Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 2)

For your simulated organized crime needs.

Moderators: jestingrabbit, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
BoomFrog
Posts: 1069
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 5:59 am UTC
Location: Seattle

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby BoomFrog » Thu Oct 11, 2018 4:28 pm UTC

Sabrar wrote:Lol, that completely reversed my read on you.

Ooo, ooo! Am I scum now? What gave you the townie feeling originally? Voting superJedi? hmm...

My tiny Sabrar clone is just smirking at me... :?

Sabrar wrote:On second thought you might have misread it as either alignment.
Oh, I was scum and then town. But now back toward "Is BoomFrog". I see. So scummy for voting SuperJedi? Or scummy for no gambit?
"Everything I need to know about parenting I learned from cooking. Don't be afraid to experiment, and eat your mistakes." - Cronos

User avatar
somitomi
Posts: 635
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2015 11:21 pm UTC
Location: can be found in Hungary
Contact:

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby somitomi » Thu Oct 11, 2018 4:29 pm UTC

moody7277 wrote:BoomFrog saying "no gambit this time, let's go straight to scumhunting" is certainly counter to his recent activity. Not sure what to make of that yet.

Considering these "gambits" work by catching people off guard they're pretty useless once we start expecting it.

Ninja'd by a couple posts
—◯-◯

User avatar
BoomFrog
Posts: 1069
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 5:59 am UTC
Location: Seattle

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby BoomFrog » Thu Oct 11, 2018 4:35 pm UTC

moody7277 wrote:BoomFrog saying "no gambit this time, let's go straight to scumhunting" is certainly counter to his recent activity. Not sure what to make of that yet.
Part of why you are so hard to sort is because you keep your true thoughts so close to your chest. Why not say what your first impression is before pondering more? Thoroughly processed thoughts have little hidden context left in them to suss out.
"Everything I need to know about parenting I learned from cooking. Don't be afraid to experiment, and eat your mistakes." - Cronos

User avatar
Sabrar
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:29 pm UTC

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby Sabrar » Thu Oct 11, 2018 4:46 pm UTC

You were scum-lean then 99% town then probably town and now very likely town.

User avatar
Sabrar
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:29 pm UTC

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby Sabrar » Thu Oct 11, 2018 4:49 pm UTC

Original scum read was mainly because your attitude wrt mod-kill.

User avatar
moody7277
Posts: 572
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 7:06 pm UTC
Location: Extreme south Texas

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby moody7277 » Thu Oct 11, 2018 4:55 pm UTC

somitomi wrote:
moody7277 wrote:BoomFrog saying "no gambit this time, let's go straight to scumhunting" is certainly counter to his recent activity. Not sure what to make of that yet.

Considering these "gambits" work by catching people off guard they're pretty useless once we start expecting it.


SDK still managed to get a lot out his versions of gambiting even after there evolved a strong definition of "SDK-esque". BoomFrog seemed to want to follow in that model. If he's going against that trend, it could be from either direction:

scum!BF: I've done a lot of these recently, and have gotten a lot of flak for it. Might want to keep my head down.
town!BF: I've done a lot of these recently, and the arguments about them have been really distracting. Might want to let people hunt scum without all the math to sort through.

Not a lot of difference in those that we can see in what's been posted so far. It also depends on my "scum hate attention" paradigm which might not hold for some players.
The story of my life in xkcdmafia:

Tigerlion wrote:Well, I imagine as the game progresses, various people will be getting moody.


BoomFrog wrote:I still have no idea what town moody really looks like.

User avatar
BoomFrog
Posts: 1069
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 5:59 am UTC
Location: Seattle

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby BoomFrog » Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:16 pm UTC

moody7277 wrote:
somitomi wrote:
moody7277 wrote:BoomFrog saying "no gambit this time, let's go straight to scumhunting" is certainly counter to his recent activity. Not sure what to make of that yet.

Considering these "gambits" work by catching people off guard they're pretty useless once we start expecting it.


SDK still managed to get a lot out his versions of gambiting even after there evolved a strong definition of "SDK-esque". BoomFrog seemed to want to follow in that model. If he's going against that trend, it could be from either direction:

scum!BF: I've done a lot of these recently, and have gotten a lot of flak for it. Might want to keep my head down.
town!BF: I've done a lot of these recently, and the arguments about them have been really distracting. Might want to let people hunt scum without all the math to sort through.

Not a lot of difference in those that we can see in what's been posted so far. It also depends on my "scum hate attention" paradigm which might not hold for some players.

The BoomFrog always like attention. As scum it can keep heat off my allies. As town it can help me get reads on people as I have at least one fact to work from which is my own alignment. So, if you had to guess, which of the two do you think it is right now? (Hint, it's not either of those, but you have a piece of the truth)
"Everything I need to know about parenting I learned from cooking. Don't be afraid to experiment, and eat your mistakes." - Cronos

User avatar
wam
Posts: 201
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 9:08 am UTC
Location: South England

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby wam » Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:20 pm UTC

BoomFrog wrote:
Now the "irony" comment is even more confusing... Wam, please explain.
wam wrote:So setup speculation I'm guessing 9-3 (irony).

What exactly were you thinking and saying in this sentence? Please be honest and detailed.

It was a joke, an admittedly bad one...

I put irony in there as otherwise I would have spent 4 pages arguing about it.
Come join us playing mafia signup here

User avatar
wam
Posts: 201
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 9:08 am UTC
Location: South England

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby wam » Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:21 pm UTC

Also boomfrog has talked about super Jedi a lot....
Come join us playing mafia signup here

User avatar
moody7277
Posts: 572
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 7:06 pm UTC
Location: Extreme south Texas

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby moody7277 » Thu Oct 11, 2018 6:03 pm UTC

@BoomFrog: There are a few players whose meta does run counter to that particular paradigm (you, Sabrar, SDK, maybe bessie), but I think it still works in enough cases that the rule is useful. Right now, I think you're trying not to be a distraction, which is town.
The story of my life in xkcdmafia:

Tigerlion wrote:Well, I imagine as the game progresses, various people will be getting moody.


BoomFrog wrote:I still have no idea what town moody really looks like.

User avatar
mpolo
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:24 pm UTC
Location: Germany

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby mpolo » Thu Oct 11, 2018 6:45 pm UTC

We had a school outing to the European Parliament yesterday, so I just noticed that this started. I may have to wait to tomorrow to read through, as I am pretty tired… But I'll give it a shot.
Image <-- Evil experiment

User avatar
mpolo
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:24 pm UTC
Location: Germany

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby mpolo » Thu Oct 11, 2018 6:52 pm UTC

I agree with Sabrar's reasoning that there are no safe claims. I am uncertain if there is a lot of value to claiming suits, but I am willing to do so. Otherwise, there hasn't been much beyond random voting, so I guess I will leave that there.
Image <-- Evil experiment

User avatar
Mark_Cangila
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2018 4:34 pm UTC

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby Mark_Cangila » Thu Oct 11, 2018 7:09 pm UTC

I also agree with the safe claim proposal. However, I think we should still worry about mafia guessing face card claims and hoping they guess right.

User avatar
somitomi
Posts: 635
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2015 11:21 pm UTC
Location: can be found in Hungary
Contact:

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby somitomi » Thu Oct 11, 2018 8:01 pm UTC

mpolo wrote:I agree with Sabrar's reasoning that there are no safe claims. I am uncertain if there is a lot of value to claiming suits, but I am willing to do so. Otherwise, there hasn't been much beyond random voting, so I guess I will leave that there.

Hold on, mafia definitely have safe claims, the argument is whether they could get a power role as safeclaim.
For the record I don't think there's significant benefit to claiming suits right now, because I don't agree with Sabrar on PR safeclaims being bastard. They don't give that much information to scum and the whole premise of the game is that scum has more info than town anyway. I don't see it causing too much harm either though.
—◯-◯

User avatar
BoomFrog
Posts: 1069
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 5:59 am UTC
Location: Seattle

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby BoomFrog » Thu Oct 11, 2018 8:51 pm UTC

Mark_Cangila wrote:I also agree with the safe claim proposal. However, I think we should still worry about mafia guessing face card claims and hoping they guess right.

In your own words what is the safe claim proposal? How will it help mafia guess who is a face card?
"Everything I need to know about parenting I learned from cooking. Don't be afraid to experiment, and eat your mistakes." - Cronos

User avatar
BoomFrog
Posts: 1069
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 5:59 am UTC
Location: Seattle

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby BoomFrog » Thu Oct 11, 2018 8:54 pm UTC

wam wrote:It was a joke, an admittedly bad one...

I put irony in there as otherwise I would have spent 4 pages arguing about it.

It was a joke because you knew the setup literally stated the set-up was 9-3? Or some other reason?
"Everything I need to know about parenting I learned from cooking. Don't be afraid to experiment, and eat your mistakes." - Cronos

User avatar
BoomFrog
Posts: 1069
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 5:59 am UTC
Location: Seattle

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby BoomFrog » Thu Oct 11, 2018 8:55 pm UTC

wam wrote:Also boomfrog has talked about super Jedi a lot....

What do you think about that? Also, fyi, my vote on him is serious and for the reasons stated.
"Everything I need to know about parenting I learned from cooking. Don't be afraid to experiment, and eat your mistakes." - Cronos

User avatar
Sabrar
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:29 pm UTC

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby Sabrar » Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:14 pm UTC

Was your vote on me in Chaos serious as well?

User avatar
Vicarin
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:45 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby Vicarin » Thu Oct 11, 2018 10:11 pm UTC

Seriously wondering if BoomFrog's apparent complete lack of reading the setup rules earlier is itself the gambit :?

Ah well, I prefer this to the woofs, much more interesting. Not sure what to make of him overall.

@everyone who thinks PR safeclaims are decently possible: how do you think the safeclaims were determined?

User avatar
BoomFrog
Posts: 1069
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 5:59 am UTC
Location: Seattle

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby BoomFrog » Thu Oct 11, 2018 10:25 pm UTC

Sabrar wrote:Was your vote on me in Chaos serious as well?

I had to reread that about 4 times to get back in my mindset at the time. But no, that wasn't serious.
"Everything I need to know about parenting I learned from cooking. Don't be afraid to experiment, and eat your mistakes." - Cronos

User avatar
Mark_Cangila
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2018 4:34 pm UTC

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby Mark_Cangila » Thu Oct 11, 2018 10:46 pm UTC

BoomFrog wrote:
Mark_Cangila wrote:I also agree with the safe claim proposal. However, I think we should still worry about mafia guessing face card claims and hoping they guess right.

In your own words what is the safe claim proposal? How will it help mafia guess who is a face card?

Sabrar is saying that the mafia have no face card safe claims because it would help mafia guess some info about PRs by knowing the cards they were given couldn't have been given to town.

User avatar
Zenii
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2018 5:56 am UTC

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby Zenii » Thu Oct 11, 2018 11:05 pm UTC

Vicarin wrote:@Zenii: I don't know if I'd call it miniscule, but yeah, I think the benefits are worth it. Good to see you back properly too :D

bessie wrote:Welcome back Zenii, I was so excited when I saw your name in sign ups!

Thanks! It's good to be back.
Sabrar wrote:The downside is on the same scale as the advantage it would provide us. This is definitely not clear-cut.
It is to me.
Sabrar wrote:This means that áll information should be disclosed up-front.
This is an opinion, not a fact.
BoomFrog wrote:The reason I don't like suit claiming is because a mafioso who claims nearly last might get a chance to see a suit is fairly empty and then take the chance of claiming a face-card in that empty suit. I'd rather force scum to stick to their safe-claims which presumably were given randomly and are likely to be vanilla claims.
I'd rather scum stick to their suit claim. They don't have to stick to their safe claims because they're not public. Order does matter though. I'd not argue otherwise.




Dislike:
Vicarin wrote:Did I say it was? :P

Vicarin wrote:Well, partially because it implies that LaserGuy might have changed his answers, which is interesting and has nothing to do with anyone's alignment. But yes, mostly because I'd say it's a decent town indication.

User avatar
Vicarin
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:45 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby Vicarin » Thu Oct 11, 2018 11:19 pm UTC

Zenii wrote:
Sabrar wrote:The downside is on the same scale as the advantage it would provide us. This is definitely not clear-cut.
It is to me.
Sabrar wrote:This means that áll information should be disclosed up-front.
This is an opinion, not a fact.


:lol:

Zen, any particular reason your posting style so far is completely different to how you started Stellaris?

User avatar
BoomFrog
Posts: 1069
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 5:59 am UTC
Location: Seattle

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby BoomFrog » Fri Oct 12, 2018 12:48 am UTC

Mark_Cangila wrote:
BoomFrog wrote:
Mark_Cangila wrote:I also agree with the safe claim proposal. However, I think we should still worry about mafia guessing face card claims and hoping they guess right.

In your own words what is the safe claim proposal? How will it help mafia guess who is a face card?

Sabrar is saying that the mafia have no face card safe claims because it would help mafia guess some info about PRs by knowing the cards they were given couldn't have been given to town.

How does claiming suits help the mafia guess who is a face card?
"Everything I need to know about parenting I learned from cooking. Don't be afraid to experiment, and eat your mistakes." - Cronos

User avatar
Vicarin
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:45 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby Vicarin » Fri Oct 12, 2018 2:38 am UTC

@SuperJedi: Do you have any opinions at all on what's been going on so far? You've been pretty quiet.

User avatar
Zenii
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2018 5:56 am UTC

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby Zenii » Fri Oct 12, 2018 2:48 am UTC

Vicarin wrote:
Zenii wrote:
Sabrar wrote:The downside is on the same scale as the advantage it would provide us. This is definitely not clear-cut.
It is to me.
Sabrar wrote:This means that áll information should be disclosed up-front.
This is an opinion, not a fact.


:lol:
There's quite a difference between voicing an opinion and founding an argument off one.

See the difference between: "I like bunnies. Here are some reasons why." and "I like bunnies, therefore, Laserguy likes bunnies, therefore there are at least three bunnies in the game."

Zen, any particular reason your posting style so far is completely different to how you started Stellaris?
Yes.

User avatar
Vicarin
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:45 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby Vicarin » Fri Oct 12, 2018 3:10 am UTC

True, but at least he's given his reasoning. You want to share your logic for the suit claim or are you just going to keep claiming it is clear-cut without any basis for it? I'd prefer to see faulty reasoning that I can check rather than a blanket statement.

And you're just going to leave it at "Yes"?

User avatar
bessie
Posts: 20
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2013 8:27 am UTC
Location: California

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby bessie » Fri Oct 12, 2018 3:52 am UTC

Vicarin wrote:Well, partially because it implies that LaserGuy might have changed his answers, which is interesting and has nothing to do with anyone's alignment. But yes, mostly because I'd say it's a decent town indication.
I find it interesting that you would have even thought that the mod might have misled a player and changed an answer, especially in an open, non-bastard game.

Sabrar wrote:
Vicarin wrote: You're also making assumptions about the setup based on what you think would make it balanced, as bessie has noted many times.
This is a pointless discussion but it has nothing to do with balance, just how a semi-open setup with no bastardry should work.
You’re right it isn’t balance. It’s your interpretation of semi-open, and your stubbornness in thinking that the way you interpret things or the way you think is optimal is the only correct way of doing things. Interesting you are attempting to turn everyone away from discussing this.

plytho wrote:I think Sabrar is likely town because of the no comment reply from LaserGuy. This implies Sabrar hasn't asked the question before and is basing his points on his reasoning about what semi open and non bastard means.
Why couldn't someone of any alignment ask the mod a question by pm, then ask the same question in thread because they want to be seen asking the question, or because they want the answer public, even if they know the answer would be no comment?

wam wrote:The paranoid part of me can see scum sabrar asking the mod what the public answer would be and then asking publically fornthe points but i agree its unlikely.
Why is this so unlikely from scum!Sabrar?

moody7277 wrote:BoomFrog saying "no gambit this time, let's go straight to scumhunting" is certainly counter to his recent activity. Not sure what to make of that yet.
Wait, where did BoomFrog claim he’s not doing a gambit?

Sabrar wrote:
plytho wrote:Yeah, or he might think he knows the answer because he knows what the fake claims are but thinks town!Sabrar would ask the question so he did it anyway. [/paranoia]
Usually people are not very good at guessing what questions I would ask. I suggest not spending too much time on this.
“Usually people” :( ? Hmmm. Note: second attempt.

somitomi wrote:Considering these "gambits" work by catching people off guard they're pretty useless once we start expecting it.
Disagree, and disagree. For example WoT3 should have caught no one off guard (except perhaps Mark) so it's not essential that the gambit do so. And gambits have other benefits. See here :) . And here :D .

User avatar
Vicarin
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:45 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby Vicarin » Fri Oct 12, 2018 4:17 am UTC

bessie wrote:
Vicarin wrote:Well, partially because it implies that LaserGuy might have changed his answers, which is interesting and has nothing to do with anyone's alignment. But yes, mostly because I'd say it's a decent town indication.
I find it interesting that you would have even thought that the mod might have misled a player and changed an answer, especially in an open, non-bastard game.


I don't think it'd be LaserGuy misleading a player, I think it's possible that he answered a question from Sabrar in a PM, realized that he actually wanted to leave that option open, and then answered with no comment in this thread when me and Sabrar asked. This would also require Sabrar to be told to not say that he got a different answer earlier (explaining why he wants to push discussion away from it), and unfortunately LaserGuy can't just make a post to clarify the situation because confirming something happened ruins the point of giving a no comment.

Of course, the alternative is Sabrar just being THAT sure that he'd get a specific answer back when he gave a different wording for the mod question, seeing as he was acting as if he was absolutely certain that scum didn't have PRs. Giving a reworded version of my question knowing that I'll get a no-comment anyway seems just so incredibly weird if he was scum trying to sow disinformation. Why not just let my one get answered?

I'm probably also unfortunately reading a bit into the presence of Gojoe posts at times that would match up with the first scenario happening. I don't want to try to draw conclusions from them, but when you notice their presence (like you did in Chaos with regards to me probably being permanently dead), you can't help but to have them color your views...

User avatar
wam
Posts: 201
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 9:08 am UTC
Location: South England

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby wam » Fri Oct 12, 2018 6:41 am UTC

BoomFrog wrote:
wam wrote:It was a joke, an admittedly bad one...

I put irony in there as otherwise I would have spent 4 pages arguing about it.

It was a joke because you knew the setup literally stated the set-up was 9-3? Or some other reason?


It was a joke as the setup is in the OP....
Come join us playing mafia signup here

User avatar
wam
Posts: 201
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 9:08 am UTC
Location: South England

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby wam » Fri Oct 12, 2018 6:41 am UTC

BoomFrog wrote:
wam wrote:Also boomfrog has talked about super Jedi a lot....

What do you think about that? Also, fyi, my vote on him is serious and for the reasons stated.


If your scum he's scum. I don't see scum boomfrog going after a newbie town beginning of day 1.
Come join us playing mafia signup here

User avatar
mpolo
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:24 pm UTC
Location: Germany

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby mpolo » Fri Oct 12, 2018 6:42 am UTC

BoomFrog wrote:
Mark_Cangila wrote:
BoomFrog wrote:
Mark_Cangila wrote:I also agree with the safe claim proposal. However, I think we should still worry about mafia guessing face card claims and hoping they guess right.

In your own words what is the safe claim proposal? How will it help mafia guess who is a face card?

Sabrar is saying that the mafia have no face card safe claims because it would help mafia guess some info about PRs by knowing the cards they were given couldn't have been given to town.

How does claiming suits help the mafia guess who is a face card?


The point is, if a scum player manages to be one of the last to claim, happens to see that (for example) no one has claimed diamonds, then even though he has a safe claim of 5 of clubs, he might claim diamonds with the plan to claim a town power role at the point that he is under pressure. Since no one else has claimed diamonds, he can do this pretty much with impunity. There are a lot of ifs there. We expect that approximately 3-4 people are going to be in each suit, and when we remove one suit because no one claims spades, we should have 4-5 in each group. Thus it is rather unlikely that we have a void in a suit. However, anyone who has ever played hearts knows how tenuous that reasoning is in any particular game.
Image <-- Evil experiment

User avatar
mpolo
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:24 pm UTC
Location: Germany

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby mpolo » Fri Oct 12, 2018 6:43 am UTC

Also, if some suit has no members (or very few members), scum will know (or suspect) that there are maximally 2 of any given power role.
Image <-- Evil experiment

User avatar
wam
Posts: 201
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 9:08 am UTC
Location: South England

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby wam » Fri Oct 12, 2018 6:44 am UTC

Vicarin wrote:
@everyone who thinks PR safeclaims are decently possible: how do you think the safeclaims were determined?


The way I would have don it is to draw all town roles and then randomly draw 3 more town roles and give them as safe claims. Not saying this is how laser did it.

Ps sorry for the multi posts but it's easier on phone!
Come join us playing mafia signup here

User avatar
wam
Posts: 201
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 9:08 am UTC
Location: South England

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby wam » Fri Oct 12, 2018 6:46 am UTC

bessie wrote:

wam wrote:The paranoid part of me can see scum sabrar asking the mod what the public answer would be and then asking publically fornthe points but i agree its unlikely.
Why is this so unlikely from scum!Sabrar?
.

Because even for sabrar it's pretty convoluted!
Come join us playing mafia signup here

User avatar
wam
Posts: 201
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 9:08 am UTC
Location: South England

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby wam » Fri Oct 12, 2018 6:47 am UTC

I agree with mpolo logic and now think we shouldn't claim suits.
Come join us playing mafia signup here

User avatar
Vicarin
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:45 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby Vicarin » Fri Oct 12, 2018 6:49 am UTC

wam wrote:
Vicarin wrote:
@everyone who thinks PR safeclaims are decently possible: how do you think the safeclaims were determined?


The way I would have don it is to draw all town roles and then randomly draw 3 more town roles and give them as safe claims. Not saying this is how laser did it.

Ps sorry for the multi posts but it's easier on phone!


Do you think scum would get an Ace safeclaim?

User avatar
plytho
¡This cheese is burning me!
Posts: 156
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2008 6:23 pm UTC

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby plytho » Fri Oct 12, 2018 7:03 am UTC

bessie wrote:
plytho wrote:I think Sabrar is likely town because of the no comment reply from LaserGuy. This implies Sabrar hasn't asked the question before and is basing his points on his reasoning about what semi open and non bastard means.
Why couldn't someone of any alignment ask the mod a question by pm, then ask the same question in thread because they want to be seen asking the question, or because they want the answer public, even if they know the answer would be no comment?
Town would (should) state the answer to the question before publicly asking the mod. Or at least not pretend like the answer is something else.

Scum definitely could ask questions privately before asking them publicly and act surprised by the answer. But, I don't this particular question would be asked by scum as they sort of know the answer.
Pronouns: he him his
Avatar: The High Frontier by Angus McKie

User avatar
Vicarin
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:45 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby Vicarin » Fri Oct 12, 2018 7:49 am UTC

mpolo wrote:Also, if some suit has no members (or very few members), scum will know (or suspect) that there are maximally 2 of any given power role.


Haven't got my simulation in front of me anymore, but I think from rough estimates that the chance of having 3 of a particular PR is <10% anyway, so this piece of information probably won't be new for scum. Maybe Sabrar can crunch his numbers for the exact chance.

User avatar
wam
Posts: 201
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 9:08 am UTC
Location: South England

Re: Texas Hold'em Mafia (Day 1)

Postby wam » Fri Oct 12, 2018 7:51 am UTC

Vicarin wrote:
wam wrote:
Vicarin wrote:
@everyone who thinks PR safeclaims are decently possible: how do you think the safeclaims were determined?


The way I would have don it is to draw all town roles and then randomly draw 3 more town roles and give them as safe claims. Not saying this is how laser did it.

Ps sorry for the multi posts but it's easier on phone!


Do you think scum would get an Ace safeclaim?


Good point. You would have to take the aces out or 're draw.
Come join us playing mafia signup here


Return to “Mafia”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests