Dethy Tournament--Heat Three in progress!--Still Recruiting!

[Chessgeek]

I had to hope TFT scried Murska. Oh well. I guess the Tanar reveal does have some impact, but it's no biggie. I'd probably lose it anyway. Murska did you actually scry me last night?

[Askthepizzaguy]

Remove knowledge of Tanar being insane from the play field and re-examine.

TheFieryTower got Chessgeek as Innocent
Chessgeek got Murska as Guilty
Tanar got TheFieryTower as Guilty
Murska got Askthepizzaguy as Innocent
Askthepizzaguy got Chessgeek as Guilty

Tanar is lynched, proven innocent, but not proven Insane Cop.
Murska is murdered, proven innocent.

TheFieryTower got Askthepizzaguy as Innocent
Chessgeek got
Askthepizzaguy got Murska as Guilty

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

Because I get two guilty results, I already know I am either Insane or Paranoid.

Because Tanar got a guilty result on TFT, the possibilities are Sane, Insane, and Paranoid.

Because TFT got two innocent results, both of them against current suspects, he is claiming to be Naive Cop, not Insane. He cannot be claiming to be the Sane Cop, because then he would be accusing himself of being guilty. So by rule, TFT can only be Naive or Mafia, regardless of Tanar's reveal.

TFT: Naive Cop or Mafia
Askthepizzaguy: Paranoid Cop, Insane or Mafia
Murska: Known innocent with an innocent result on Askthepizzaguy, meaning Insane Cop with an innocent result on guilty Pizzaguy, or Sane cop with an innocent result on innocent Pizzaguy. Potentially Naive.
Tanar Aerdoth: Got a result of Guilty against TFT, ended up flipping innocent.

From that, you know that if Tanar is Sane, then Murska would have needed to be insane or naive by force, which would mean that Askthepizzaguy was guilty if Murska was insane. But that's impossible, because the Insane Cop cannot get an innocent result on someone that the Sane Cop gets an innocent result on. Because Tanar got a guilty on TFT, it's not possible for Tanar to be Sane, and for Murska to be Insane and then also get a result of Askthepizzaguy as innocent.

Therefore, you flip it. Tanar as insane, and Murska as sane, are the only possibilities for those two to be the Sane and Insane cops. Which would lead to Askthepizzaguy scried as innocent by sane cop, and TFT scried as guilty by insane cop.

I would still know I'm paranoid because of my two guilty scries, leading me to vote for Chessgeek, not TFT (guilty result claimed by Chessgeek D1 means he's lying, from my perspective) and TFT would still know he's naive because of his two innocent scries, and therefore know Murska was Sane, and vote for Chessgeek.

We would also know, due to the valid results of the sane and insane cops, that both TFT and Askthepizzaguy are forced to be innocent based on that.

There's still no possibility that we don't lynch Chessgeek, if we reasoned it out well enough. That is, with those same night action results.

However, Chess might have chosen a different murder target. And we might have chosen different scry targets. So it is possible the Tanar reveal affected the game. It certainly did not help matters for the mafia side.

I believe village did everything necessary to cause a forced win regardless, but I'd also be satisfied if the game was ruled a draw.

[Murska]

I had to hope TFT scried Murska. Oh well. I guess the Tanar reveal does have some impact, but it's no biggie. I'd probably lose it anyway. Murska did you actually scry me last night?

Indeed I did.

[Chessgeek]

However, Chess might have chosen a different murder target. And we might have chosen different scry targets. So it is possible the Tanar reveal affected the game. It certainly did not help matters for the mafia side.

I haven't read the analysis you just posted, but it doesn't really matter. I had initially worked out that I would kill TFT. ATPG would know he was paranoid so his results are null, Murska finds me guilty but I find him guilty so ATPG has to choose in a 50-50

Indeed I did.

Okay so there was nothing I could have done to survive.

Oh no wait! It's the same thing anyway if I kill TFT, since ATPG doesn't know I'm mafia and can't trust you even though you would know you were sane. I don't know how I screwed that up when I had figured it out before Tanar's role was revealed. Drat, I coulda been a contender. The Tanar flip shouldn't have mattered with best play.

EDIT: Although really I guess my play is just as good, since ATPG should get lynched if TFT scries me since the odds are higher for him being mafia. Whatever.

[TFT]

EDIT: Although really I guess my play is just as good, since ATPG should get lynched if TFT scries me since the odds are higher for him being mafia. Whatever.

Only problem with that logic is if ATPG has a higher chance of being maf(Unless there is a logical reason to, which I didn't see making my scry choice), then I would of course scry him every time, meaning I shouldn't get the wrong result.

[Chessgeek]

Only problem with that logic is if ATPG has a higher chance of being maf(Unless there is a logical reason to, which I didn't see making my scry choice), then I would of course scry him every time, meaning I shouldn't get the wrong result.

I mean he has a higher chance of being mafia after you get your result. When you get me as innocent (And I get ATPG as guilty so one of him and I must be paranoid) there are two scenarios you'd have to account for

If you're sane: ATPG must be a wolf since you know you're town and you have me as innocent

If you're naive: It's a 50-50 shot between him and I.

75% shot of ATPG being maf means he gets lynched.

I guess you have a point, I didn't really work out the odds on who you should scry. I saw Murska saying that you should scry me and since nobody else commented on who you should scry I figured you'd go for it. I didn't think there was significant reason why one of us would be better than the other, except Murska's aforementioned statement.

[Zjoot]

Well, to officially end this round: Chessgeek was lynched, he was, as you already know, the mafia. That makes another village victory. Please discuss mvp amongst yourselves, and the roles for the next round will be sent out tomorrow.

[reaverb]

the roles for the next round will be sent out tomorrow.

Which five players are going to be in Heat 5? The only person who I see asking to play without having participated previously is Internet Flea.

[Zack]

Which five players are going to be in Heat 5? The only person who I see asking to play without having participated previously is Internet Flea.

What are me and Visor, chopped liver?

[TBFProgrammer]

Which five players are going to be in Heat 5? The only person who I see asking to play without having participated previously is Internet Flea.

What are me and Visor, chopped liver?

Very demanding chopped liver, apparently.


Also, because I've been thinking about it a lot (and my position has changed a lot from what I first thought),
On the question of methods of forcing the mafia into a random claim:

Let's take the apparently default scenario where everyone claims the moment they first visit the thread after game start, except perhaps for the mafia. The first couple of players are almost certainly innocent unless the mafia takes a very large risk. This is something the players can reason about and will likely come into the equation more the better the mafia's play is. In other words, a mafia going fourth or fifth is actually better served with a slightly sub-optimal play exonerating one of the first claimants than with a purely optimal play.

Now let's consider randomness. The mafia has a decent chance of exonerating only one or two players with this approach, which is not really much worse than the default case. If they happen to exonerate no-one, town suddenly has almost nothing to work with. A mafia player may even be best served claiming first with a random guess (except on guilty/non-guilty) than they are with a more strategic play. It still is a large risk to take, but a more calculated approach is usually easy to read.

The strategy of partial claims is actually incredibly pro-town by comparison to one that forces full randomness, because mafia players are working with enough information to make plays that stand out as optimal behavior by the numbers, but not enough to achieve the fully optimal result and avoid exonerating anyone. There are a lot more decision points the mafia has to navigate. Aventine stuck out like a sore thumb if you did a full analysis of what everyone knew when they offered up each part of their claim; he was the only one whose play would actually help him as a mafia.

Also note that, in scenarios where two players are logically exonerated, they can usually identify the mafia from amongst the two who aren't lynched by scrying each other if the right person is lynched. Zjoot's rule change will remove this option and make random claiming (aside from watch-your-back influence) a much more viable tactic by the mafia. Getting three players logically exonerated will be extremely rare if the watch-your-back results are leveraged to avoid 4-1 splits on the result type.

[Saposhiente]

Giving a smart player more information to make a choice with always benefits them. If necessary, they may choose to give a result that would confirm someone innocent even when they don't have to, just to seem innocent.

[TBFProgrammer]

Giving a smart player more information to make a choice with always benefits them. If necessary, they may choose to give a result that would confirm someone innocent even when they don't have to, just to seem innocent.

My basic points are that someone with more choices but fewer options per choice will have a harder time hiding that they are actively making decisions, and that fully constraining a player to an uninformed choice in this context is not as useful as it first appears.

[Saposhiente]

While the effect you describe does reduce the effectiveness of removing information from the Mafia, it is impossible for that effect to make partial information better than no information from Town's perspective.

[TBFProgrammer]

While the effect you describe does reduce the effectiveness of removing information from the Mafia, it is impossible for that effect to make partial information better than no information from Town's perspective.

I'm not saying that. I'm saying that a high chance of gaining partial concrete information at the guaranteed expense of virtually all other useful forms of information is not a trade in the town's best interest, especially with Zjoot's new rule meaning there isn't a significant chance of getting complete concrete information.

EDIT: Wait, you meant in what you give to the mafia. In that case I disagree with you because of what the partial information buys. If the mafia doesn't ignore the information, its influence on them can be tracked, as all other players are reporting a pre-determined result. If the mafia does ignore the information, then town is no worse off then if they hadn't given it. Allowing the mafia complete information will allow them to disguise their tracks better, but partial information does not if delivered in a well constrained manner.

[Internet Flea]

...there's a new rule?

[Murska]

So, while we're discussing other things, Murska for MVP. Because, well, I think I did pretty well both of the times we ran the round.

[Saposhiente]

I'm not saying that. I'm saying that a high chance of gaining partial concrete information at the guaranteed expense of virtually all other useful forms of information is not a trade in the town's best interest, especially with Zjoot's new rule meaning there isn't a significant chance of getting complete concrete information.

EDIT: Wait, you meant in what you give to the mafia. In that case I disagree with you because of what the partial information buys. If the mafia doesn't ignore the information, its influence on them can be tracked, as all other players are reporting a pre-determined result. If the mafia does ignore the information, then town is no worse off then if they hadn't given it. Allowing the mafia complete information will allow them to disguise their tracks better, but partial information does not if delivered in a well constrained manner.

It is not a binary ignore/do not ignore. The mafia can consider the information and give a result that is neither disastrous nor easily traced to them as optimal. Again, more information = always better. Always. Don't assume that the mafia doesn't know how to properly use the information given to him.

...there's a new rule?

Zjoot's thinking about, in the finals game only, making you not get scry results on anyone who gets killed during the night.

[TBFProgrammer]

It is not a binary ignore/do not ignore. The mafia can consider the information and give a result that is neither disastrous nor easily traced to them as optimal. Again, more information = always better. Always.

It is not that simple, really. Without Zjoot's new rule, two innocents is essentially GG.

With random chance, mafia has a decent shot to win if 0 or 1 player comes up innocent.

With deliberate, mafia has a decent shot to trick only when it comes up 0, and otherwise is forced into some form of optimal play. At least one towny, usually two, will obviously have made non-optimal decisions, and the intersection of those with 1 cleared player will almost always end with 2 cleared, so the mafia has to get 0 innocent to come up to have a decent shot to win. While this has a higher chance than in random, it doesn't beat out the chance of 0 or 1 innocents in random.

With Zjoot's new rule, two innocents grants a 2/3 chance of a town victory. Watch your back almost entirely precludes 3 and 4 innocents being cleared (our mafia's have been ignoring this to their own peril so far).

Random pretty much can't do better than 2/3 chance of a town victory for the town.

Deliberate has a few more options for shifty play. However, with the partial reveals, the deliberate player almost has to choose an optimal first play unless they go quite late, and a trick requires an optimal play early or it is essentially comes down to random behavior.

As to why the mafia's moves can always be traced, the players can reasonably determine almost exactly what each player would know at each stage if they were mafia by the time all results are in.

[Saposhiente]

The thing is you can't clear people who would have made suboptimal mafioso decisions. If you do that then the mafia can just make a "suboptimal" (but not tripleclearing) decision and automatically win. That's how the information always helps them.

[TBFProgrammer]

The thing is you can't clear people who would have made suboptimal mafioso decisions. If you do that then the mafia can just make a "suboptimal" (but not tripleclearing) decision and automatically win. That's how the information always helps them.

The mafia can only very rarely do this without making an optimal or delaying move at first. It isn't perfect, but it only has to beat a ~7/12 chance to be superior to a forced random.

[reaverb]

What are me and Visor, chopped liver?

No, both of you are ghosts. I had a hard enough time finding the flea.

[Zjoot]

Huh, for some reason I thought I had more players for the fifth round. And Visor has elected to drop out by PM. So I think that leaves IF, Sabeki (who posted that he's back and interested in the game again), and Zack. I'll go advertise for two more spots in the main thread, but I'll leave it open for anyone who has already been in a heat and wants another shot at the finals. I'll give it 24 hours or so and see what we get.

[reaverb]

I would still like to play in Heat 5, although I already had a go so if two more people who haven't played want the join I'm assuming they would get priority.

[Askthepizzaguy]

Because the last round was a bit chaotic, I'd be willing to try again.

But I've been in several so my name should be dead last considered.

[Lex-Kat]

I'll toss my dagger in for a second attempt, if PizzaGuy has been in two already. BTW, you need to update your OP.

[Zjoot]

Reaverb and Lex-Kat it is! Add Zack, Internet Flea and Sabeki and we've got the full roster for the final heat! Roles are on their way. Once you get them, make sure you post in thread to confirm your readiness! Game will begin immediately when everyone has posted. The first day, as always, lasts 72 hours or until one person has three votes. Don't worry about waiting for me to officially start it. Once everyone's posted, the clock will start automatically.

[Internet Flea]

Here, got my role.

[Zack]

I'm ready.

[Lex-Kat]

Ready .

[reaverb]

I'm ready.

Just waiting for Sabeki now.