Trepa Mayfield
FGM
Does Not Follow Directions
The only kind of panda worth preserving.
Posts: 989
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 23, 2010 18:45:23 GMT -5
Post by Trepa Mayfield on Feb 23, 2010 18:45:23 GMT -5
The cruise ship carrying the newly-gathered union split the waters quite nicely, powering along toward the island fortress that held Nintendo's headquarters. "Now listen up!" said Popo, over the loudspeaker. "We're fast approaching private waters! Our intelligence says that there shouldn't be any threats at this point, but I don't want anyone risking their lives for no reason! Everyone stay below-deck until--gurk" The sounds of a scuffle replaced any words, followed by Mario shouting "So long-a, suckers!", and then a roar, and then...nothing.
Was it safe? What had happened? The other members confirmed that yes, Popo was dead, and Mario was nowhere to be seen. They decided to raid his room, perhaps finding clues to what had happened. Inside, they found codebooks, transmitters, evidence for a conspiracy infiltrating the group. Some of the unionizers...were scabs. And according to their plans, if even one of them is alive when the boat hits land, the whole union will get massacred in seconds.
All they could do was sit, and wait, dead in the water, and try to figure out who is who...hopefully, before they were all killed.
Day 1 start!
(Day 1 ends at 6:45 PM EST, Sunday)
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 23, 2010 19:02:24 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on Feb 23, 2010 19:02:24 GMT -5
Nothing like a fresh clean Day 1.
How is everyone doing this game?
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 23, 2010 19:09:53 GMT -5
Post by special on Feb 23, 2010 19:09:53 GMT -5
Nothing like a fresh clean Day 1. How is everyone doing this game? I am fine. How are you? I suppose we have some topics that we can discuss discussing. 1. Borda voting 2. Potential set-ups 2a. Number of Scum 2b. Number of 3rd party 2c. Number of Scum teams 2d. Number/type of PFKs 3. Mass claims 4. Grudges 5. Fishing 6. Leaking PIS But perhaps this was premature. We might want to discuss if we should even discuss discussing things.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 23, 2010 19:23:13 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on Feb 23, 2010 19:23:13 GMT -5
I'm doing ok.
I will come out right now and say that more and more I like the idea of mass claims. I am not saying we should open the Day with a mass claim, but I am saying that at some point in the game I think they would be a good idea, because it has been my experience that they are generally a good idea at some point in a closed setup.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 23, 2010 19:23:41 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Feb 23, 2010 19:23:41 GMT -5
well, i can tell you that the borda counting is real problematic.
crap, as a scummer in the last one that used this mechanism, we could have ended the game much earlier if it would not have been internet connectivity issues on me and one other scummer.
so those 2nd and 3rd place votes, while looking attractive to fill the box can really bite town in the ass if just tossed haphazardly.
but the fact that we don't have to have a full slate to have any of our votes count should mitigate that.
i would strongly suggest that those types of votes be more fos than actually potentially lynch changing.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 23, 2010 19:31:01 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Feb 23, 2010 19:31:01 GMT -5
hey, ed if you have "leaking PIS" i'd take that up with your urologist.
sounds kind of fucking nasty.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 23, 2010 19:35:08 GMT -5
Post by special on Feb 23, 2010 19:35:08 GMT -5
well, i can tell you that the borda counting is real problematic. crap, as a scummer in the last one that used this mechanism, we could have ended the game much earlier if it would not have been internet connectivity issues on me and one other scummer. so those 2nd and 3rd place votes, while looking attractive to fill the box can really bite town in the ass if just tossed haphazardly. but the fact that we don't have to have a full slate to have any of our votes count should mitigate that. i would strongly suggest that those types of votes be more fos than actually potentially lynch changing. I agree. I was Scum with you in the borda game, and it became mighty powerful for Scum. It basically allows them: 1. In early game, to cast 2nd or 3rd place votes for people and get them lynched while others look scummier for it. 2. All game, to cast votes for other Scum and muddy up the vote analysis 3. At lynch or lose, allow Scum too much maneuverability. 2 well informed Scum have much greater voting power than 3 not-so-well informed Town. So I might suggest we discuss limiting our use of 2nd and 3rd place votes, unless we have solid targets.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 23, 2010 19:49:56 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Feb 23, 2010 19:49:56 GMT -5
was that the one where you were the scum infiltrator mason and went all lincoln on us? to the point that the mod went all revisionist and redacted all your posts?
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 23, 2010 19:55:17 GMT -5
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Feb 23, 2010 19:55:17 GMT -5
It's good to be back playing a game I can hopefully wrap my head around. As far as Borda voting goes, only used it once, but I loved it. If I recall, you get three votes, first vote is worth 3 points, 2nd vote worth 2, 3rd vote worth 1.... that right?
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 23, 2010 19:56:59 GMT -5
Post by shaggy on Feb 23, 2010 19:56:59 GMT -5
Well I certainly think discusing things are always a good thing.
I do agree with NAF that down the road mass claims can be a good thing, look at Heroes on Giraffe, I mean the mass claim was one of the major things that did the scum in. Obviously though I think Day one would be way to premature for it to happen. But I will give you that there are times in a game when it can be benneficial.
I think the borda vote system is more problematic down the road, if we happen to get into a situation of lynch or loose. Such as one game I remember where we lost cause of this. One 3rd place vote was on me and then the scum piled on in the last minute of the day and ended the game with a lynch of me and a win for them.
As for dynamics of the game, we have what 19 players so that would be what a square root of 4.5 so I think is safe to assume atleast 4, maybe 5, depending on how many PFK or 3rd party we have. Atleast this is my stab in the dark geuss.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 23, 2010 20:13:07 GMT -5
Post by special on Feb 23, 2010 20:13:07 GMT -5
was that the one where you were the scum infiltrator mason and went all lincoln on us? to the point that the mod went all revisionist and redacted all your posts? Yeah, it was the lincoln thing coupled with the random wikipedia thing.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 23, 2010 20:16:49 GMT -5
Post by Red Skeezix on Feb 23, 2010 20:16:49 GMT -5
I agree that mass claims are a good idea, later on, just not right now.
@shaggy, I remember heroes, that was the game where we were kicking some town ass (to the point that people were complaining that the game was obviously biased towards scum), and the game went full swing the other direction with a simple little mass claim.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 23, 2010 20:18:57 GMT -5
Post by special on Feb 23, 2010 20:18:57 GMT -5
It's good to be back playing a game I can hopefully wrap my head around. As far as Borda voting goes, only used it once, but I loved it. If I recall, you get three votes, first vote is worth 3 points, 2nd vote worth 2, 3rd vote worth 1.... that right? Borda might look fun, but I think it gives more power to the Scum. Scum can place their votes with a hell of a lot more information than Town can. For example, it you have 3 uniformed Town voting for Scum A, Town B and Town C..it might look like Player 1 1. Scum A 2. Town B 3. Town C Player 2 1. Town C 2. Town B 3. Scum A Player 3 1. Town D 2. Scum A 3. Town B This would mean: Scum A has 6 votes Town B has 5 Votes A Scum can come in and place a 2nd vote on Town B and get them lynched instead. And the Scum have good information for casting votes. and where would we cast suspicion? The voting record is a mess.....
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 23, 2010 20:32:10 GMT -5
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Feb 23, 2010 20:32:10 GMT -5
It's good to be back playing a game I can hopefully wrap my head around. As far as Borda voting goes, only used it once, but I loved it. If I recall, you get three votes, first vote is worth 3 points, 2nd vote worth 2, 3rd vote worth 1.... that right? Borda might look fun, but I think it gives more power to the Scum. Scum can place their votes with a hell of a lot more information than Town can. For example, it you have 3 uniformed Town voting for Scum A, Town B and Town C..it might look like Player 1 1. Scum A 2. Town B 3. Town C Player 2 1. Town C 2. Town B 3. Scum A Player 3 1. Town D 2. Scum A 3. Town B This would mean: Scum A has 6 votes Town B has 5 Votes A Scum can come in and place a 2nd vote on Town B and get them lynched instead. And the Scum have good information for casting votes. and where would we cast suspicion? The voting record is a mess..... Point taken, my use of the system was limited as I came into the last SSBM game and got thrown into a rather messy situation, so I didn't survive more than a couple of nights.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 23, 2010 20:37:59 GMT -5
Post by shaggy on Feb 23, 2010 20:37:59 GMT -5
Reread the last day of SSBM and you can really see the perils of the system. I had to go back and look but that was the game I remember where it was fun but did the town in, at the end.
|
|
Trepa Mayfield
FGM
Does Not Follow Directions
The only kind of panda worth preserving.
Posts: 989
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 23, 2010 20:59:56 GMT -5
Post by Trepa Mayfield on Feb 23, 2010 20:59:56 GMT -5
Note that this system of Borda is slightly different than the last one. In this game, one must not cast all three votes in order for them to count.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 23, 2010 21:11:47 GMT -5
Post by Meeko on Feb 23, 2010 21:11:47 GMT -5
Boy did I pick the wrong night to defrag my hard drive.
I am caught up now, and I am here.
----
So yeah, this voting system seems to be heavier, in terms of votes, the vote math, and the overall theory, and it's implication. Agreed that scum have it easier on this system.
In a game where I am rarely understood, I don't need a new voting system to wreak havoc for me. (I know the system is not new, I mean it is new to me, I am popping my Borda cherry, or what ever this system is.)
Bear with me.
I assume unvotes remain the same?
2. Everyone has 3 votes: a 1st vote, a 2nd vote, and a 3rd vote. The 1st vote is worth 3 point, the 2nd is worth 2 point, and the 3rd is worth 1 point. Whoever has the most points at the end of the day is killed. You can't vote more than once for the same person. Unlike in other games, you don't have to vote 3 times for it to count.*
So to me, this means we can vote for 1, 2, OR 3 players. Correct?
Scum have no reason to not make all three votes. [My god, Why do I hear echoes of Double Lysing?]
How does Town combat this then? If town doesn't make all three votes, aren't we basically handing the game over to scum?
I assume we place our second and third votes on those we would normally FOS. That much I get. Granted, the FOS comes with point values as well.
Can you make your "third" vote first? That is, can you specifically state what point value you would like each vote to have, as you make it? -- Provided of course you still have that slot open.
I assume votes do not bubble up. If I make a first and a second vote, and then unvote my first, my second remains my second, correct?
We must guard against a third or second slot vote getting promoted to first slot, with out reason. There should be no discount given in regards to promoting a second slot vote to a first slot. If you move your second [or third] slot to your first slot, you should have a good reason. That reason should be public as well.
I am fearful that scum will make a vote in their second or third slot, and then feel free to change that vote to their first slot, with little to no explanation or reason.
I can only imagine the WIFOM once the votes start to leapfrog slots. If someone all of a sudden becomes your first place vote, that has no prior representation on your list for that day, I think there should be good reason for it.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 23, 2010 21:14:35 GMT -5
Post by Meeko on Feb 23, 2010 21:14:35 GMT -5
And I see that my longer posts are already going to get the best of me.
Thanks Pede for ESPping a question I had before I got to submit it.
|
|
Trepa Mayfield
FGM
Does Not Follow Directions
The only kind of panda worth preserving.
Posts: 989
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 23, 2010 21:20:53 GMT -5
Post by Trepa Mayfield on Feb 23, 2010 21:20:53 GMT -5
Can you make your "third" vote first? That is, can you specifically state what point value you would like each vote to have, as you make it? -- Provided of course you still have that slot open.
I assume votes do not bubble up. If I make a first and a second vote, and then unvote my first, my second remains my second, correct? 1. Yes. 2. You assume correctly. And although you didn't ask, I should specify that you can't vote for the same person multiple times in the same vote (i.e. no 1. Vote Hoopy 2. Vote Hoopy 3. Vote Hoopy).
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 23, 2010 21:28:06 GMT -5
Post by Meeko on Feb 23, 2010 21:28:06 GMT -5
And although you didn't ask, I should specify that you can't vote for the same person multiple times in the same vote (i.e. no 1. Vote Hoopy 2. Vote Hoopy 3. Vote Hoopy). I was good on that one. That's why I didn't ask.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 23, 2010 21:37:27 GMT -5
Post by special on Feb 23, 2010 21:37:27 GMT -5
Although, it should be stated that it's always a good idea to...
Vote: Høøpy Frøød
in games that he isn't playing.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 23, 2010 21:37:55 GMT -5
Post by special on Feb 23, 2010 21:37:55 GMT -5
and, lest I confuse anyone
Unvote: Høøpy Frøød
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 23, 2010 22:19:56 GMT -5
Post by MentalGuy on Feb 23, 2010 22:19:56 GMT -5
I did not play in the other game, but I can see where scum could game the Borda count voting. I think it would be good thing if players would agree not to place 2nd and 3rd votes except as one-off FOS's. What would be the real point of placing a 2nd vote that would lynch someone anyway? If you felt they were scummy enough to lynch, shouldn't they be your top vote?
I agree that mass claims can be powerful, but in Heroes, one of the things that helped (besides having two mod-confirmed essentially unkillable Town) was that the mass claim just sort of happened. It left the scum unprepared. I don't think they will be caught as off-guard this game. That said, I still think that at some point a mass claim is likely to do the Town a lot of good.
Another thing I will mention is policy voting, such as "lynch the lurker" or voting for editing. I know some people are dead set against policy voting, but I am more ambivalent about it. Those policies were developed for good reasons, and at some point pressure needs to be put on people to play in a pro-town way. I have a tendency to not be a high post count player, and there have been times when a lurker vote has gotten me to participate more (both as Town and Scum). That said, it seems there is usually something more significant that happens over the course of the Day than simple policy failures. When someone sticks to a policy vote in spite of other significant events, it doesn't sit too well with me.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 23, 2010 23:47:19 GMT -5
Post by Inner Stickler on Feb 23, 2010 23:47:19 GMT -5
I agree and I disagree. After day three, I think a mass claim is more beneficial to town pretty much regardless of the particulars of the situation.
The borda count worries me because I see it as a real tool for scum.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 0:03:03 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 24, 2010 0:03:03 GMT -5
I'm not too bothered by the borda votes, or having to potentially do without some vote record insights. The silver lining is that we'll be less likely to infer scummy motivations on townies who just happen to have vote records that look bad.
To those with ideas to mitigate scum manipulation of the multiple votes, can I ask that you present your proposals in such a way that the potential pros and cons to each faction are illustrated?
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 0:41:28 GMT -5
Post by Meeko on Feb 24, 2010 0:41:28 GMT -5
I'm not too bothered by the borda votes, or having to potentially do without some vote record insights. The silver lining is that we'll be less likely to infer scummy motivations on townies who just happen to have vote records that look bad. To those with ideas to mitigate scum manipulation of the multiple votes, can I ask that you present your proposals in such a way that the potential pros and cons to each faction are illustrated? Cookies, I don't follow. At all. Help me out here. In most games, an unvote or a last minute vote is a switch from A to B in terms of lead. We now have a situation where a single unvote or last minute switch can go from A to B OR C. Scum is given an entire extra track to switch last minute votes on. Yet you don't worry? Please explain. You say you would not be bothered if some some insight is potentially not present. Please elaborate on this, with an example wherein the element of missing insight is present, and it would be acceptable to you. How will we be less likely to infer scummy motivations? And if I am beginning to understand you, wouldn't this also mean that we would not have any scummy motivations to infer, from scum as well ? It is one thing to get rid of False positives. It is an entirely different affair to get rid of ALL Positives in doing so. Something about Babies and Bathwater here. Per your last paragraph: You want me to tell you how I think scum can hide their vote tells? Fish much?
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 1:03:36 GMT -5
Post by Nanook on Feb 24, 2010 1:03:36 GMT -5
Meeko, I don't think that terms means what you seem to think it does.
Borda in general is definately a pro-scum voting system, as we amply demonstrated in the last SSB. However, I think not having the forced second and third votes really mitigates that to a large extent. Personally, I probably won't be using my second vote much at all. I'll likely use the third vote as a more forceful FOS(which I've never cared for, but is useful when you can put some bite in it), and of course my first vote.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 2:02:16 GMT -5
Post by Paulwhoisaghost on Feb 24, 2010 2:02:16 GMT -5
Scum have no reason to not make all three votes. [My god, Why do I hear echoes of Double Lysing?] How does Town combat this then? If town doesn't make all three votes, aren't we basically handing the game over to scum? Wrong. Scum has good reason to not make all three votes. Scum want to make you think they are town while stirring up confusion. As you can already tell, Borda makes a lot of people nervous because a scum can easily protect a fellow scum by voting for the next two highest lynch candidates in his 1st and 2nd place vote slots and making either or both of those players the new lynch leader. All the while he doesn't look like he was protecting the scum, especially if he votes said scum in his third place slot. Here's the math behind that potential situation: Scum A has 6 votes. Town A has 5 votes. Town B has 4 votes. Scum B comes in an writes a great post about why he agrees with those suspicious of Town A and Town B, but not so much Scum A. In the order of his highest suspicions he would place Town B 1st, Town A 2nd, and Scum A at a distant 3rd. He ends said post with a vote of Vote: 1st: Town B 2nd: Town A 3rd: Scum AThus he brings the new vote count to a three way tie. If he didn't put Scum A as his 3rd vote, he would tie the game with 2 town in the lead. Now, this is why people are suggesting that we not use our 2nd or 3rd votes. It adds a scummy tinge to act of using them because not using them makes it harder for scum to pull such a stunt without getting noticed. And since there is protown reasoning behind NOT using your 2nd and 3rd votes, surely scum is gonna be all over it. Borda count does have it's benefits, it allows you state who you absolutely want to lynch that day. It also gives you an option to say, "If I wasn't going to lynch Player A, I would lynch Player B, and if not him, then Player C." Sure, that's what FOS's are for, but saying you are suspicious of someone and saying you are ready to lynch someone are not equal at all in my book. The Borda system allows you to state your opinion on a group of people, and in my limited experience, you end up with a lynch candidate you were happy with. (Too often am I seen as town with a one off vote for someone because I am the only one who has that person for my primary suspect.)
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 2:11:40 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 24, 2010 2:11:40 GMT -5
Meeko: You admit that you aren't following me, yet you're comfortable coming to the conclusion that I'm fishing?
Read what I said again, without that part of putting words in my mouth, and maybe you will see that your paranoia is a bit overkill.
The rules are the rules, and there have been a few posts that seemed to be "Oh noes!11! Borda bad!!" which I don't understand. Why sweat it? Be aware of it, yes. Discuss strategy about it, fine. But I'm confident Pede gave us a balanced game with an apparent upgrade in flexibility of the borda system since the last go-round. I don't see how worrying and fretting and wringing our hands about it is worth the keystrokes. In the part of my post that you are interpreting as fishing, apparently, all I am asking is that the players who are, as Nanook has proposed, likely not to utilize all of the votes at their disposal to explain why. If you someone is going to try and telegraph a personal policy about how they plan to use restraint in their number of votes like that, I'd like to hear the logic behind that decision. Does he, by extension, consider people who do not make a similar pledge or who end up voting with a different policy as suspicious? Anyone who might pledge to use all of their available votes each and every day would get the same question.
The silver lining statement was just that. There is a cloud of potential scum manipulation of the votes in this set up, and such manipulation will be difficult to tease out of vote analysis. The silver lining is, if we are mindful of this and emphasize scum-hunting in areas outside of vote analysis, we will be less likely to run into those pesky false-positives where we lynch Townies because of their bad voting records.
Not celebratory sunshine and flowers and unicorns...the silver lining of a cloud.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 24, 2010 2:45:11 GMT -5
Post by luvbwfc on Feb 24, 2010 2:45:11 GMT -5
I thought Ed's explanation of the perils of Borda was clear and informative. How about we agree to use it as a kind of fos system. Someone pings you, you put a 1 pt vote on them, they continue to act scummy/have shady reasoning, you promote them up through 2 pts and then 3 pts, but we only ever place one vote each at a time
Yes there is no rule stopping people placing multiple votes, but if we have all agreed otherwise, only scum would do so. This would only work in early game of course. In late game we need those 1st & 2nd place votes on scum A and scum B to prevent scum deciding the lynch.
|
|