Long Game 73: The Forgotten Coup

[Shard of Reading]

9 minutes ago, Araris Valerian said:

Perhaps we could look to the Gods of Luck and Chance for the camps defense tonight. If everyone takes a 1/4 chance and protects on success, we should get roughly 4 village defense, which seems about right.

How about we don't rely on Gods of lunch and Chance for something as important as this.

[Mat]

10 minutes ago, Araris Valerian said:

Perhaps we could look to the Gods of Luck and Chance for the camps defense tonight. If everyone takes a 1/4 chance and protects on success, we should get roughly 4 village defense, which seems about right.

This idea I like, actually. Better than any form of planned infiltratable coordinating, PMs or not, I think. Though it'd need wide participation.

[Devotary of Spontaneity]

16 minutes ago, Araris Valerian said:

If everyone takes a 1/4 chance and protects on success, we should get roughly 4 village defense, which seems about right.

What do you think is going to happen that 4 defense would be needed to stop one chalkling? It looks like the only thing that can lower defense is a LoW getting roleblocked.

[Archer]

 Evan straightened his back, tilting his head up despite the morning drizzle. His coat still felt big on him. When he shoved his hands into the pockets, he could barely reach the chalk dust that had collected in the bottoms. It was all he had left after several days of fighting. He shoved open the door to the barracks and walked in on the court martial already in session.

“We’ve been getting pummeled over on the North Side.” He coughed, trying to make his voice sound deeper. “I don’t know if he’s turned traitor, but Lan has been hanging back a little too much for my liking. Eh, boys? I mean men. I vote Lan!” Flyingbooks

I'm still waiting on the answers to some GM PM questions about how certain things work. (Can someone explain maps to me?) My current plan is to take a bribe today. @thief you are welcome to take it off my hands to help with your win-con. If you can take things in the same round they are picked up, rob me today, then you can take something from the supply in the night. If you can't, you now know where it will be, in case all of the elims take one in the night. You can rob me in the night, or take from the supply in the night and pick this up tomorrow. I have no plans to use the item. I will inform the camp when I have been successfully robbed. 

I wouldn't mind distributing the acid today, so we know who has it. It can only be used for defense, and I'd rather the elims didn't get the chance to take and sit on it. 

[Ashbringer]

Assuming that we mis-exe here, because that has been a frequent occurence, we will actually use 4 defense to stop 2 chalklings.

[Quintessential]

18 minutes ago, Araris Valerian said:

Perhaps we could look to the Gods of Luck and Chance for the camps defense tonight. If everyone takes a 1/4 chance and protects on success, we should get roughly 4 village defense, which seems about right.

7 minutes ago, Shard of Reading said:

How about we don't rely on Gods of lunch and Chance for something as important as this.

4 minutes ago, Matrim's Dice said:

This idea I like, actually. Better than any form of planned infiltratable coordinating, PMs or not, I think. Though it'd need wide participation.

I'm gonna agree with Reading on this one. The mathematical probability works out to 4 village Defense (assuming 5 elims and no one with Specializations in Lines of Warding) but that doesn't mean that's what we'll actually end up with. We could end up with no one drawing Lines or 9 people drawing Lines, the former leading to our Camp being overrun and the latter leading us to use up way too much chalk. Given that my rate of rolling elim in these games is about 30% higher than it should be, I'm not inclined to trust chance very much : P.

That being said, I'm not sure what the best method of arranging defense is. 

[StrikerEZ]

I think that, in theory, this idea of each player using the 1/4 chance to decide whether or not to protect is a good idea, but has a few flaws. First, it requires everyone to buy in. Second, it requires convincing players that they should do something they might not want to. Third, probability doesn't exactly work that way. Yes, over thousands and thousands of iterations, the most common number for defense we'd get would be around 4-5, but there's a lot more variance introduced in this small of a population, with only experiment occurring. I'd much rather organize the protection (though not in thread) than rely on the Gods of Luck and Chance. (Sorry Alv )

[Mat]

4 minutes ago, Quinn0928 said:

That being said, I'm not sure what the best method of arranging defense is. 

I mean, I'm also down with the common sense plan: No plan, per se, everyone just do what you think makes the most sense  

Honestly that might just work the best :P.

Alternatively, we each could just ask Alv

[Araris Valerian]

Actually, it turns out that with a 1/5 chance of each villager protecting, there is only a ~10% chance that the camp gets overrun. The average amount of wasted chalk would be 1.54. If we decided to go with this plan, we could flex the probability higher or lower depending on which number people are uncomfortable with. I suppose the question is, is there anyone that wouldn't go along with my plan if the village agreed to it? And is 10% a comfortable margin of failure? My suggestion of 1/4 odds cuts that in half, but increases the amount of wasted chalk on average to 2.31.

Math for amount of wasted chalk:

Spoiler

sum (17 choose n)(n-2)p^n(1-p)^(17-n) from n=3 to 17, where p is the decimal probability of protection per player

Edit: We could also easily adjust this if some players don't want to do it, but the majority do.

Edited January 29, 2021 by Araris Valerian

[Shard of Reading]

The thing is, I would participate if everyone agreed to it. But I don't think it's the best idea.

[Quintessential]

2 minutes ago, Araris Valerian said:

Actually, it turns out that with a 1/5 chance of each villager protecting, there is only a ~10% chance that the camp gets overrun. The average amount of wasted chalk would be 1.54. If we decided to go with this plan, we could flex the probability higher or lower depending on which number people are uncomfortable with. I suppose the question is, is there anyone that wouldn't go along with my plan if the village agreed to it? And is 10% a comfortable margin of failure? My suggestion of 1/4 odds cuts that in half, but increases the amount of wasted chalk on average to 2.31.

Math for amount of wasted chalk:

  Reveal hidden contents

sum (17 choose n)(n-2)p^n(1-p)^(17-n) from n=3 to 17, where p is the decimal probability of protection per player

Edit: We could also easily adjust this if some players don't want to do it, but the majority do.

I... hmmm. I. I don't know. : P There's probably some fancy PM-chain type way to do this that has a much lower margin of error than that. But I can't think what. 

[Random Bystander]

Just now, Shard of Reading said:

The thing is, I would participate if everyone agreed to it. But I don't think it's the best idea.

Yeah. Probability doesn't always work how it should. Who knows. Maybe for the first few days no one would protect the camp at all, and then we'd lose the game. On the other hand, using this method could allow us to WIN the game, soooo...

[Devotary of Spontaneity]

31 minutes ago, Ashbringer said:

Assuming that we mis-exe here, because that has been a frequent occurence, we will actually use 4 defense to stop 2 chalklings.

Right, okay. Looks like there's a 94/95% (depending on 16 or 17 villagers) chance of getting at least two defense with 1/4 odds and a greater than 80% chance of 3+ defense. With 1/5, that's 86/88% and 65/69%. Actual coordination would require some sort of accountability and claiming in PMs. Potentially have the people known to have grabbed chalk and acid today largely cover defense until more trust can be developed.

[StrikerEZ]

If we are going to do the probability protection plan, I think we should go for the 1/5 odds. I don't want to waste too much chalk in trying to defend the camp. And with the randomness involved, there's not as much worry about needing to overprotect to avoid elim roleblocks. We'd just need everyone to buy in completely.

[Kasimir]

37 minutes ago, Araris Valerian said:

Actually, it turns out that with a 1/5 chance of each villager protecting, there is only a ~10% chance that the camp gets overrun. The average amount of wasted chalk would be 1.54. If we decided to go with this plan, we could flex the probability higher or lower depending on which number people are uncomfortable with. I suppose the question is, is there anyone that wouldn't go along with my plan if the village agreed to it? And is 10% a comfortable margin of failure? My suggestion of 1/4 odds cuts that in half, but increases the amount of wasted chalk on average to 2.31.

Math for amount of wasted chalk:

  Reveal hidden contents

sum (17 choose n)(n-2)p^n(1-p)^(17-n) from n=3 to 17, where p is the decimal probability of protection per player

Edit: We could also easily adjust this if some players don't want to do it, but the majority do.

Duncan wasn't sure he had an issue with that plan. 

He'd just found out there was no alcohol to be had, because all alcohol was being strictly-rationed and therefore counted as bribes [OOC: Thanks Sart, still cracking up  ] and that meant he would have to figure something out. He didn't fancy his odds nicking more alcohol from under the quartermaster's watchful eye.

Defending the camp. Right. As far as he could work out, Elysian's plan didn't seem too awful. He liked those odds, anyway. Wasn't much of a gambling man, though. 1/4 odds sounded about right to him.

[Quintessential]

Alright, y'know what? I'll do it. Why not. It's certainly the simplest plan so far, and we can be reasonably certain of the likelihood of a failure.

[Condensation]

5 hours ago, Quinn0928 said:

So, my thought is, why don't we leave the Bribes for the Thief? That way they don't have a reason to try to steal from us, because they can use their actions to collect Bribes instead, and we don't lose any kill or defense Items. 

Sounds like a plan.

3 hours ago, STINK said:

how is chalk even made

They mine it then shape it. There's a chalk mine I can hike to in my area.

1 hour ago, Matrim's Dice said:

Alternatively, we each could just ask Alv

Um... hard pass. He is rather good at randomizing, but... no.

I know it was a joke. However, it's still a hard no.

I'm going to go PM everyone! If I already have a PM with you but you want another, go ahead. I won't PM you unless I need to PM you specifically.

[---]

Okay I for some reason am having an incredibly difficult time talking in this game. I'm going to blame it on the mechanics? :P. I never like D1 in general but since there seems to be actual things to coordinate, it's making it harder to look at people eee.

The main discussion seems to be to RNG or not to RNG and the main opposee seems to be Quinn? who just gave in.

12 hours ago, Ashbringer said:

I called my own death that game but I don’t remember anyone sacrificing themselves.

*sad illwei noises*

Connie

Telling me that you're going to spill all the secrets in my PM with you isn't the best way to make PM friends :P.
And telling me you already know something that I haven't told many other people isn't comforting either :P.

Edited January 29, 2021 by Illwei

[Condensation]

2 minutes ago, Illwei said:

Connie

Telling me that you're going to spill all the secrets in my PM with you isn't the best way to make PM friends :P.

That's not what I meant!

I'm willing to share basics. For example, so and so and I are talking about Greek mythology. That's all. And it'd really only be if you're getting suspicion.

[Ookla-son-son-Ventyl]

@Sart

Do some players start with items? Or do they have to be taken from the camp first?

[Mat]

12 minutes ago, Illwei said:

Telling me that you're going to spill all the secrets in my PM with you isn't the best way to make PM friends :P.

This was explained, I believe. At lease somewhat.

12 minutes ago, Illwei said:

And telling me you already know something that I haven't told many other people isn't comforting either :P.

But this sounds like a possible leak. Can you elaborate further?

[Gears]

The problem with the RNG plan is a lack of culpability. There is no reason to actually do anything because there is no blame. We can assign people the goal of taking or using items and have them randomly do it in the day or night to prevent being roleblocked by elims. Alternatively, we can make lots of small groups that each must scrounge up some amount of Defense from their members each cycle. Also, remember to assume that the elims will never use any item to up the Defense and adjust accordingly.

This is actually a game where we may not want to have a D1 X. The Strength goes up if we mis-X, not when we die, and X-ing an elim won't actually decrease the Strength because it has a minimum of 1. X-ing someone now will just make it harder for us in the future by upping the Strength [in 80% of cases]. Since not voting would probably allow elims to kill someone or people may not agree, I have a question for @Sart: If we vote on No Vote or No X or No Exe or Skip or some iteration of that, would you count that as a valid vote to not X someone and let it act as though it was a genuine candidate that can tie, win the majority, etc? EX: 3 people vote Gears, 4 people vote No Vote, no one dies? 

I don't know if it's a good idea, but I think the D1 X argument should be reconsidered in the context of this game.

[Araris Valerian]

2 minutes ago, Gears said:

The problem with the RNG plan is a lack of culpability. There is no reason to actually do anything because there is no blame. We can assign people the goal of taking or using items and have them randomly do it in the day or night to prevent being roleblocked by elims. Alternatively, we can make lots of small groups that each must scrounge up some amount of Defense from their members each cycle. Also, remember to assume that the elims will never use any item to up the Defense and adjust accordingly.

I don't think there is an entire lack of culpability. We can ask who did, in fact, add to the defense the following day. While some elims might lie, villagers wouldn't, and that is another data point that can help us out. The plan is emphasizes protecting the camp over finding elims because (IMO) the risks of letting the camp get overrun are significantly higher than the chance that we learn something useful from a coordinated defense. I also think people should do sort of whatever they want with items, at least for now. We can sort out who all is still able to protect next cycle.

[Quintessential]

7 minutes ago, Gears said:

I don't know if it's a good idea, but I think the D1 X argument should be reconsidered in the context of this game.

sigh Normally I would complain about this being brought up again, but Gears has a point. @Sart can we get a VC?

Look, here's the thing. Normally a D1 mix (I like this abbreviation so I'm using it) wouldn't really hurt us, so the information that we'd gain from it would outweigh the potential harm it could cause (unless we accidentally targeted the village vig or a powerful rolescanner, for example... oh wait). This game, though, is different. Instead of weighing in increase in knowledge against keeping one person alive, we're weighing an increase in knowledge against keeping one person alive and ensuring that the elims don't become any more powerful. 

On the other hand, having seen in QF50 what it looks like when no one dies to the C1 exe (C2 was a directionless mess, to put it lightly), I'm not sure which one is worth more. Gears' argument could, in theory, be extended throughout the whole game--let the elims winnow down the pool of suspects by killing villagers but keep their power relatively low, while at the same time trying to get reads on people and only exeing or vig-killing when we're sure who's elim--but that doesn't seem very fun to me, tbh. And if we do want to exe next cycle, which I assume we do, it's probably pretty important to exe this cycle as well. That way we get our directionless-mess phase out of the way before the elims have had a chance to kill.

[STINK]

24 minutes ago, Gears said:

I don't know if it's a good idea, but I think the D1 X argument should be reconsidered in the context of this game.

you know people say this every game right