Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
I just looked back at some mafia games and it looks like the last time there was a three way runoff d1r1 was mafia 71. I'll dig into it more after church but none of the three mafia were included in the 3 way d1r1 runoff and mafia ended up winning the game. Interesting to note that Jimmy was also mafia that game (not saying I think he is mafia right now but it bears mentioning). I personally would like a runoff of 4 players but it doesn't look like that will happen unless zig or potent move off of kdogg. I'm keeping my vote where it is right now in hopes that one of them moves off of kdogg.
I'm confused. Earlier you said you are glad someone put kdogg back in the runoff, now you want someone to move off him? Am I missing something?
I just looked back at some mafia games and it looks like the last time there was a three way runoff d1r1 was mafia 71. I'll dig into it more after church but none of the three mafia were included in the 3 way d1r1 runoff and mafia ended up winning the game. Interesting to note that Jimmy was also mafia that game (not saying I think he is mafia right now but it bears mentioning). I personally would like a runoff of 4 players but it doesn't look like that will happen unless zig or potent move off of kdogg. I'm keeping my vote where it is right now in hopes that one of them moves off of kdogg.
I'm confused. Earlier you said you are glad someone put kdogg back in the runoff, now you want someone to move off him? Am I missing something?
I still want kdogg in the runoff but a 4 person runoff isn't possible with kdogg at 3 votes. In my opinion it seems like mafia benefits from a 3 person run off d1r1 more than town.
Also not a fan of how quiet some people are being right now. Here is the current post counts (quick count may be off by 1 or 2 posts).
Just an FYI, proboards will give you the post counts in the thread. Just go to the main arcade page and look at the "replies" column. Click on the corresponding number and it will bring up a box with all the people that have posted in the thread and their post count in it.
I'm confused. Earlier you said you are glad someone put kdogg back in the runoff, now you want someone to move off him? Am I missing something?
I still want kdogg in the runoff but a 4 person runoff isn't possible with kdogg at 3 votes. In my opinion it seems like mafia benefits from a 3 person run off d1r1 more than town.
I'm pretty certain someone will even things back out.
My thoughts are more like: Why is Thor bent on preventing a four-way runoff?
I can agree five might be excessive. However, players are still able to reconfigure into a four-way to given my voting. Nobody can shift to any more than a three-way to given your initial vote and recent switch. I have trouble seeing why an innocent would want to cap runoff size at three like this - and you've done it twice this round thus far.
I'm cool with four. I think it's a fair compromise - five is arguably too cold & three is arguably too hot. Here's the thing, though, Thor: my vote allows for a four-way to take shape. Not so much with you.
What's your interest in limiting the size of this runoff? I've got myself a boring-ass vanilla role again, so I know it's not something fun like that.
Also not a fan of how quiet some people are being right now. Here is the current post counts (quick count may be off by 1 or 2 posts).
Just an FYI, proboards will give you the post counts in the thread. Just go to the main arcade page and look at the "replies" column. Click on the corresponding number and it will bring up a box with all the people that have posted in the thread and their post count in it.
I still want kdogg in the runoff but a 4 person runoff isn't possible with kdogg at 3 votes. In my opinion it seems like mafia benefits from a 3 person run off d1r1 more than town.
I'm pretty certain someone will even things back out.
I wish I would have known this before I counted everyone....
I'm just going to lay this out there, since I won't be back until almost vote clise tomorrow.
It's wasn't that I wanted a five-way runoff at that point. What I wanted was Thor in it.
I said I saw something in the votes that I mentioned vaguely.
I did the process of elimination, had no explanation for two votes involving Potent - one cast by, one cast against. At that point, it struck me curious that the vote immediately after Carini's predetermined/neutral "Carini > Thor" vote was Potent > Carini. Could be something, could be nothing, I know.
But I made vague mention of it when I mentioned not being able to explain Potent's votes. At that point, Thor stacked on me to give me a "three against ones" lead - eliminating the possibility of a four-way.
Thor said it was "nonsense." But then he voted along with my vague Potent suspicion once I went away for a day. (I believe ZIG described a similar action from Thor as the "move of the game" in the last game, which lessened the "nah, that couldn't be..." factor in my mind.)
There have been changes since then, sure. In the course of them - at least to me - it almost seems like they're tag-team partners and/or synchronized swimmers with the vote changes.
So, that's where I'm at. Cold be right, could be wrong. Might as well be out with it.
I figure four of y'all have already voted for me, and half of those votes came from Thor & Potent after I made mention of a vague sense there could be something to those votes involving Potent.
I'm used to being in a Day One runoff. Just put one or both of them in there with me, please?
With that, Chicago and Guns N Roses await me. Back in the wee hours or tomorrow morning.
I'm confused. Earlier you said you are glad someone put kdogg back in the runoff, now you want someone to move off him? Am I missing something?
I still want kdogg in the runoff but a 4 person runoff isn't possible with kdogg at 3 votes. In my opinion it seems like mafia benefits from a 3 person run off d1r1 more than town.
You actually have no basis for this opinion. I've been a part of plenty of games with a 3 person runoff without much fuss. For some reason Kdogg is trying to make it into an issue now. Probably because of his own self interest.
My vote will remain on Kdogg, the person who expanded to a 5 person runoff which I think we universally agree is a poor bet for the town. If someone wants to take their vote off Kdogg and start the process to a 4 person runoff that is fine with me. But I'm content with a 3 way runoff as well.
I have little to add at this point; once it gets past R1, I'm sure I'll have more I want to say/discuss. I bet this goes for other people with currently low post counts too.
It is hard enough sifting through the initial pages in later rounds/days. I don't want to further clog up these first pages with posts that don't carry much significance
Considering you've found the need to respond to my threads as if you are threatened by me I offer you some peace my confused counterpart. May you find peace in your restless soul.
Guns N Roses didn't end until nearly midnight, I didn't get home until 4:00am, and I didn't get out of bed until nearly 1:00. Viking had a similar "morning after" post following the Friday show. Worth it.
Glad I said my piece earlier. I know I did something to piss somebody off to get those four votes over the course of D1R1 alone. But I'm not in the mood for thinking today.
First he pushes kdogg up to three votes - forcing the at most a three way runoff.
Then after some pushback he says "that worked" and voted for potent for no other reason than my vote was also on potent. Soon after kdogg creates a 5 way runoff.
After seeing kdogg expand the the runoff Thor then goes off on kdogg and reverts his vote back to kdogg (once again forcing a three way runoff at most). If no one had moved off of kdogg it means that two people would have had to leave the runoff. By switching his vote from potent to kdogg Thor decides who one of those players will be (unless two people would have magically voted for potent to bring him back into the runoff). I'm not saying that potent is scum but it is worth mentioning.
Why was Thor so aggressively trying to push a three way runoff? Was there more of a reason for his vote on potent besides me? What does "that worked" mean?
We definitely need more answers then what we have.
By popular demand, have done a lot of research over the last couple days based on Day 1 runoffs since a couple players said they would like to see some data.
First, I looked at the last 20 games.
16 games began with a 4-person runoff. 4 games began with a 5-person runoff.
Next, I looked at the individual games to see if I could find some patterns.
In the 4 games with 5-person runoffs, the day 1 kill was Mafia 2 of the 4 games, however, in one of those instances, it took an inspector reveal to get the Mafia out. So, 50% Mafia kill success rate, but 25% inspector reveal rate.
In the 16 games with a 4-person runoff, the day 1 kill was Mafia 6 of those 16 games, however, we had 3 inspector reveals. So, 37.5% Mafia kill success rate, but an 18.75 inspector reveal rate.
Based on this sample size, a 5-day runoff is a little bit better for killing a Mafia but also slightly more likely to cause an inspector reveal. If I had to guess, if we had more 5-person runoffs, the results would probably converge with the 4-person runoff results.
In conclusion, I think the different between a 4-person runoff and a 5-person runoff would probably be minimal. Of course, since we already have a 4-person runoff, it's a bit of a moot point for this game.
Post by SupeЯfuЯЯyanimal on Jul 4, 2016 15:56:38 GMT -5
I'm not quite sure what I want to do yet. I can see both Kdogg and Thor's arguments. I just can't tell if both are being sincere. While both of them have some valid concerns, there seems to be a good deal of conjecture which leads to sift through. But this is mafia, most of the time we are flying blind and making arguments based on our gut. Can't really fault either of them. I do the same thing.
Viking stayed on his gimmick vote for me and has got me placed in the runoff. He's done this before and, if I recall correctly, he'd done it regardless of his role. It's hard to say otherwise because he's been so quite. It's also worth noting that the people voting for him haven't had much to say either.
I think it's safe to say that Potent goes back to me again? I also think it's safe to say you aren't voting for yourself here.
So barring any major change or unexpected move by the other yet to vote... your vote either kills myself or Thor, or makes a three-way D1R3 between me/Thor/Viking. Yeah?
First he pushes kdogg up to three votes - forcing the at most a three way runoff.
Then after some pushback he says "that worked" and voted for potent for no other reason than my vote was also on potent. Soon after kdogg creates a 5 way runoff.
After seeing kdogg expand the the runoff Thor then goes off on kdogg and reverts his vote back to kdogg (once again forcing a three way runoff at most). If no one had moved off of kdogg it means that two people would have had to leave the runoff. By switching his vote from potent to kdogg Thor decides who one of those players will be (unless two people would have magically voted for potent to bring him back into the runoff). I'm not saying that potent is scum but it is worth mentioning.
Why was Thor so aggressively trying to push a three way runoff? Was there more of a reason for his vote on potent besides me? What does "that worked" mean?
We definitely need more answers then what we have.
danbob > Thor
1. My 3-stack on Kdogg did initially work, in that it got him to stop spouting off nonsense where he was making theories about round first round initial votes.
2. At the time, prior to ZIG's case study, I think everyone would agree that as a whole town was opposed to 5 way runoffs. When Kdogg made a 5 way runoff, i felt he genuinely needed to be guaranteed to advance because he didn't seem to be acting in the best interests of the town.
3. There is no genuine proof that there is something wrong with a 3-way runoff. There is therefore no reason to take issue with me stacking up Kdogg unless you're Mafia with him.
First he pushes kdogg up to three votes - forcing the at most a three way runoff.
Then after some pushback he says "that worked" and voted for potent for no other reason than my vote was also on potent. Soon after kdogg creates a 5 way runoff.
After seeing kdogg expand the the runoff Thor then goes off on kdogg and reverts his vote back to kdogg (once again forcing a three way runoff at most). If no one had moved off of kdogg it means that two people would have had to leave the runoff. By switching his vote from potent to kdogg Thor decides who one of those players will be (unless two people would have magically voted for potent to bring him back into the runoff). I'm not saying that potent is scum but it is worth mentioning.
Why was Thor so aggressively trying to push a three way runoff? Was there more of a reason for his vote on potent besides me? What does "that worked" mean?
We definitely need more answers then what we have.
danbob > Thor
1. My 3-stack on Kdogg did initially work, in that it got him to stop spouting off nonsense where he was making theories about round first round initial votes.
2. At the time, prior to ZIG's case study, I think everyone would agree that as a whole town was opposed to 5 way runoffs. When Kdogg made a 5 way runoff, i felt he genuinely needed to be guaranteed to advance because he didn't seem to be acting in the best interests of the town.
3. There is no genuine proof that there is something wrong with a 3-way runoff. There is therefore no reason to take issue with me stacking up Kdogg unless you're Mafia with him.
4. Maybe Potent is "scum." I have no idea.
The idea that me having a negative opinion of a three person runoff makes me mafia is laughable. It's not that I was totally against it - but you were lobbying for it so hard. Why take such a passionate stance about restricting towns options unless there was someone you didn't want in the runoff ?
*Viking > kdogg *kdogg > ZIG *Mike D > SFA *Carini > Thor Potent > Carini *ZIG > kdogg *SFA > Mike D *Rummy > Viking danbob > Potent
* These votes all make sense to me.
Viking going after me feels about right. I made it known I'd go for ZIG. ZIG reciprocated. Mike D & SFA reciprocating makes sense & has precedent. Carini has a formula. Rummy's vote for Viking makes complete sense, because history.
The ones I can't currently explain both involve Potent. Hmm.
I made six assertions in this process of elimination reasoning, and I think most (if not all) of them have fairly solid logic and/or evidence behind them.
The only one of those six assertions I feel is on shaky ground is "Viking going after me feels about right." If you had a problem with that, why did you go after me over that vote instead of Viking for casting it? Instead, you voted with him.
Tell me which one of these you think is incorrect - earning the "nonsense" label - and why. Don't just use a scary word and try to make me a fucking boogeyman. Back your claim up.
Viking going after me feels about right. As I mentioned above, this is more of a gut call but did/does feel right to me.
I made it known I'd go for ZIG. See: postgame discussion in the 93 thread - which we know you already did, because you signed up for this one and were also participating on those pages.
Mike D & SFA reciprocating makes sense & has precedent. Reciprocating makes perfect sense to me. I double-checked last game, and I do see Mike D went a different way with his initial vote. I will concede that the most recent game's example in D1R1 went a different way. My logic isn't perfect. But if this was your issue... both SFA & Mike D were options for you, and you chose to come after me instead.
Carini has a formula. Correct me if I'm wrong, but... this is common knowledge in Inforoo Mafia, yes?
Rummy's vote for Viking makes complete sense, because history. Thor, you yourself were the Ref this game and renamed its thread to include "currently recruiting non-psychopaths." You can't claim ignorance on my "because history" comment. inforoo.com/thread/35262/mafia-89-recruiting-non-psychopaths
