Mafia 87: Madness in Mega-City One - GAME THREAD

[Balki Bartokomous]

I still think we should modify the ghugcorollary so that True doesn't mean both innocent and dark.

Why?

[kingofthepirates]

please forgive my ignorance, but what exactly is 'pocketing'? it that like just spreading good vibes overall? or does it have some other meaning? Also, I'm quite confused about the whole ghugcorollary thing. have the majority of us playing agreed to go through with this plan? and which version are we going for? Balki's original idea? ghug's original idea? or some other amended version?

[DiplomacyandWarfare]

Dipcorollary to the ghugcorollary:
Scan Innocent = return true
Scan Guilty = return false
psychic cop:
Scan not dark = return true
scan dark = return false
Vanilla cop:
Scan vanilla = return true
scan not vanilla = return false
Parity cop:
scan teammatch = return true
scan noteammatch = return false
SJS cop:
scan notacop = return true
scan a cop = return false

[Balki Bartokomous]

please forgive my ignorance, but what exactly is 'pocketing'? it that like just spreading good vibes overall? or does it have some other meaning? Also, I'm quite confused about the whole ghugcorollary thing. have the majority of us playing agreed to go through with this plan? and which version are we going for? Balki's original idea? ghug's original idea? or some other amended version?

Pocketing

Pocketing is a term used to describe the act of a scum player being kind or friendly or favorable to a town player for the purpose of "having them in your pocket." Basically, if you are scum, and you want to have town people who will keep you safe or vote with you, it might be a winning strategy to be nice to them or agree with them. If someone accuses someone else as "pocketing" they are accusing them of being scum, trying to win an ally (or allies) in the Town by being nice to or agreeing with someone else.

Balki Plan/Ghug Corollary

My sense is that we are headed in the direction of doing something like this. We don't need to finalize for quite a while (during the night phase), so I'm letting the discussion breath a bit. But I feel like it's an optimal strategy and it has received enough endorsements that I think we're going to agree to it eventually. Still waiting to hear Snowy's elaborations.

If we do it, I am sure we'll have a set of specific instructions well in advance of when we need everyone to act on it (EON).

[Balki Bartokomous]

Dipcorollary to the ghugcorollary:
Scan Innocent = return true
Scan Guilty = return false
psychic cop:
Scan not dark = return true
scan dark = return false
Vanilla cop:
Scan vanilla = return true
scan not vanilla = return false
Parity cop:
scan teammatch = return true
scan noteammatch = return false
SJS cop:
scan notacop = return true
scan a cop = return false

Sorry - can you explain again what you are trying to accomplish with this edit?

[snowy801]

Dipcorollary to the ghugcorollary:
Scan Innocent = return true
Scan Guilty = return false
psychic cop:
Scan not dark = return true
scan dark = return false
Vanilla cop:
Scan vanilla = return true
scan not vanilla = return false
Parity cop:
scan teammatch = return true
scan noteammatch = return false
SJS cop:
scan notacop = return true
scan a cop = return false

How do you feel about people's reactions to your posts? There were quite a few

[snowy801]

(be back later)

[DiplomacyandWarfare]

The original ghug corollary has every result mapped to either "true" or "false". The problem is that, for example, Innocent = true, guilty = false, but psychic cop scanning dark = true and not dark = false. Therefore, if someone is scanned as "true":
The person scanning them might be a vanilla town
The person scanning them might be a lying scum
The person scanning them might be a cop and the target is innocent
The person scanning them might be a psychic cop and the target is a dark judge
Among several other results for other roles.
My solution simply streamlines this by mapping "Innocent", "not dark", "Vanilla" (most Vanillas are town) and "Not cop (including dark judge)" to true, while "Guilty", "dark", "not vanilla", and "cop (including dark judge)" are mapped to false. As you can see, the suspicious results are mostly mapped to false. Non-vanilla cops scanned by the vanilla cop and the sjs cop (scans to see if the target is a cop) run the risk of being scanned as false, but it's not that difficult to simply say "I'm XYZ cop" if you get in serious risk of being vote-killed because the sjs cop scanned you.

[ghug]

By the way, it says at the bottom who's browsing this forum my name
Did they remove that hide feature or is that just a bug? Does anyone see my name

You should appear italicized to yourself on the bottom if you're hidden.

[ghug]

So it appears the claiming to be the nacho cop was not a misspelling of claiming to be the macho cop but rather a joke that everyone but me got.
I still think we should modify the ghugcorollary so that True doesn't mean both innocent and dark.

Have you considered my counterargument?

[Hamilton Brian]

Seems to have been a lot of thought going into figuring this out.

[Balki Bartokomous]

The original ghug corollary has every result mapped to either "true" or "false". The problem is that, for example, Innocent = true, guilty = false, but psychic cop scanning dark = true and not dark = false. Therefore, if someone is scanned as "true":
The person scanning them might be a vanilla town
The person scanning them might be a lying scum
The person scanning them might be a cop and the target is innocent
The person scanning them might be a psychic cop and the target is a dark judge
Among several other results for other roles.
My solution simply streamlines this by mapping "Innocent", "not dark", "Vanilla" (most Vanillas are town) and "Not cop (including dark judge)" to true, while "Guilty", "dark", "not vanilla", and "cop (including dark judge)" are mapped to false. As you can see, the suspicious results are mostly mapped to false. Non-vanilla cops scanned by the vanilla cop and the sjs cop (scans to see if the target is a cop) run the risk of being scanned as false, but it's not that difficult to simply say "I'm XYZ cop" if you get in serious risk of being vote-killed because the sjs cop scanned you.

Are you suggesting that we would try to chop someone because of a particular result from a hypo scan?

I definitely think we should not do that.

Under the theory of the plan, as I've proposed it, the hypo scan results will be essentially worthless until after a cop has died and flipped a particular kind of cop.

I think it is a bad idea to make the scan results actually coherent (suggesting towny or scummy) before flips, as that just gives Scum more idea of what scans are real and what scans are hypothetical.

[ghug]

Seems to have been a lot of thought going into figuring this out.

Everyone should just blindly listen to me and focus on solving.

[DiplomacyandWarfare]

The original ghug corollary has every result mapped to either "true" or "false". The problem is that, for example, Innocent = true, guilty = false, but psychic cop scanning dark = true and not dark = false. Therefore, if someone is scanned as "true":
The person scanning them might be a vanilla town
The person scanning them might be a lying scum
The person scanning them might be a cop and the target is innocent
The person scanning them might be a psychic cop and the target is a dark judge
Among several other results for other roles.
My solution simply streamlines this by mapping "Innocent", "not dark", "Vanilla" (most Vanillas are town) and "Not cop (including dark judge)" to true, while "Guilty", "dark", "not vanilla", and "cop (including dark judge)" are mapped to false. As you can see, the suspicious results are mostly mapped to false. Non-vanilla cops scanned by the vanilla cop and the sjs cop (scans to see if the target is a cop) run the risk of being scanned as false, but it's not that difficult to simply say "I'm XYZ cop" if you get in serious risk of being vote-killed because the sjs cop scanned you.

Are you suggesting that we would try to chop someone because of a particular result from a hypo scan?

I definitely think we should not do that.

Under the theory of the plan, as I've proposed it, the hypo scan results will be essentially worthless until after a cop has died and flipped a particular kind of cop.

I think it is a bad idea to make the scan results actually coherent (suggesting towny or scummy) before flips, as that just gives Scum more idea of what scans are real and what scans are hypothetical.

No.
The point is to give scumleans and townleans rather than ambigious "innocent or maybe a dark Judge" results. If somebody is scanned 5 times by 5 different people as "false", they are probably scum.

[DiplomacyandWarfare]

So it appears the claiming to be the nacho cop was not a misspelling of claiming to be the macho cop but rather a joke that everyone but me got.
I still think we should modify the ghugcorollary so that True doesn't mean both innocent and dark.

Have you considered my counterargument?

Perhaps consider snipping my post to the point you are disagreeing with me on.

I still think we should modify the ghugcorollary so that True doesn't mean both innocent and dark.

So it appears the claiming to be the nacho cop was not a misspelling of claiming to be the macho cop but rather a joke that everyone but me got.

[JustAGuyNamedWill]

Okay so

Town

kingofthepirates
foodcoats
sweetandcool
ghug
Hamilton Brian
ND
rdrivera2005
snowy801
Chaqa
Vecna
Kakarroto
DrFidelis
worcej
dargorygel
Diplomacy&Warfare
Balki Bartokomous
brainbomb
damo666

Mafia

I can elaborate on whomever. Except Vecna and kak for obvious reasons

you can elaborate on worcej?

Oops I meant to put kak/vec/worc all together but I guess I accidentally put Fidelis above worc instead of below

[Chaqa]

chaqa is at 20 posts now and theyre pretty bad

Thank you I try

Everyone knows I ramp up as the game goes on

Who's everyone

Yes

[Balki Bartokomous]

The original ghug corollary has every result mapped to either "true" or "false". The problem is that, for example, Innocent = true, guilty = false, but psychic cop scanning dark = true and not dark = false. Therefore, if someone is scanned as "true":
The person scanning them might be a vanilla town
The person scanning them might be a lying scum
The person scanning them might be a cop and the target is innocent
The person scanning them might be a psychic cop and the target is a dark judge
Among several other results for other roles.
My solution simply streamlines this by mapping "Innocent", "not dark", "Vanilla" (most Vanillas are town) and "Not cop (including dark judge)" to true, while "Guilty", "dark", "not vanilla", and "cop (including dark judge)" are mapped to false. As you can see, the suspicious results are mostly mapped to false. Non-vanilla cops scanned by the vanilla cop and the sjs cop (scans to see if the target is a cop) run the risk of being scanned as false, but it's not that difficult to simply say "I'm XYZ cop" if you get in serious risk of being vote-killed because the sjs cop scanned you.

Are you suggesting that we would try to chop someone because of a particular result from a hypo scan?

I definitely think we should not do that.

Under the theory of the plan, as I've proposed it, the hypo scan results will be essentially worthless until after a cop has died and flipped a particular kind of cop.

I think it is a bad idea to make the scan results actually coherent (suggesting towny or scummy) before flips, as that just gives Scum more idea of what scans are real and what scans are hypothetical.

No.
The point is to give scumleans and townleans rather than ambigious "innocent or maybe a dark Judge" results. If somebody is scanned 5 times by 5 different people as "false", they are probably scum.

I think this is a bad idea.

I don't like it because it makes it easier for the bad guys to find our real cops. I also don't like it because I don't want us making Day Chop decisions based on a mishmash of hypothetical scans, which in most cases will mean nothing, and can be heavily influences by scum. Definitely don't like this idea.

[Chaqa]

So it appears the claiming to be the nacho cop was not a misspelling of claiming to be the macho cop but rather a joke that everyone but me got.
I still think we should modify the ghugcorollary so that True doesn't mean both innocent and dark.

To be fair chaqa is well known for (fake?)claiming, and therre was no way for you to know that

I fake claim town

Wait

[JustAGuyNamedWill]

Okay so

Town

kingofthepirates
foodcoats
sweetandcool
ghug
Hamilton Brian
ND
rdrivera2005
snowy801
Chaqa
Vecna
Kakarroto
DrFidelis
worcej
dargorygel
Diplomacy&Warfare
Balki Bartokomous
brainbomb
damo666

Mafia

I can elaborate on whomever. Except Vecna and kak for obvious reasons

worcej??

Also what do you find sus about the venerable Balki, and towny about king?

Balki is either the best town this game or pretty good scum. He is directing the thread and talking about mainly mech things.

King is playing exactly how I sort of played in M83. Idk, maybe a bit of sympathy for his situation. But he seems to be trying to do good.