Long Game 13: Traitors on the Plains

[phattemer]

Well, Ren, I was just picking someone at random. I thought I could get some discussion about whether or not lynching mostly inactive people is better, but without any other votes it just acts like a lynch discussion with no intent to kill.

[Herowannabe]

Re: Leftinspace/Smeagol/Leif: Several people have said they see an eliminator trying to act like a villager in his posts, but I'm not seeing it. Or at least, I'm not convinced. Not enough to lynch him.

I'm going to keep my vote on Paranoid King. Yeah, he's been inactive for the past four days (which coincidentally, lines up with when Bort's PM would have been started. Not hard for PK to see the email, figure out that Bort's a TW or LW, tell his diagramist buddies to kill him, then "go inactive" for a while until everything blows over), but in my opinion that's all the more reason to lynch him. Why lynch a potential diagramist who is posting and contributing and who (if he is a diagramist) is giving us posts to analyze and eventually see through when instead we can lynch a potential diagramist who isn't posting or contributing anything? And if PK isn't a diagramist, what have we lost? A villager who isn't contributing anything anyway.

Also, to look at things from another angle, ask yourself this: who is more likely to be a villager Radiant- the player who is actively posting and discussing or the one who has been inactive for several days? The diagramists certainly have no problem attacking active players, I fail to see why we should be helping them in that endeavor.

I realize not everyone agrees with my point of view (lynching inactives), but I thought I'd go ahead and preemptively explain why I'm not changing my vote.

[Macen]

I am pretty sure you are all about to lynch a Refugee. I just hope it's not one of our Radiants.

I do personally think that one of the 4 is a Diagramist. If there are only 5 diagramists, that means bort had a ~20% chance of getting a Diagramist with each person he contacted. 

There is about a 60% chance that a diagramist was contacted (This is a lowball chance). Combining that with the fact that he died the next night, I find it VERY unlikely that one of the four isn't a diagramist. All odds point to a diagramist being part of the group. I can't put numbers on that, but I would guess it's very high.

For all of you stating that the experienced players would not kill him the same night - you aren't taking into account Squiring. If I was a diagramist I would want to kill a Radiant before he could get his squire off, that takes away one more Refugee with an ability. Rewards outweigh the risk for them. Based on this: 

The number of Squires that each Radiant will be able to create will depend on the total number of players. The game is designed for 21+ players, in which case there would be between seven and ten Radiants, with each being able to create one to two Squires.

Based on those numbers I'm guessing we are close to 10 Radiants. If 1/5 of our players are Diagramists that means they have 2, we have 8. If there are only 10 - I'm guessing 1 of each role (possible 2 of certain roles and 0 of others?)

Back to what I was saying before. I feel that (at least) 1 of the 4 in that group was a Diagramist. After doing this post I'm now pretty convinced that they are not one of their radiants (that risk would not have outweighed the reward).

So you guys need to decide if it's worth the risk to lynch one of them consider the diagramist in the group (if there is one) is probably not a radiant. But, the refugees in the group have a 7/20 (-1 for Bort, 2 for the diagramist, based on 10 total) chance of being a radiant [35%]...


P.S. I did most of the math on the fly here, if you see something wrong, please point it out - also... this completely changed the way I feel about the votes we are doing. I do know that the flow of this post goes from me thinking we should lynch one of the 4, to being more hesitant. I could have re-written it, but I want you guys to be able to see the logic I followed.

Please do not take my math / logic as fact. Take it with a grain of salt and do the numbers yourself.

[Macen]

Macen (0) : Twei

Ren (1) : Macen

Paranoid (3) : Hero, Maill, Twei, Araris, Leiftinspace,

Leift (4) : Emerald, Orlok. Alvron, Clanky

Phatt (1): Ren, Eramit

*EDIT* I Meant to edit this into my last post, and forgot to do that - sorry for the double post.
*EDIT2* FIxed what Leift said.

Edited July 23, 2015 by Macen

[Aonar]

Minor GM Announcement: I just found out I'll be without internet access from about six today, until sometime in the evening tomorrow, so this turn will have to be extended by 24 hours.

 

Please return to your (now rescheduled) lynching.

Edited July 22, 2015 by Aonar Faileas

[leiftinspace]

 

Macen (0) : Twei

Ren (1) : Macen

Paranoid (4) : Hero, Maill, Twei, Araris, Leiftinspace,

Leift (4) : Emerald, Orlok. Alvron, Clanky

Phatt (1): Ren, Eramit

*EDIT* I Meant to edit this into my last post, and forgot to do that - sorry for the double post.

 

 

You forgot to cross out Maill's vote for PK. I wouldn't mind if it were still tied, but oh well. At least I have a short reprieve for people to change their minds.

[Paranoid King]

I am SO sorry, guys. I've been inactive for a few days because I left on vacation to a place without internet access. I meant to inform you, but internet at my house was dead for 6-7 hours before I left. For all those wondering about my inactivity, sorry.

EDIT: Akir... Akisem... Glove stealer can back me up on this, as we both are brothers. Ariki... Glove boy, please respond with confirmation of my story.

EDIT 2: oops, just remembered you're not supposed to use info gleaned from out of topic. Let me rephrase that. Ahem. Akirisemapatahisirikalakirisihatapamesirika, I notice you haven't been online for a few days, either. Would you like to provide an explanation?

Edited July 23, 2015 by Paranoid King

[Elithanathile]

I can't believe it. I'm still alive? Sorry for the inactivity, but last thursday my family had a 4hour internet outage, immexiately followed by a six hour drive to go on vacation, also followed by 6 days of vacation without internet, and the drive back. I didn't tell you beforehand, because I thought I would have internet there. I am so sorry about all the inactivity, and I have a lot of catching up to do. Mostly I'm just surprised that I'm alive. Also, PK was on the vacation with me, with the same issues, so that's why he was inactive too.

[Feligon]

I've been meaning to post something, but I have no idea what to say.  I probably will just vote on whoever has the most votes to try to make sure someone that we suspect is lynched instead of just letting the eliminators pick us off one by one.  I'm also interested to know what was discussed in the pm with bort, if anyone can fill me in on the details.

[Renegade]

Well, if what Paranoid King and Bridge Boy say is correct, then it is unlikely that Paranoid King actually saw Bort's PM.  This doesn't clear him, but if he is a Diagramist, he probably didn't know that Bort was a Truthwatcher (at least based off of the PM).

 

As for Leif, I'm sort of ambivalent.  I don't think that the points raised against him are as severe as some have been pointing out, and it is interesting that he's ended up attracting far more attention than Twelfth or me.  However, I am starting to wonder about the "reprieve" that he mentioned.

 

I'm also interested to know what was discussed in the pm with bort, if anyone can fill me in on the details.

 

I'm guessing that you're assuming that the Bort PM was a group PM between Bort and the four other participants, but each of the PMs are sent out individually.  Other than Paranoid King, all of us have discussed what went on in our separate PMs with Bort.

 

I haven't figured out who to vote for yet, but I'm starting to suspect Idolevy and Kipper again, for the reasons I gave on Day 1.  At the very least, neither of them have contributed anything to the discussion since then, so I'd like to know where they stand on this, if they decide to show up.

Edited July 23, 2015 by Renegade

[Araris Valerian]

I think my vote is going on Macen this cycle. His first post about taking out people that were in PMs stuck out to me quite a bit. It seems to me with his last post about probability that he is trying to sit on the fence, as far as killing one of the four people discussion has currently been focused on. And somebody else brought his name up, but didn't stick with a vote because he is active, so perhaps people should consider him as a lynch target.

[Paranoid King]

Alright. I see that people have been voting on me because I was inactive and was in a PM with Bort. Here's the problem with me (or anyone else in the PM) conspiring to kill him:

• that PM is a link to free info
• Bort already used up most of his charges
• as such, there is no reason to kill him other than that he is a KR.

So it seems to me like free info would be a better motivator than taking out a KR. I can't see why Discovery would kill him. Unless they weren't in the PM. Private communication between their enemies would be something they'd want to stop immediately.

As such, I don't suspect any of the members Bort PM'd, and I'm placing my vote on Macen.

[Emerald101]

So it seems to me like free info would be a better motivator than taking out a KR. I can't see why Discovery would kill him. Unless they weren't in the PM. 

 

LG13 =/= MR7

[Macen]

Alright. I see that people have been voting on me because I was inactive and was in a PM with Bort. Here's the problem with me (or anyone else in the PM) conspiring to kill him:

• that PM is a link to free info
• Bort already used up most of his charges
• as such, there is no reason to kill him other than that he is a KR.

So it seems to me like free info would be a better motivator than taking out a KR. I can't see why Discovery would kill him. Unless they weren't in the PM. Private communication between their enemies would be something they'd want to stop immediately.

As such, I don't suspect any of the members Bort PM'd, and I'm placing my vote on Macen.

The reason they would kill him is because PM's only last for 1 night, they use up a charge, and he hadn't made his Squire yet. Also, why did you contradict yourself?

 

So it seems to me like free info would be a better motivator than taking out a KR. I can't see why Discovery would kill him. Unless they weren't in the PM. Private communication between their enemies would be something they'd want to stop immediately.

  

First you say they wouldn't want to kill the KR so they could get free info (who is saying he would have opened a PM up with that Diagramist again?). Then you say they would want to stop communication between their enemies.

 

If I was a Diagramist and the person who was communicated with out of my faction wasn't one of our Radiants, I would 100% kill Bort. That leaves a 50/50 chance they will be suspicious of the group (obviously people are saying that we shouldn't be) and if people ARE suspicious of the group, there is only a 25% that our Diagramist is going to the one who gets lynched first. They kill 1 of our Illusionists, and they possibly kill him before he can get a squire out.

All I've been doing is breaking down game rules and presenting numbers to back up my theory. I still THINK we should lynch one of the 4. In my opinion there is at least a 25% chance we get a Diagramist (there is about a 20% chance he messaged 2 Diagramist; this could made it a 50% chance hit a Diagramist). If we don't get a Diagramist then there is a 35% chance they are one of our Radiants.

All of that being said, I'm going to stop breaking this stuff down for everyone because it appears it's just making me seem suspicious. You can do it yourself or use your gut instinct.

*EDIT* Added Votes:

 

Macen (2) : Twei, Arasis, Paranoid King

Ren (1) : Macen

Paranoid (3) : Hero, Maill, Twei, Araris, Leiftinspace,

Leift (4) : Emerald, Orlok. Alvron, Clanky

Phatt (1): Ren, Eramit

Edited July 23, 2015 by Macen

[Paranoid King]

First you say they wouldn't want to kill the KR so they could get free info (who is saying he would have opened a PM up with that Diagramist again?). Then you say they would want to stop communication between their enemies.

My apologies. I meant that if there was a diagramist in the PM, he could get info. If there were no diagramists in the PM, he would want to stop other people from getting info.

[Macen]

My apologies. I meant that if there was a diagramist in the PM, he could get info. If there were no diagramists in the PM, he would want to stop other people from getting info.

Again, I think you need to go re-read how the illumination ability works. It's only for that night.

[Herowannabe]

@Paranoid King, I notice that you still have not told us anything about your PM with Bort. Did you see it before you left? We're you able to discuss anything? Did Bort say anything to you?

[Paranoid King]

I did not see the PM before I left. Bort asked if I had been PM'd by anyone else. He was basically saying he was a KR, if he died, it was likely because one of the correspondents killed him because he was a KR.

[Araris Valerian]

Well Macen, the problem with your math is that I don't think you can break down probability like that. I'll do it for myself and then explain why. So we have 25 players left, and I will assume 6 eliminators, although it could be 5 or 7 as well. So there is a .24 chance any player is an eliminator by now. If we pick 4 at random, the chances of getting no eliminators is .76^4 or about .3336. But the average number of eliminators is 4(.24) or .96

The problem with your math is you are taking a subset of the group and assuming that they have a different ratio of eliminators than the overall group. But 1 eliminator in the 4 is a .25 chance, versus .24, so killing one of the four doesn't stand to help us much.

If there are only 5 then the numbers come out to:

Chance of 0 eliminators in PM=.8^4 or .4096

Average number of eliminators in the PM = .8

But the point of this is that if we take lots of random samples of this group with four people, on average the proportion of Diagramists is the same as the overall population. So by math alone we can't use this information at all. We need some sort of extra bit of info. Bort being dead contributes a bit to that, but I don't think it changes the numbers enough to focus a lynch on one of those four people exclusively.

Edit: For clarification, I made some assumptions about what Macen was implying but the main point I was trying to get across is the stuff in the last paragraph, not that Macen was doing bad math.

Edited July 23, 2015 by Araris Valerian

[Macen]

Well Macen, the problem with your math is that I don't think you can break down probability like that. I'll do it for myself and then explain why. So we have 25 players left, and I will assume 6 eliminators, although it could be 5 or 7 as well. So there is a .24 chance any player is an eliminator by now. If we pick 4 at random, the chances of getting no eliminators is .76^4 or about .3336. But the average number of eliminators is 4(.24) or .96

The problem with your math is you are taking a subset of the group and assuming that they have a different ratio of eliminators than the overall group. But 1 eliminator in the 4 is a .25 chance, versus .24, so killing one of the four doesn't stand to help us much.

If there are only 5 then the numbers come out to:

Chance of 0 eliminators in PM=.8^4 or .4096

Average number of eliminators in the PM = .8

But the point of this is that if we take lots of random samples of this group with four people, on average the proportion of Diagramists is the same as the overall population. So by math alone we can't use this information at all. We need some sort of extra bit of info. Bort being dead contributes a bit to that, but I don't think it changes the numbers enough to focus a lynch on one of those four people exclusively.

Edit: For clarification, I made some assumptions about what Macen was implying but the main point I was trying to get across is the stuff in the last paragraph, not that Macen was doing bad math.

Your math is right on with what I did. I took the lowest possible numbers (5 elminiators) so no one could say I was trying to skew the results. More realistic would be that it's 6 or 7, and I would take 1 person out of each subsequent roll of the dice.

Let's pretend it's 6:

19/25 = .76

18/24 = .75

17/23 = .7391

16/22 = .7272

.76*.75*.7391*.7272 = .3064 = 30.64% = 69.26% chance of one being bad.

 

If we want to go as high as 7 Diagramists:

17/24 = .7083

16/23 = .6956

15/22 = .6818

.72*.7083*.6956*.6818 = .2419 = 24.19% = 75.81% chance of one being bad.

These numbers are based on 27 people minus one for Bort, becuase he couldn't communicate with himself. And minus one for yourself (since you know you're good and he didn't communicate with you). If someone wants to do the odds including yourself (26), be my guest.

That being said, between a 59.04% and 75.81% chance of one of them being bad. Combine that with the fact that he died quickly afterwards (trying to kill him before he got a squire off?) I think the probability is much higher.

The odds are above 50% no matter how you break it down, do I really need to argue more than that?

*EDIT* To touch on your last paragraph, got ahead of myself -sorry.

 

But the point of this is that if we take lots of random samples of this group with four people, on average the proportion of Diagramists is the same as the overall population. So by math alone we can't use this information at all. We need some sort of extra bit of info. Bort being dead contributes a bit to that, but I don't think it changes the numbers enough to focus a lynch on one of those four people exclusively.

In a situation like this you don't take a lot of random samples. You take the laws of probability. If you roll a 5 sided dice 4 times (which is essentially what happened) you have a 59.04% chance of getting a 5 at least once. But EVEN if we take all the math out of it... do you really think they just happened to kill the guy who communicated with 4 people right after he communicated with 4 people? Really?

*/EDIT*

*EDIT2* I would like to throw a Caviat in backing up Araris in the fact that there is a lot more that goes into making this equation perfect. You can go to a lot of math sites and get equations that get it a lot finer than this. That being said, this is a pretty commonly accept short hand for these probabilities. It's not perfect, but it's close enough.

Edited July 23, 2015 by Macen

[Mailliw73]

I'm going to throw my vote on Hero. Something about his recent posts haven't sounded true to me and I don't have a ton of time this cycle to analyze more than that. My other suspicions are Macen and Phatt most prominently. Araris has dropped on my suspicion list. I'll be out of town for the night cycle and half of the next day, but I'll be back for the second half.

[Feligon]

I'll go ahead and vote for Lieft.  I want to make sure we lynch someone, that way we can get more information and hopefully lead to some more solid answers.  There is most likely 1 diagramist that had a pm with Bort, I doubt it was paranoid(he was away), and Lieft has the most votes on him already, so my vote will make it very hard for the diagramists to sway the lynch

[eramit]

i am removing my vote on Phatt and putting it on PK because its very suspicious how araris voted on macen in the same time when PK came back and when araris voted on macen PK did the same - its like they are trying to turn the lynch target from PK to macen and working together...

[Paranoid King]

...But if I'm trying to turn the vote to someone else, why wouldn't I vote on Leift? He has the most votes. And, assuming we are both discovery Diagramists, why would he vote on me?

[Kipper]

Okay, now that the MR has ended, and I am settled into vacation, I will actually read the rules of the game and begin to participate...look for me soon, hopefully later tonight after I've read everything. I'm sure I wasn't missed, as I am, in actuality, the humblest role of the humble in this most excellent game.

Two points:

1. Does anyone mind if I refer to the Diagramamamists as "mafia" or "maf?" 'S such a long word to type, and easy to get wrong.

2. PK, I'm not sure if that counts as an IKYK, but it sounds an awful lot like one. I don't think that you necessarily need to defend trying to lynch someone other than yourself, anyway.

Edit:

Renegade, having just seen your post above...

What is it exactly that you would like me to give an opinion on? I'd be happy to, once I know the issue.

Edited July 23, 2015 by Kipper