Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 51 to 96 of 96

Thread: A Traitor Among Traitors 13er Setup (3/17)

  1. ISO #51
    Thread Analyst AndrewGreve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    USA -West coast
    Posts
    314
    Timezone
    UTC-08:00
    Community
    2+2
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by Zork (#48)
    Andrew, thank you for your detailed feedback!

    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#46)
    Wolf NK restriction
    It is unnecessary to restrict the wolves NK to villagers. In order for the wolves NK to target the SK or wolf, it would require the SK or that wolf to agree to target themselves. Only a player that is actively working against their own win condition will vote to NK themselves.
    Well now, if a Mafioso thinks you are the Traitor, he or she would be trying to achieve his or her win condition by killing you. The Mafioso may be right or wrong, but no one could doubt their sincerity. After all, the Mafia cannot win until the Traitor is dead. The problem is that even if the Mafioso is right, the Traitor flips as Mafia, so no one will know for sure whether that Mafioso who led the wagon (either in game thread by day or in wolfchat by night) against the alleged Traitor was a correct Mafioso, an incorrect Mafioso, or a treacherous, intentionally incorrect Traitor. Which actually means that perhaps you are right that there is no need to restrict NKs to villagers, but that the game will unfold almost certainly in that manner. Does anyone think the apple cart might be upset if the restriction were removed?
    A nk target requires 3 wolves and a SK to unanimously agree on the target

    wolf #1 targets sk
    Wolf #2 targets sk
    wolf #3 targets sk
    sk does not target sk

    same logic applies to any scenario where wolves try to target a wolf.

  2. ISO #52
    Appealing to Emotion Zork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    6,142
    Timezone
    UTC-06:00
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#46)
    Potential game breaking mechanic: listing 3 villagers = modkill
    I could see a possible abuse with mod-killing villagers guessing at three names. If submissions are not public I could still say:

    I am submitting:
    player x
    player y
    player z
    If I die it is 3 cleared vills for 1 vill death.
    If I live, once I flip, village know 1-3 wolves are on the list.
    If every villager does this and adjusts the list each night there is prob a way to solve the game pretty quickly. It would take work to optimize an algorithm based on all players previous lists, but I think it is doable.

    additionally:
    Wolves would be forced to also submit lists or get lynched for working against village win condition. If any list submitted at any point in the game has 3 confirmed villagers, and that player didn't die, boom peeked wolf.
    Yep, you're right. Good catch. Fortunately, it only needs a very small tweak to fix: players will submit only two names.

  3. ISO #53
    Appealing to Emotion Zork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    6,142
    Timezone
    UTC-06:00
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#47)
    I agree with manti that each individual mechanic might be unique enough to warrant testing alone. I don't think all together is bad/unfun, but the more new stuff in a set-up the more room to mechanically solve a game before it starts.

    I've never modded and most of my experience is in more vanilla or closed set-ups. So you can take my thoughts with a grain of salt.
    You are clearly mod material based on your analysis and insight that I'm seeing in this thread. I'm not saying manti isn't, just that I humbly disagreed with his thoughts. That's not to say I don't appreciate his input, as well.

  4. ISO #54
    Appealing to Emotion Zork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    6,142
    Timezone
    UTC-06:00
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#51)
    Quote Originally Posted by Zork (#48)
    Andrew, thank you for your detailed feedback!

    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#46)
    Wolf NK restriction
    It is unnecessary to restrict the wolves NK to villagers. In order for the wolves NK to target the SK or wolf, it would require the SK or that wolf to agree to target themselves. Only a player that is actively working against their own win condition will vote to NK themselves.
    Well now, if a Mafioso thinks you are the Traitor, he or she would be trying to achieve his or her win condition by killing you. The Mafioso may be right or wrong, but no one could doubt their sincerity. After all, the Mafia cannot win until the Traitor is dead. The problem is that even if the Mafioso is right, the Traitor flips as Mafia, so no one will know for sure whether that Mafioso who led the wagon (either in game thread by day or in wolfchat by night) against the alleged Traitor was a correct Mafioso, an incorrect Mafioso, or a treacherous, intentionally incorrect Traitor. Which actually means that perhaps you are right that there is no need to restrict NKs to villagers, but that the game will unfold almost certainly in that manner. Does anyone think the apple cart might be upset if the restriction were removed?
    A nk target requires 3 wolves and a SK to unanimously agree on the target

    wolf #1 targets sk
    Wolf #2 targets sk
    wolf #3 targets sk
    sk does not target sk

    same logic applies to any scenario where wolves try to target a wolf.
    Yes, the difficulty you describe is why I thought it would keep things less complicated than they already are to maintain a blanket restriction on scum targeting scum. We naturally do this as Town when we want to lynch two players, but we must choose to prioritize one over the other when the rest of the Town just doesn't see one of your two top scum as lynchable. You can always say, today we lynch Player A, and I'll be coming for Player B later.

    In this setup, that comment could be posted by someone in wolfchat, where they say ok Player Z, I know you're the Traitor because of reasons 1, 2, and 3, but I'm going after Townies right now. I got your number, Player Z, I'm watching you. etc.

  5. ISO #55
    Thread Analyst AndrewGreve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    USA -West coast
    Posts
    314
    Timezone
    UTC-08:00
    Community
    2+2
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by Zork (#54)
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#51)
    Quote Originally Posted by Zork (#48)
    Andrew, thank you for your detailed feedback!

    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#46)
    Wolf NK restriction
    It is unnecessary to restrict the wolves NK to villagers. In order for the wolves NK to target the SK or wolf, it would require the SK or that wolf to agree to target themselves. Only a player that is actively working against their own win condition will vote to NK themselves.
    Well now, if a Mafioso thinks you are the Traitor, he or she would be trying to achieve his or her win condition by killing you. The Mafioso may be right or wrong, but no one could doubt their sincerity. After all, the Mafia cannot win until the Traitor is dead. The problem is that even if the Mafioso is right, the Traitor flips as Mafia, so no one will know for sure whether that Mafioso who led the wagon (either in game thread by day or in wolfchat by night) against the alleged Traitor was a correct Mafioso, an incorrect Mafioso, or a treacherous, intentionally incorrect Traitor. Which actually means that perhaps you are right that there is no need to restrict NKs to villagers, but that the game will unfold almost certainly in that manner. Does anyone think the apple cart might be upset if the restriction were removed?
    A nk target requires 3 wolves and a SK to unanimously agree on the target

    wolf #1 targets sk
    Wolf #2 targets sk
    wolf #3 targets sk
    sk does not target sk

    same logic applies to any scenario where wolves try to target a wolf.
    Yes, the difficulty you describe is why I thought it would keep things less complicated than they already are to maintain a blanket restriction on scum targeting scum. We naturally do this as Town when we want to lynch two players, but we must choose to prioritize one over the other when the rest of the Town just doesn't see one of your two top scum as lynchable. You can always say, today we lynch Player A, and I'll be coming for Player B later.

    In this setup, that comment could be posted by someone in wolfchat, where they say ok Player Z, I know you're the Traitor because of reasons 1, 2, and 3, but I'm going after Townies right now. I got your number, Player Z, I'm watching you. etc.
    I might be explaining my point poorly or I am mis-understanding you.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If nk requires a unanimous decision from all 4 wolves(traitor wolf included), it is impossible for the wolves to target a wolf with the NK, with or without the restriction

    because

    It will always require a player to self-vote to succeed.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  6. ISO #56
    Thread Analyst AndrewGreve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    USA -West coast
    Posts
    314
    Timezone
    UTC-08:00
    Community
    2+2
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by Zork (#49)
    uninformed Wolfs vs informed SK idea
    If you want some informed vs uninformed action in wolf chat:
    If wolf NK matches SK NK. SK is killed by wolves. the SK NK still goes through, so 2 deaths that night. It forces SK to have an additional agenda in deciding the wolf NK. And incentivize's SK to stop NK closer to must-lynch. Prob should shorten night action submission to a 2 hour phase, even if day is 12 hours.
    This is an outstanding idea. I got around the timing of it by requiring the Traitor submit their kill as a day action even though it is a night action ultimately. This gives wolfchat the usual full night to contemplate and decide. I do love that twist, and I also love that it does not add to the body count. You are basically turning the Traitor into a bodyguard of his or her victim, but that if there is no attack on that victim, the Traitor lives and the player he or she was bodyguarding dies.

    Definitely incorporating that one.
    prob wait till after we clear up previous mis-understanding before opening this thought regarding the informed vs uninformed mechanic
    This idea would actually require wolves to have ability to target evil's with a (unanimous-1).

    SK would never self-vote or put final vote on nk to self-kill. Wolves need ability to punish for not consolidating NK target


    edited for clarity
    Last edited by AndrewGreve; February 15th, 2019 at 09:58 PM.

  7. ISO #57
    Appealing to Emotion Zork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    6,142
    Timezone
    UTC-06:00
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#55)
    If nk requires a unanimous decision from all 4 wolves(traitor wolf included), it is impossible for the wolves to target a wolf with the NK, with or without the restriction

    because

    It will always require a player to self-vote to succeed.
    I see what you're saying now. Thank you.

  8. ISO #58
    Appealing to Emotion Zork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    6,142
    Timezone
    UTC-06:00
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#56)
    Quote Originally Posted by Zork (#49)
    uninformed Wolfs vs informed SK idea
    If you want some informed vs uninformed action in wolf chat:
    If wolf NK matches SK NK. SK is killed by wolves. the SK NK still goes through, so 2 deaths that night. It forces SK to have an additional agenda in deciding the wolf NK. And incentivize's SK to stop NK closer to must-lynch. Prob should shorten night action submission to a 2 hour phase, even if day is 12 hours.
    This is an outstanding idea. I got around the timing of it by requiring the Traitor submit their kill as a day action even though it is a night action ultimately. This gives wolfchat the usual full night to contemplate and decide. I do love that twist, and I also love that it does not add to the body count. You are basically turning the Traitor into a bodyguard of his or her victim, but that if there is no attack on that victim, the Traitor lives and the player he or she was bodyguarding dies.

    Definitely incorporating that one.
    prob wait till after we clear up previous mis-understanding before opening this thought regarding the informed vs uninformed mechanic
    This idea would actually require wolves to have ability to target evil's with a (unanimous-1).

    SK would never self-vote or put final vote on nk to self-kill. Wolves need ability to punish for not consolidating NK target


    edited for clarity
    I ran through scenarios and found that what you're proposing is great except it is too anti-Traitor. The Traitor under your proposals can now be targeted by the Mafia while Town are still alive. That is an exposure to death the Traitor did not have before. Additionally, under your proposal the Traitor would also die if Scum (by your "unanimous - 1" standard) target the same player who the Traitor targeted.

    But I want to keep the best parts of what you're proposing and balance it in the process. So here goes:
    • As always, when the Town cannot win, any living Town who remain are killed.
    • The Traitor must always target Town while any Town remain alive; this targeting is done during the day before the Scum choose a target. The Traitor can submit an alternative name in case his or her first choice is lynched.
    • Scum (Mafia and/or Traitor) may target anyone, including the Traitor; this targeting is done during the night after the Traitor chose a target.
    • A Mafioso, chosen randomly from among the Mafia not dissenting to the Scum NK, dies if the Scum target the same player whom the Traitor targeted. This could result in only the Mafioso dying if the targeted Townie was wearing a vest. This would also confirm to the two surviving Mafia that their recently departed brother was, in fact, truly Mafia and not the Traitor.
    • The players must always lynch. There is no "no lynch."
    • The Traitor may never holster.
    • The Scum may never holster.

    Additionally, when the number of living scum voting is:
    • 4, the NK vote must be 4-0 or 3-1; otherwise, the target is randed among all Townies.
    • 3, the NK vote must be 3-0 or 2-1; otherwise, the target is randed among all Townies.
    • 2, the NK vote must be 2-0; otherwise, the target is randed between the two choices.

    Example #1:
    • The Traitor targets Player A, who is Town, by the end of d1.
    • Scum targets Player B, who is Town, by the n1 action deadline.
    • Absent vesting, Players A and B die at the end of n1.

    Example #2:
    • The Traitor targets Player A, who is Town, by the end of d1.
    • Scum targets Player Y, who is Mafia, by the n1 action deadline.
    • Absent vesting, Players A and Y die at the end of n1.

    Example #3:
    • The Traitor targets Player A, who is Town, by the end of d1.
    • Scum targets Player Z, who is the Traitor, by the n1 action deadline.
    • Absent vesting, Players A and Z die at the end of n1.

    Example #4:
    • The Traitor targets Player A, who is Town, by the end of d1.
    • Scum also targets Player A by the n1 action deadline.
    • Absent vesting, Player A and a Mafioso, chosen randomly from among the Mafia not dissenting to the Scum NK, dies at the end of n1.

    Even if Mafiachat becomes pretty sure who the Traitor is, why would you want to try killing someone who can kill only Town? You would be getting rid of your KP prematurely to some extent, wouldn't you?
    Last edited by Zork; February 16th, 2019 at 12:36 AM.

  9. ISO #59
    Thread Analyst AndrewGreve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    USA -West coast
    Posts
    314
    Timezone
    UTC-08:00
    Community
    2+2
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by Zork (#58)
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#56)
    Quote Originally Posted by Zork (#49)
    uninformed Wolfs vs informed SK idea
    If you want some informed vs uninformed action in wolf chat:
    If wolf NK matches SK NK. SK is killed by wolves. the SK NK still goes through, so 2 deaths that night. It forces SK to have an additional agenda in deciding the wolf NK. And incentivize's SK to stop NK closer to must-lynch. Prob should shorten night action submission to a 2 hour phase, even if day is 12 hours.
    This is an outstanding idea. I got around the timing of it by requiring the Traitor submit their kill as a day action even though it is a night action ultimately. This gives wolfchat the usual full night to contemplate and decide. I do love that twist, and I also love that it does not add to the body count. You are basically turning the Traitor into a bodyguard of his or her victim, but that if there is no attack on that victim, the Traitor lives and the player he or she was bodyguarding dies.

    Definitely incorporating that one.
    prob wait till after we clear up previous mis-understanding before opening this thought regarding the informed vs uninformed mechanic
    This idea would actually require wolves to have ability to target evil's with a (unanimous-1).

    SK would never self-vote or put final vote on nk to self-kill. Wolves need ability to punish for not consolidating NK target


    edited for clarity
    I ran through scenarios and found that what you're proposing is great except it is too anti-Traitor. The Traitor under your proposals can now be targeted by the Mafia while Town are still alive. That is an exposure to death the Traitor did not have before. Additionally, under your proposal the Traitor would also die if Scum (by your "unanimous - 1" standard) target the same player who the Traitor targeted.

    But I want to keep the best parts of what you're proposing and balance it in the process. So here goes:
    • As always, when the Town cannot win, any living Town who remain are killed.
    • The Traitor must always target Town while any Town remain alive; this targeting is done during the day before the Scum choose a target. The Traitor can submit an alternative name in case his or her first choice is lynched.
    • Scum (Mafia and/or Traitor) may target anyone, including the Traitor; this targeting is done during the night after the Traitor chose a target.
    • A Mafioso, chosen randomly from among the Mafia not dissenting to the Scum NK, dies if the Scum target the same player whom the Traitor targeted. This could result in only the Mafioso dying if the targeted Townie was wearing a vest. This would also confirm to the two surviving Mafia that their recently departed brother was, in fact, truly Mafia and not the Traitor.
    • The players must always lynch. There is no "no lynch."
    • The Traitor may never holster.
    • The Scum may never holster.

    Additionally, when the number of living scum voting is:
    • 4, the NK vote must be 4-0 or 3-1; otherwise, the target is randed among all Townies.
    • 3, the NK vote must be 3-0 or 2-1; otherwise, the target is randed among all Townies.
    • 2, the NK vote must be 2-0; otherwise, the target is randed between the two choices.

    Example #1:
    • The Traitor targets Player A, who is Town, by the end of d1.
    • Scum targets Player B, who is Town, by the n1 action deadline.
    • Absent vesting, Players A and B die at the end of n1.

    Example #2:
    • The Traitor targets Player A, who is Town, by the end of d1.
    • Scum targets Player Y, who is Mafia, by the n1 action deadline.
    • Absent vesting, Players A and Y die at the end of n1.

    Example #3:
    • The Traitor targets Player A, who is Town, by the end of d1.
    • Scum targets Player Z, who is the Traitor, by the n1 action deadline.
    • Absent vesting, Players A and Z die at the end of n1.

    Example #4:
    • The Traitor targets Player A, who is Town, by the end of d1.
    • Scum also targets Player A by the n1 action deadline.
    • Absent vesting, Player A and a Mafioso, chosen randomly from among the Mafia not dissenting to the Scum NK, dies at the end of n1.

    Even if Mafiachat becomes pretty sure who the Traitor is, why would you want to try killing someone who can kill only Town? You would be getting rid of your KP prematurely to some extent, wouldn't you?
    so basically if the mafia target the same target as the SK. Then a mafia dies. It is possible that the SK could die if he does not dissent? which is incentive to guide mafia away from his target. or stand out when a mafia dies.

  10. ISO #60
    Appealing to Emotion Zork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    6,142
    Timezone
    UTC-06:00
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#59)
    so basically if the mafia target the same target as the SK. Then a mafia dies. It is possible that the SK could die if he does not dissent? which is incentive to guide mafia away from his target. or stand out when a mafia dies.
    The Traitor faces enough exposure already. He or she:
    • can be lynched.
    • can be NKd by the Mafia with no vest available
    • stands out as suspicious to the remaining two Mafia when the third Mafia dies after Scum targets the Town player who was NK'd by both the Traitor and by Scum.
    • has no teammate--the Traitor's ability to win dies when the Traitor dies, unlike every other player in the game. Yet the Traitor must be expected to win 1 in 3 games.
    Last edited by Zork; February 16th, 2019 at 01:48 AM.

  11. ISO #61
    Thread Analyst AndrewGreve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    USA -West coast
    Posts
    314
    Timezone
    UTC-08:00
    Community
    2+2
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by Zork (#60)
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#59)
    so basically if the mafia target the same target as the SK. Then a mafia dies. It is possible that the SK could die if he does not dissent? which is incentive to guide mafia away from his target. or stand out when a mafia dies.
    The Traitor faces enough exposure already. He or she:
    • can be lynched.
    • can be NKd by the Mafia with no vest available
    • stands out as suspicious to the remaining two Mafia when the third Mafia dies after Scum targets the Town player who was NK'd by both the Traitor and by Scum.
    • has no teammate--the Traitor's ability to win dies when the Traitor dies, unlike every other player in the game. Yet the Traitor must be expected to win 1 in 3 games.
    just trying to understand the new rule set

    so if traitor votes in wolf chat for his own nk. He is immune from the mafia kill?

    • The Traitor targets Player A, who is Town, by the end of d1.
    • Scum 1 targets Player A
    • Scum 2 targets Player A
    • Scum 3 targets Player A
    • Serial Killer targets Player A


    Absent vesting, Player A and one of Mafia 1-3, chosen randomly from among the Mafia not dissenting to the Scum NK, dies at the end of n1.
    SK cannot die
    Last edited by AndrewGreve; February 16th, 2019 at 02:33 AM.

  12. ISO #62
    Appealing to Emotion Zork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    6,142
    Timezone
    UTC-06:00
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#61)
    Quote Originally Posted by Zork (#60)
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#59)
    so basically if the mafia target the same target as the SK. Then a mafia dies. It is possible that the SK could die if he does not dissent? which is incentive to guide mafia away from his target. or stand out when a mafia dies.
    The Traitor faces enough exposure already. He or she:
    • can be lynched.
    • can be NKd by the Mafia with no vest available
    • stands out as suspicious to the remaining two Mafia when the third Mafia dies after Scum targets the Town player who was NK'd by both the Traitor and by Scum.
    • has no teammate--the Traitor's ability to win dies when the Traitor dies, unlike every other player in the game. Yet the Traitor must be expected to win 1 in 3 games.
    just trying to understand the new rule set

    so if traitor votes in wolf chat for his own nk. He is immune from the mafia kill?
    yes - but the other wolves will be looking at him/her super suspicious face, and this will cost him/her in endgame

    The traitor in your example stands a good chance of being bussed hard before even getting to endgame, for that matter!
    Last edited by Zork; February 16th, 2019 at 02:34 AM.

  13. ISO #63
    Thread Analyst AndrewGreve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    USA -West coast
    Posts
    314
    Timezone
    UTC-08:00
    Community
    2+2
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by Zork (#62)
    yes - but the other wolves will be looking at him/her super suspicious face, and this will cost him/her in endgame
    I mean they will be looking at the other 2 as equally more suspicious if all 4 votes together. There will be tells if the SK tries to change the wolf target but then settles on the consensus

    If wolves nk the sk target twice then the remaining wolf KNOWS who the sk is. But since SK cannot holster, the remaining wolf will know the SK always when there are 2 wolves left.

    SK cannot let 2 wolves die. So HUGE incentive to keep wolf nk away from SK target

  14. ISO #64
    Thread Analyst AndrewGreve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    USA -West coast
    Posts
    314
    Timezone
    UTC-08:00
    Community
    2+2
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by Zork (#62)

    The traitor in your example stands a good chance of being bussed hard before even getting to endgame, for that matter!
    the other 2 wolves still wont know who the SK is at that point. They will just know the wolves targeted the SK target. In my example all 4 wolves still voted together.

  15. ISO #65
    Thread Analyst AndrewGreve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    USA -West coast
    Posts
    314
    Timezone
    UTC-08:00
    Community
    2+2
    Gender
    If there are 2 wolves left, and 2 nks each night. The SK's win condition changes to get village to lynch the wolf without outting himself. The wolfs job is to get past the village must lynch

    edit: getting kinda convoluted for text. We can discord if you want
    Last edited by AndrewGreve; February 16th, 2019 at 02:50 AM.

  16. ISO #66
    Appealing to Emotion Zork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    6,142
    Timezone
    UTC-06:00
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#63)
    the remaining wolf will know the SK always when there are 2 wolves left.
    How so?

    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#63)
    SK cannot let 2 wolves die.
    Why not?

    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#63)
    HUGE incentive to keep wolf nk away from SK target
    Why?

    Remember, the Traitor flips as Mafia, so when there are two Scum left, both are thinking there is a very good chance that the other is the Traitor when in fact the Traitor is already dead (for example, by having been lynched).

  17. ISO #67
    Appealing to Emotion Zork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    6,142
    Timezone
    UTC-06:00
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#64)
    Quote Originally Posted by Zork (#62)

    The traitor in your example stands a good chance of being bussed hard before even getting to endgame, for that matter!
    the other 2 wolves still wont know who the SK is at that point. They will just know the wolves targeted the SK target. In my example all 4 wolves still voted together.
    True, and that's a good thing. The Traitor has enough bullets to dodge already.

  18. ISO #68
    Appealing to Emotion Zork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    6,142
    Timezone
    UTC-06:00
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#65)
    If there are 2 wolves left, and 2 nks each night. The SK's win condition changes to get village to lynch the wolf without outting himself. The wolfs job is to get past the village must lynch

    edit: getting kinda convoluted for text. We can discord if you want
    right, I gotcha

    I can't discord at the moment but thank you for the offer. Rain check?

  19. ISO #69
    Thread Analyst AndrewGreve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    USA -West coast
    Posts
    314
    Timezone
    UTC-08:00
    Community
    2+2
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by Zork (#66)
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#63)
    the remaining wolf will know the SK always when there are 2 wolves left.
    How so?

    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#63)
    SK cannot let 2 wolves die.
    Why not?

    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#63)
    HUGE incentive to keep wolf nk away from SK target
    Why?

    Remember, the Traitor flips as Mafia, so when there are two Scum left, both are thinking there is a very good chance that the other is the Traitor when in fact the Traitor is already dead (for example, by having been lynched).
    I assume the second nk stops.

  20. ISO #70
    Thread Analyst AndrewGreve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    USA -West coast
    Posts
    314
    Timezone
    UTC-08:00
    Community
    2+2
    Gender
    If there are two wolves alive and SK kill is still active. One of the two wolves is the SK.

    Once SK is dead. SK kill stops. Everyone knows SK is dead. The death write up doesn't matter.

    If SK can holster then this no longer applies, and sk's decision on WHEN to holster becomes super important.
    Last edited by AndrewGreve; February 16th, 2019 at 03:05 AM.

  21. ISO #71
    Thread Analyst AndrewGreve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    USA -West coast
    Posts
    314
    Timezone
    UTC-08:00
    Community
    2+2
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by Zork (#68)
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#65)
    If there are 2 wolves left, and 2 nks each night. The SK's win condition changes to get village to lynch the wolf without outting himself. The wolfs job is to get past the village must lynch

    edit: getting kinda convoluted for text. We can discord if you want
    right, I gotcha

    I can't discord at the moment but thank you for the offer. Rain check?
    Sure

  22. ISO #72
    Appealing to Emotion Zork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    6,142
    Timezone
    UTC-06:00
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#69)
    I assume the second nk stops.
    Yes, but they will not know whether it's because the Traitor is dead or because a vest stopped a kill.

  23. ISO #73
    Appealing to Emotion Zork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    6,142
    Timezone
    UTC-06:00
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#70)
    If there are two wolves alive and SK kill is still active. One of the two wolves is the SK.

    Once SK is dead. SK kill stops. Everyone knows SK is dead. The death write up doesn't matter.

    If SK can holster then this no longer applies, and sk's decision on WHEN to holster becomes super important.
    There is no holstering by anyone. The availability of vests keeps folks from coming to certain conclusions in this regard. Townies who repeatedly accurately identify the Mafia in their nightly submissions and who repeatedly say they are wearing a vest if earned will continually defeat all NKs and can be killed only via the lynch. I edited the setup as follows: "Names submitted must be living at the start of the night in which they are submitted. Names may be resubmitted on subsequent nights." Of course, when there is only one scum remaining alive, no one will be able to submit two names accurately.

    In other words, after a player has flipped as Mafia, when a day starts with only one or maybe even zero players having died overnight, no one will know whether that is because Scum KP is reduced to one because the Traitor is dead or whether that is because players are earning and using vests or both.

  24. ISO #74
    Appealing to Emotion Zork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    6,142
    Timezone
    UTC-06:00
    Gender
    LATEST/GREATEST:

    The Setup (13er)

    9 Townies
    • 1 Cop will be given a randed n0 Townie result of investigation.
    • 5 Vest-Earners are each asked to submit nightly exactly two names identifying the scum. If the list contains exactly two scum, a vest is earned. Otherwise, no vest is earned, and any vests already earned are destroyed. Names submitted must be living at the start of the night in which they are submitted. Names may be resubmitted on subsequent nights. A player may also choose to wear a vest, and it will be worn if available. The player will not know if his or her choice to wear a vest was honored. Wearing a vest absolutely guarantees that player will survive the night. A player who is told that he or she is a Vest-Earner and who fails to submit exactly two names on n1 is deemed to be playing against his or her team's win condition.
    • 1 Backup Cop is initially told the lie that he or she is a Vest-Earner. The list(s) of scum submitted at night when the Backup Cop is under the incorrect impression he or she is a Vest-Earner is/are ignored. If the Cop dies, the Backup Cop is then told that he or she is the new Cop.
      --If the Cop is lynched and the Backup Cop survives the night, the Backup Cop receives the result of his or her investigation.
      --If the Cop is night killed (NK'd), the Backup Cop is notified at the start of the next night. If the Backup Cop survives that next night, he or she receives the result of his or her investigation.
    • 1 Dictator is initially told the lie that he or she is a Vest-Earner. However. at the end of d1, the Dictator is informed of his or her true role and asked to submit two names. These names are announced at the start of d2 as the only players eligible for that day's lynch. If targeted for NK on n1, the Dictator does not die until the end of d2.
    • 1 Pardoner is initially told the lie that he or she is a Vest-Earner. However, at the end of d1, the Pardoner is informed of his or her true role and asked to submit the names of two other players. Neither player may be lynched on d3; the next highest votegetter is lynched instead. This submission survives the death of the Pardoner.

    3 Mafia (Scum) with night chat and a team NK submitted by the night action deadline with no holstering. The NK may be of ANY player, including Scum, and is deemed submitted when it is decided by a vote of 4-0, 3-0, 2-0, 1-0, 3-1, 2-1-1, or 2-1. If the submission is decided by any other vote, the target is randed among all living Town. If the target is identical to the Traitor's target, a Mafioso is chosen randomly to die instead from among:
    • those Mafia not dissenting when the submission was decided by a majority or plurality vote OR
    • the Mafia when the submission was decided by any other vote.

    1 Traitor (Scum) who appears to the Mafia as a Mafioso, appears to the Cop as a Mafioso, is revealed to everyone when lynched as a Mafioso, participates in Mafia night chat, and has his or her own NK submitted via PM by EOD with no holstering. The Traitor must submit two names so that if his or her first choice is the lynch, the second name is chosen for the NK instead.

    Anti-Claim Mechanic
    • If the majority or plurality of Scum at night agree to identify to the Mod a player as the Dictator and/or a player as the Pardoner, and that PM is completely correct, the player(s) identified in that PM die(s) at the end of the next day. This is above and beyond the normal KP. If the PM is incorrect in any way, a Scum randomly chosen from among those not dissenting from the submission dies at the end of the next day instead.
    • The Dictator and Pardoner are strongly advised to pretend they are Vest-Earners after n1 lest they be killed via Anti-Claim, which would be devastating for the Town. They may get creative and pretend they are Vest-Earners pretending to be the Dictator or the Pardoner, as well.
    • The Vest-Earners after n1 are strongly advised to do one of two things as they see fit: sell the fact that they are Vest-Earners or pretend to be the Dictator and or the Pardoner in an effort to draw an incorrect Anti-Claim submission. This is the only way to kill Scum beyond the lynch.
    • Remember, Scum can pretend to be Vest-Earners, the Dictator, or the Pardoner, as well.
    • If you are the true Dictator and/or Pardoner, don't be so quick to counterclaim!

    WIN CONDITIONS:
    This game is designed to give each of the three teams a 1 in 3 chance of winning.
    --The Traitor wins when all Townies are dead and the number of Mafia alive is 0 or 1.
    --The Mafia wins when the Traitor is dead and they achieve parity with the Town.
    --The Town wins when the only players alive are Townies.

    END GAME:
    • If and when the Town cannot win, any remaining Townies die.
    • Lynch votes may not be changed if the only remaining players are Scum. If a Mafioso is then lynched, each of the last two Mafia will submit a NK. The one NOT killed by the Traitor decides the Mafia's NK:
      --if it is the Traitor, the Mafia wins.
      --if it is the same Mafioso that the Traitor killed, the Traitor wins.
    • Lynch votes also may not be changed when the only players alive are two Townies and one Scum. If in this situation a Townie is lynched and the Scum is
      --Mafia, the Mafia wins (dead Traitor and parity achieved).
      --the Traitor and the remaining Townie has
      ----no vest, the Traitor wins.
      ----at least one vest, the Town wins.
    Last edited by Zork; February 16th, 2019 at 03:22 PM.

  25. ISO #75
    Thread Analyst AndrewGreve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    USA -West coast
    Posts
    314
    Timezone
    UTC-08:00
    Community
    2+2
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by Zork (#72)
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#69)
    I assume the second nk stops.
    Yes, but they will not know whether it's because the Traitor is dead or because a vest stopped a kill.
    I didn't consider this.

    The vests do provide a potential false negative, but if a nk does go through that doesnt match the wolf-chat target then wolf knows immediately other wolf is sk. So no false positive, and sk has no control over false negative.

    not the problem I thought it was though.

  26. ISO #76
    Thread Analyst AndrewGreve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    USA -West coast
    Posts
    314
    Timezone
    UTC-08:00
    Community
    2+2
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by Zork (#74)
    LATEST/GREATEST:
    [/COLOR]The Traitor may submit two names so that if his or her first choice is the lynch, the second name is chosen for the NK instead.
    I suppose the traitor could try to guess the lynch target and only submit that name to attempt a holster.

  27. ISO #77
    Appealing to Emotion Zork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    6,142
    Timezone
    UTC-06:00
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#75)
    The vests do provide a potential false negative, but if a nk does go through that doesnt match the wolf-chat target then wolf knows immediately other wolf is sk. So no false positive, and sk has no control over false negative.
    Yes, in that case all players would know the Traitor still lives.

  28. ISO #78
    Appealing to Emotion Zork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    6,142
    Timezone
    UTC-06:00
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#76)
    Quote Originally Posted by Zork (#74)
    LATEST/GREATEST:
    [/COLOR]The Traitor may submit two names so that if his or her first choice is the lynch, the second name is chosen for the NK instead.
    I suppose the traitor could try to guess the lynch target and only submit that name to attempt a holster.
    Unlikely, but good point. Fixed by changing "may" to "must."

  29. ISO #79
    Thread Analyst AndrewGreve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    USA -West coast
    Posts
    314
    Timezone
    UTC-08:00
    Community
    2+2
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by Zork (#77)
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#75)
    The vests do provide a potential false negative, but if a nk does go through that doesnt match the wolf-chat target then wolf knows immediately other wolf is sk. So no false positive, and sk has no control over false negative.
    Yes, in that case all players would know the Traitor still lives.
    the SK targets un-vested villager, and wolf chat targets vested villager, then only the wolf would know the SK. In other words if only one villager is night killed, the villagers don't know if that is sk or wolf target.

    If 2 nk's go through, then everyone knows sk is alive.

  30. ISO #80
    Appealing to Emotion Zork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    6,142
    Timezone
    UTC-06:00
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#79)
    the SK targets un-vested villager, and wolf chat targets vested villager, then only the wolf would know the SK. In other words if only one villager is night killed, the villagers don't know if that is sk or wolf target.

    If 2 nk's go through, then everyone knows sk is alive.
    right

  31. ISO #81
    Thread Analyst AndrewGreve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    USA -West coast
    Posts
    314
    Timezone
    UTC-08:00
    Community
    2+2
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by Zork (#78)
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#76)
    Quote Originally Posted by Zork (#74)
    LATEST/GREATEST:
    [/COLOR]The Traitor may submit two names so that if his or her first choice is the lynch, the second name is chosen for the NK instead.
    I suppose the traitor could try to guess the lynch target and only submit that name to attempt a holster.
    Unlikely, but good point. Fixed by changing "may" to "must."
    I would have considered it, to make the wolf feel safer and not worry about any busing attempts.

    I think my only other concern now is that it is very difficult for the final wolf partnered with traitor to lynch traitor without outing himself in the process. I could see an emotional player spite revealing the SK to give village the win just because the spot is so dire. If the village knows that there is exactly 1 wolf and exactly 1 traitor left, they would be correct to trust a player outing himself and the traitor, since there is only a few possibilities, and none of them are a player helping their own win condition.

    1) wolf outing self and SK(forces village win condition)
    2) wolf outing self for a mislynch(forces wolf loss condition)
    3) Traitor outing self and wolf(forces village win condition)
    4) traitor outing self and mis-lynch(Forces traitor loss condition)
    5) Villager making FPS (forces a mis-lynch) <-- this one isnt strictly anti win condition but it is close, since GTO in this spot is to lynch the player making the claim first.

    I have no idea how one builds around potential players throwing the game, or if it is best to build games ignoring the possibility(since a game can ALWAYS be thrown by someone). I like finding things in rule sets I would try to abuse, so thanks for listening. I'll let you know if I think of something else that is potentially breaking your game's spirit/intent/win conditions.

  32. ISO #82
    Appealing to Emotion Zork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    6,142
    Timezone
    UTC-06:00
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#81)
    I think my only other concern now is that it is very difficult for the final wolf partnered with traitor to lynch traitor without outing himself in the process. I could see an emotional player spite revealing the SK to give village the win just because the spot is so dire.
    Let me stop reading right there and address this quickly. When Town cannot win, any remaining Townies are removed from the game precisely to prevent this situation from happening. And besides, what is to prevent the Traitor from pretending to be an emotional Mafioso spite-revealing the real Mafioso as the "Traitor?"
    Last edited by Zork; February 16th, 2019 at 04:28 PM.

  33. ISO #83
    GOAT Tier BATMAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    17,761
    Community
    PTP(RIP), 2+2
    AKA
    BATM!
    Gender
    Sure. In

  34. ISO #84
    Appealing to Emotion Zork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    6,142
    Timezone
    UTC-06:00
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#81)
    there is only a few possibilities, and none of them are a player helping their own win condition.
    That's absolutely correct. However, there is already a provision in place to guard against this beyond the provision eliminating Town players from the game when they cannot possibly win:

    Note that merely failing to play AGAINST your win condition is insufficient. You must play TOWARD.
    Last edited by Zork; February 16th, 2019 at 04:32 PM.

  35. ISO #85
    Appealing to Emotion Zork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    6,142
    Timezone
    UTC-06:00
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#81)
    1) wolf outing self and SK(forces village win condition)
    2) wolf outing self for a mislynch(forces wolf loss condition)
    3) Traitor outing self and wolf(forces village win condition)
    4) traitor outing self and mis-lynch(Forces traitor loss condition)
    5) Villager making FPS (forces a mis-lynch) <-- this one isnt strictly anti win condition but it is close, since GTO in this spot is to lynch the player making the claim first.

    I have no idea how one builds around potential players throwing the game, or if it is best to build games ignoring the possibility(since a game can ALWAYS be thrown by someone). I like finding things in rule sets I would try to abuse, so thanks for listening. I'll let you know if I think of something else that is potentially breaking your game's spirit/intent/win conditions.
    I agree with you completely, and you're right on those 5 points. The first 4 are already outlawed. The 5th is mere FPS, as you say.

    No setup can completely guard against players outright cheating, which is what you call intentional violation of the rules, even when those rules threaten banning (see quote of site rule above). However, I have minimized the risk of this occurring by creating a situation where if there is a Townie, a Traitor and a Mafioso at F3, we would skip that directly to F2 with just the Traitor and the Mafioso, and the Traitor wins because the Traitor's win condition is to eliminate the Town and have only one Mafioso remaining, whereas the Mafia does not win because their win condition requires eliminating the Traitor.

    So I don't think any of those situations are possible, actually. I might be wrong, but even if and to the extent any are possible, there are site-wide safeguards in place.

  36. ISO #86
    Thread Analyst AndrewGreve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    USA -West coast
    Posts
    314
    Timezone
    UTC-08:00
    Community
    2+2
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by Zork (#85)
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#81)
    1) wolf outing self and SK(forces village win condition)
    2) wolf outing self for a mislynch(forces wolf loss condition)
    3) Traitor outing self and wolf(forces village win condition)
    4) traitor outing self and mis-lynch(Forces traitor loss condition)
    5) Villager making FPS (forces a mis-lynch) <-- this one isnt strictly anti win condition but it is close, since GTO in this spot is to lynch the player making the claim first.

    I have no idea how one builds around potential players throwing the game, or if it is best to build games ignoring the possibility(since a game can ALWAYS be thrown by someone). I like finding things in rule sets I would try to abuse, so thanks for listening. I'll let you know if I think of something else that is potentially breaking your game's spirit/intent/win conditions.
    I agree with you completely, and you're right on those 5 points. The first 4 are already outlawed. The 5th is mere FPS, as you say.

    No setup can completely guard against players outright cheating, which is what you call intentional violation of the rules, even when those rules threaten banning (see quote of site rule above). However, I have minimized the risk of this occurring by creating a situation where if there is a Townie, a Traitor and a Mafioso at F3, we would skip that directly to F2 with just the Traitor and the Mafioso, and the Traitor wins because the Traitor's win condition is to eliminate the Town and have only one Mafioso remaining, whereas the Mafia does not win because their win condition requires eliminating the Traitor.

    So I don't think any of those situations are possible, actually. I might be wrong, but even if and to the extent any are possible, there are site-wide safeguards in place.
    Sounds like we agree.

    For the sake of thought exercise, the scenario I was considering that could elicit a wolf spite is as follows:

    Nightfall with 7-9 players left. 1 wolf and 1 traitor;
    2 players are nk'd;
    dawn with 5-7 players. Everyone knows there is 1 wolf, and 1 Traitor, and 3-5 villagers.

    Wolf's only win condition is to lynch the traitor. Then survive to and win a F3 after pushing the traitor's lynch. Throw in potential banked vests and it is a very narrow win condition.

    @F5 the Traitor could do an FPS claim, since village strongly prefers to lynch wolf first. Only that means Traitor is gambling on dodging village vests, and dodging lynch after claiming wolf. It is worst line to victory for Traitor, esp since wolf only does it out of rage and intentional game throw.

  37. ISO #87
    Appealing to Emotion Zork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    6,142
    Timezone
    UTC-06:00
    Gender
    If there would be an F3 of a Townie with no vest, a Mafioso, and a Traitor, the Townie must be removed from the game because there is no way for the Townie to win
    • If the Townie lynches the Mafioso, he/she is stuck with the Traitor who will kill the Townie in the night to win the game.
    • If the Townie lynches the Traitor, the Townie just created parity, which wins the game for the Mafia.

    If there would be an F3 of a Townie WITH a vest, a Mafioso, and a Traitor, the Traitor must be removed from the game because there is no way for the Traitor to win
    • The Traitor cannot lynch Town to achieve the Traitor win condition of parity with Mafia because the Traitor is the only player standing between the Mafia and a win, so the Mafia is not voting to lynch Town, and neither will Town vote to lynch Town.
    • The Traitor cannot lynch Mafia, either, because even if the Traitor convinces the Townie to go along with it, that leaves them at F2 the next day. This is because the Townie wears the vest, and, per the roleset, when there is only a Townie and the Traitor, and the Townie wore the vest, the Town wins.
    • Therefore, the Traitor must be removed from the game under this circumstance because there is no way for the Traitor to win.
    • Furthermore, if the Traitor must be removed from the game under that circumstance, the Townie must also be removed from the game because there is no way for the Townie to win; there is parity between the Town and the Mafia.

    Therefore, unless I am missing something, if a day begins at F3 with Townie/Mafioso/Traitor and there is
    • no vest = Mafia/Traitor tie game
    • vest = Mafia wins game.

    If the day would begin at F3 with two Townies and a Mafioso, it proceeds like a normal F3. If the day would begin at F3 with two Townies and a Traitor, it also proceeds like a normal F3 except that if the remaining Townie has a vest, the Town wins. Otherwise the Traitor wins. So if F3 is unfolding, and you are Town, you know that one of the other two players is Town, and the other is Scum. You also know that if that Scum is a Traitor, at least one of you two Townies must have a vest or the game would have been called already. So then you have to figure out not only who the Scum is, but your second choice lynch should be the Townie who is less likely to have a vest still!

    Complicated!

  38. ISO #88
    Appealing to Emotion Zork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    6,142
    Timezone
    UTC-06:00
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#86)
    Throw in potential banked vests and it is a very narrow win condition.
    Well, yeah, as it should be. Your hypo stated that only one wolf still lives among 7-9 players! They probably shouldn't win! :-)

    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#86)
    It is worst line to victory for Traitor, esp since wolf only does it out of rage and intentional game throw.
    I don't understand your reasoning here at all.

  39. ISO #89
    Thread Analyst AndrewGreve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    USA -West coast
    Posts
    314
    Timezone
    UTC-08:00
    Community
    2+2
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by Zork (#88)
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#86)
    Throw in potential banked vests and it is a very narrow win condition.
    Well, yeah, as it should be. Your hypo stated that only one wolf still lives among 7-9 players! They probably shouldn't win! :-)
    Super fair the wolf should be close to losing, but these scenarios are also when players end up more frustrated and likely to cheat out of anger.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zork (#88)
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#86)
    It is worst line to victory for Traitor, esp since wolf only does it out of rage and intentional game throw.
    I don't understand your reasoning here at all.
    Again just as a thought experiment. I don't think this is big enough to warrant changes.

    The only reason a wolf would claim wolf in that spot is to give up on win condition, aka cheat.

    1) A traitor could attempt a FPS at pretending to be a wolf cheating. It is making a highly risky play in a spot that prob favors a traitor win. Traitor is 1 ML from win, so why bother.

    If you expect the wolf to cheat then it gains a bunch of value. So it only gains value when the wolf is likely to cheat, and simultaneously requires you to pretend to be a wolf cheating. Basically it creates a pressure on traitor to beat the wolf to the punch of claiming wolf, but only if you think wolf will actually cheat.

    2) If the traitor claims wolf, it all but guarantees the wolf loses, but still leaves Traitor with a win condition. If the wolf thinks the Traitor will pretend to be a cheating wolf, it really encourages an emotional/upset wolf to cheat first.
    cycle 1 and 2 ad infinitum.


    If the traitor claims wolf, it all but guarantees the wolf loses (yeah I quoted a post in the post itself, deal with it)
    specifically for this point. In a vacuum, a player claiming wolf and partner at F5 is going to contain the traitor nearly 100% of the time. Either it is a wolf cheating and giving up the traitor, or a traitor making a FPS. SO GTO village should vote inside the dichotomy always because they need to kill traitor. Traitor needs a wolf or villager lynched at F5. So only time there is a wolf/partner claim that doesnt auto-lose for wolf is when the traitor includes a villager in the claim. (small caveat is that wolf could suicide for a traitor win, but I still think GTO points to lynching inside dichotomy)

    claiming wolf is a -EV move from traitor always, but including a villager as partner is worse because the villager and the wolf will both vote traitor, so traitor should nearly always include actual wolf in claim.

    I hope that is more clea,r text is not my best form of communicating. Odd that I choose forum based WW as a hobby.

  40. ISO #90
    Appealing to Emotion Zork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    6,142
    Timezone
    UTC-06:00
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#89)
    Quote Originally Posted by Zork (#88)
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#86)
    Throw in potential banked vests and it is a very narrow win condition.
    Well, yeah, as it should be. Your hypo stated that only one wolf still lives among 7-9 players! They probably shouldn't win! :-)
    Super fair the wolf should be close to losing, but these scenarios are also when players end up more frustrated and likely to cheat out of anger.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zork (#88)
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#86)
    It is worst line to victory for Traitor, esp since wolf only does it out of rage and intentional game throw.
    I don't understand your reasoning here at all.
    Again just as a thought experiment. I don't think this is big enough to warrant changes.

    The only reason a wolf would claim wolf in that spot is to give up on win condition, aka cheat.

    1) A traitor could attempt a FPS at pretending to be a wolf cheating. It is making a highly risky play in a spot that prob favors a traitor win. Traitor is 1 ML from win, so why bother.

    If you expect the wolf to cheat then it gains a bunch of value. So it only gains value when the wolf is likely to cheat, and simultaneously requires you to pretend to be a wolf cheating. Basically it creates a pressure on traitor to beat the wolf to the punch of claiming wolf, but only if you think wolf will actually cheat.

    2) If the traitor claims wolf, it all but guarantees the wolf loses, but still leaves Traitor with a win condition. If the wolf thinks the Traitor will pretend to be a cheating wolf, it really encourages an emotional/upset wolf to cheat first.
    cycle 1 and 2 ad infinitum.


    If the traitor claims wolf, it all but guarantees the wolf loses (yeah I quoted a post in the post itself, deal with it)
    specifically for this point. In a vacuum, a player claiming wolf and partner at F5 is going to contain the traitor nearly 100% of the time. Either it is a wolf cheating and giving up the traitor, or a traitor making a FPS. SO GTO village should vote inside the dichotomy always because they need to kill traitor. Traitor needs a wolf or villager lynched at F5. So only time there is a wolf/partner claim that doesnt auto-lose for wolf is when the traitor includes a villager in the claim. (small caveat is that wolf could suicide for a traitor win, but I still think GTO points to lynching inside dichotomy)

    claiming wolf is a -EV move from traitor always, but including a villager as partner is worse because the villager and the wolf will both vote traitor, so traitor should nearly always include actual wolf in claim.

    I hope that is more clea,r text is not my best form of communicating. Odd that I choose forum based WW as a hobby.
    On the contrary, you're quite clear. But I think I covered some of what you're describing in post 87.

  41. ISO #91
    Thread Analyst AndrewGreve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    USA -West coast
    Posts
    314
    Timezone
    UTC-08:00
    Community
    2+2
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by Zork (#90)
    On the contrary, you're quite clear. But I think I covered some of what you're describing in post 87.
    It was a pretty deep rabbit hole so it is fine

  42. ISO #92
    Appealing to Emotion Zork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    6,142
    Timezone
    UTC-06:00
    Gender
    Bottom line, if the game ends unsatisfactorily because a player decided to spaz out and break the rules to the detriment of 12 other players, you can be sure management would come down hard on that player, and it wouldn't be a fault of game design. Of course, it is incumbent on designers to reduce the risk of that happening, and I can't come up with any further edits to reduce it any further without needless additional complexity. Can you?

  43. ISO #93
    Thread Analyst AndrewGreve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    USA -West coast
    Posts
    314
    Timezone
    UTC-08:00
    Community
    2+2
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by Zork (#92)
    Bottom line, if the game ends unsatisfactorily because a player decided to spaz out and break the rules to the detriment of 12 other players, you can be sure management would come down hard on that player, and it wouldn't be a fault of game design. Of course, it is incumbent on designers to reduce the risk of that happening, and I can't come up with any further edits to reduce it any further without needless additional complexity. Can you?
    nope. just pondering on it

  44. ISO #94
    Thread Analyst AndrewGreve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    USA -West coast
    Posts
    314
    Timezone
    UTC-08:00
    Community
    2+2
    Gender
    I suppose any time there are 3+ factions it increases the opportunities for spite actions

  45. ISO #95
    Pocketing You Xicor's Avatar Community Contributor
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    5,112
    Timezone
    UTC-04:00
    Community
    AoPS
    AKA
    statisticslol, stats
    Gender
    sure ill play, why not
    Reading is essential

  46. ISO #96
    Appealing to Emotion Zork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    6,142
    Timezone
    UTC-06:00
    Gender
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewGreve (#94)
    I suppose any time there are 3+ factions it increases the opportunities for spite actions
    I think it's gonna play out where the Scum keep the alliance going because they both need each other's KP to counteract the Town with its multiple cops and vests and power roles. The Mafia especially need the Traitor to help thin that herd.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Keyboard Shortcuts

about us
Mafia Universe is a community hub for people who enjoy playing the forum variant of Mafia (also known as Werewolf). We offer fully automated Mafia games and a wide variety of customized features crafted to optimize your game experience. We also proudly host the Internet's only database of Mafia/Werewolf communities.

We hope you stick around!
Role of the Day
Bomb

The Bomb will reflexively kill any player that kills it during night.