM of the night kill and absurd voting behavior analysis. When voting analysis actually illustrates the very clear potential that his pressure of EthanG was to distance himself falsely during RVS when pressure rarely is being placed for a lynch, and the lynch on you was a counterwagon to scum being lynched. Note EthanG was scum reading drafter, but final VC has his vote on you, for bunk reasons, just like Drafters reasoning was bunk.

This means he not only has admitted to buddying me, but also clearly bw'd EthanG when voting to lynch you. So he's gonna vote with someone he was still obviously sus of despite indicating otherwise. BW'ing with a sus read? Yeah, he's totally paying attention to voting behavior and his analysis has been totally genuine 😂.

3) In conjunction with the previous. His rescinding of sus'ing Ethan in favor of you was based off of the same type of disgenuine analysis. Now he SR's EthanG again this DP despite zero else being present regarding EthanG

4) Tomorrow will be the same situation where if town gets the lynch wrong, they lose. 

Evidence points to Drafter being scum heavily fmpov. VTNL'ing isn't gonna change the choice. It does however allow for mafia to control the pieces on the board when the choice is made. 
#168
Buddamoose
Buddamoose's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 3,178
2
3
6
Buddamoose's avatar
Buddamoose
2
3
6
-->
@ILikePie5
And remember when talking to Budda, his reasoning is that Mafia won't NK tonight

That they're not likely to. 

That basically means town gets a free round of investigations tonight if we NL.

Yes, but this also kinda assume any additional results that comes forth is somehow going to be trustable. Mafia is one lynch away from a win. It's totally not overboard for a fake result to be produced tomorrow to obfuscate things even further. 

Acting like waiting a night can only ever result In beneficial effects for town, is disingenuous to the choice being made and the potential scenarios that play out tomorrow. 

Example: I'm a watcher and I saw X visiting the player who was killed!

I'm a doctor and made the save(something thats generally paired with a no kill gambit.)

All results that are just as untrustable as the current results on the board. Both mine and his. Again, VTNL'ing basically hands control of the pieces on the board and the variables present right back into mafias hands.
#169
drafterman
drafterman's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 5,653
3
6
9
drafterman's avatar
drafterman
3
6
9
"You have one post to explain"

Budda can't follow instructions.
#170
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 12,832
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@Buddamoose
Im still not understanding on how a VTNL is beneficial to mafia. Correct me if I’m wrong but you’re saying that if we VTNL then the mafia won’t make an NK? I find that hard to believe but let’s just say they don’t. We’re back to square one corrrect? Now you both would have new results to inform us on correct? That would eliminate certain people right off the bat. Right now you know one scum. Find the other scum cause someone is a partner and that will bring another variable into the equation. It leaves the door open to more variables and information tomorrow. You see what I’m trying to get to? I am willing to compromise with you. If you agree to VTNL today and mafia does not NK and there’s no information tomorrow, I will vote with you to vote for drafter.
#171
Buddamoose
Buddamoose's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 3,178
2
3
6
Buddamoose's avatar
Buddamoose
2
3
6
-->
@ILikePie5
Im still not understanding on how a VTNL is beneficial to mafia

It puts the control of pieces on the board and variables in place back into the hands of mafia for the most part. New results are just as untrustable as old ones. You yourself are willing to lynch Drafter despite him having a guilty on me.

Would you think otherwise if a watcher came out and pegged me as scum too? If so that would be inconsistent with it being a sensible course of action that still leaves town choosing between a baseline 50/50 tomorrow and pretends it still won't be the same situation of a loss upon a mislynch. 


What about if there is a no kill and there is a doc claiming they saved Drafter? Can you guarantee there are even protective roles in the game so as to assume that doc is legit? 

"Find the other scum cause someone is a partner and that will bring another variable into the equation."

And this would be possible anyways if we lynched scum today. In fact, such a scum lynch would conclusively tell protective roles who they should be protecting. 

It leaves the door open to more variables and information tomorrow

Either these variables will still be present because they are not Drafter or I. Or they are untrustable until one of us is confirmed as town. Either way, this idea of "more variables and information" assumes that presented variables will be genuine. 

Yet this situation itself is an example on how results are not always genuine and can often be faked. What precludes there from being no additional PR's than a cop and 1x tracker? Can you guarantee there are any more PR's? I sure can't, so who's to say town even gets genuine results to work with beyond results that are already thrown into question by a quasi-CC. 
 

#172
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 12,832
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@Buddamoose
I’m willing to vote for Drafter as a compromise. All I’m saying is what if more information comes out. It’s bettee to wait for the new information than not. If there is nothing, then I’m more than willing to vote for someone. Here’s a question for you, who do you think is the scum partner to Drafter?
#173
Buddamoose
Buddamoose's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 3,178
2
3
6
Buddamoose's avatar
Buddamoose
2
3
6
-->
@ILikePie5
Idk, GP and EthanG were my two SR's but GP was wrong. I'm still thinking Ethan tbh cause Drafter came out and TR'd him despite there being no posts from EthanG to hold him as scum.

Seemed like the kind of harmless pressure, just like the RVS pressure of him early on, that's typical of scum so as to safely distance from each other with minimal risk. 

Can acknowledge this could just be Drafter trying to manufacture analysis. And, being it seems what is and is not an easy lynch is something he brought up, it's safe to say he probably wouldn't have SR'd a relative of total inactive(Vaarka/Danielle(You) would have been too easy. 

I'm not even convinced your town tbh, or Vaarka, or Hammer. I'm in a position yet again where one of my SR's popped up as town. And someone I was strong TR'ing is most likely scum. So I'm unsure of whether it might be time to go back to the drawing board on analysis metrics. 
#174
Buddamoose
Buddamoose's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 3,178
2
3
6
Buddamoose's avatar
Buddamoose
2
3
6
-->
@ILikePie5
All I'm saying is what if new information comes out

And if it does, which will happen regardless with a VTNL with two cops claims, then are those results going to be any more trustable?
#175
Buddamoose
Buddamoose's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 3,178
2
3
6
Buddamoose's avatar
Buddamoose
2
3
6
-->
@ILikePie5
and TR'd him despite there being no posts from EthanG to hold him as scum

Sorry, to clarify, he SR'd him despite there being no new information regarding EthanG to change his final D1 assessment of him. 
#176
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 12,832
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@Buddamoose
You never know man. After Trump’s victory 2016, anything is possibke
#177
Buddamoose
Buddamoose's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 3,178
2
3
6
Buddamoose's avatar
Buddamoose
2
3
6
After Trump’s victory 2016, anything is possibke

#178
Buddamoose
Buddamoose's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 3,178
2
3
6
Buddamoose's avatar
Buddamoose
2
3
6
-->
@TheHammer
@Vaarka
 So VTNL obviously, someone give me the TL;DR on why this hasn't happened yet

It's not VTNL obviously. 

Refer to post 167 and 171 for why it's not "obvious" and for why Drafter has made it pretty clear he's scum. 

If you hold it's more likely there is only one cop, then realize we're right back at this same point tomorrow. Sure, more results. But the results from Drafter and I will still be untrustable, and any new results that outright confirm either of is are suspect inherently because regardless of what happens, we will still be at MYLO and one mislynch away from a loss.

Though it is true results could break in towns favor, assume Drafter is town for a moment. Has it really broke in his favor? Except for him am I even being scum read? This ignoring his only supplied reasoning for SR'ing me is that I'm deviating from SoP. 

But Vaarka expressed desire to deviate from SoP. I'm failing to see the scum read for that. Pie is open to deviating, all three of us being scum seems rather implausible. So what does that make of the validity of his original supplied reasoning? Its bunk, he obviously knows this because it's not producing reads consistent with that. Yet here he is still SR'ing me. 

"Cause of muh guilty" 

He says, which ignores that town behavior in conjunction with an opposite result is indicative of being flavored. As he has said though, his read of me being scum has never wavered. Despite town reading me last DP because

"He's doing much the same thing I am, so I can't scum read him" or something very similar to that. 

So either he was being truthful with that analysis, or he was contriving it. If he was being truthful, then sus'ing me is inconsistent with that. If he was contriving it, well uh, that's a pretty clear scum tell. 

The signs clearly point to Drafter being scum and me town, or neither of us being scum as a slim probability fmpov. But if the latter is true, we're pretty much fucked anyways fmpov cause regardless of who is lynched the other is subsequently lynched and town loses anyways. 

I'm not gonna be SR'ing anyone if they choose otherwise cause that itself isn't indicative of affiliation. I'm just saying, we're making this same decision again tomorrow regardless. And though there is a potential of additional results clearing things up, there's an equal possibility of further results obfuscating that clarity and or shading that "clarity" in a direction that results in town losing.
#179
Buddamoose
Buddamoose's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 3,178
2
3
6
Buddamoose's avatar
Buddamoose
2
3
6
-->
@TheHammer
@Vaarka
So either he was being truthful with that analysis, or he was contriving it. If he was being truthful, then sus'ing me is inconsistent with that. If he was contriving it, well uh, that's a pretty clear scum tell

To clarify. I dont want it to appear as if his "sus" of me refers to his sus today. Rather his proposed sus'ing of me yesterday throughout the DP despite TR'ing me in posting. Either he contrived that sus, or his investigation isn't consistent with his reads because it was genuine. 

He's either admitting he contrived his scumhunting, a clear tell, but not the sole or even main reason why he's scummy. Or he investigated a town read as cop. Which uhhh, I can understand a null, but investigating a TR? 

Inb4- "my sus of you throughout D1 was because of gut instinct/intuition." 
#180
drafterman
drafterman's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 5,653
3
6
9
drafterman's avatar
drafterman
3
6
9
UVC

Drafterman (1/4) - Budda ← Vote here if you are dumb/scum
VTNL (2/4) - Drafterman, TheHammer ← Vote here if you are smart/town