Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[webadict]

Scum should start claiming it.

I know. I want that to continue. As it stands, millerclaims are exceeding town tells.

Dude, now it feels like you're trolling me. No, claiming miller is not a towntell or a scumtell. It's a null tell. Just because some people acted in so-and-so manner last game does not mean they will do the same this game. Previous claims have zero predictive value. Claiming doesn't give you new information, therefore for this game it's a null tell.

You yourself say this:

I believe something like... 95% of miller claims are town. But ONLY if they are for mafia. Third party miller claims are like... 66% third party.

Right, but you don't know ahead of time if the claimant is town, scum or 3rd party, so don't know which of the 95% or 66% would apply (to say nothing about the numbers being ass-pulled), or that people will act like other people have acted elsewhere in the same proportion. Therefore, you can't derive the conclusion that they are more likely to be town. It does not follow.

Just a little fyi, claiming miller in almost any game is a sure fire way to be townlike.

Sure, it's a valid feint for scum, a perfectly viable tactic which should be used more often. It's a good screen for mafia/dopps, and a good way for an alien/3rd-party to discourage inspections on them. This is precisely the reason why it should be regarded as a null tell every time.

Regarding miller claims as null tells is the only epistemologically sound course of action, everything else is wishful thinking, self-delusional wobbly logic, and wifom.


But never mind. Feel free to stay on your rocking horse. You are still wrong.

What? No, I'm not. I've hosted a ton of games, and do you want to know how many of scum have claimed miller? Even the games where it's unknown roles or some other such thing?

Almost none. In fact, maybe once. Maybe.

Your point of view only works if you're taking the game of Mafia without any psychological standpoint. If you act like it's a nulltell, then you're ignoring a lot of statistical and psychological viewpoints, holding to only favor the logical. Logically, yes, it's a null tell. But, humans are not logical. We're a writhing, slobbering mass of emotions and irrationality. If you focus on logic with us, you won't always be right. I mean, seriously, have you looked at the world? Are we logical beings?

What kind of sick, twisted world do you live in where the logical thing is always right?

Logically, every mafia should claim miller, right? Since it's a null tell. But, that's not right. That outs every member of the scum. So, logically, very few of them should claim. But, again, doesn't that just make a scum stand out? So, what's logical about any of this? How can you say it's a null tell after all of that? Statistically, what's the chances of 3 millers in one game? Astronomically low. So, what are the chances these guys are scum?

Doesn't that mean it's not a null tell?

[Bookthras]

Logically, yes, it's a null tell.

Yes. Epistemologically as well (i.e., the only justified belief you can hold is that you don't know if the claim is sincere or not).

But, humans are not logical. We're a writhing, slobbering mass of emotions and irrationality. If you focus on logic with us, you won't always be right. I mean, seriously, have you looked at the world? Are we logical beings?

It's not about them, it's about you (i.e., the player). What conclusion can you draw from the available information? None, therefore it's a null tell. That's my point.

The whole "psychological aspect" thing involves reading the specific person who made the claim (or who made no claim), and for that you have other tools (his votes/arguments/questions/answers/whatnot).

You cannot apply psychology to a mass of disparate players on different games under different conditions and expect to reach useful conclusions for the current game. You can only try to read one person on their own, and for this the claim itself continues to have no information content: you can read them through other means, but whether that person has or hasn't claimed miller in previous games holds very little predictive value (I have some games, and not others, so how would you know if I'm sincere this time?).

It's even more meaningless if you try to hold them to someone else's standards: "Book has fakeclaimed miller 11.45% of the time, therefore there's an 11.45% chance Hapah is fakeclaiming now" is utter bullshit.

Logically, every mafia should claim miller, right? Since it's a null tell. But, that's not right.

This is irrelevant. Clearly not every mafia should do everything that is a null tell unless there's strategic value. Since you don't know their strategy ahead of time, you can infer no conclusion from whether they claim or not.

Statistically, what's the chances of 3 millers in one game? Astronomically low. So, what are the chances these guys are scum?

I won't get into a statistics argument, but in brief: no, it's not "astronomically" low, it's just low. And low-probability events happen quite often. Again, you cannot draw conclusions relevant to the current game based on that.


Whatever, I'm not going to convince you, so cling to your idiot ball and let's move on. I'm not interested in dragging this on for the hundred posts that we both know each other to be capable of. Let's let people read the arguments and form their own opinions.

But you are still wrong.

[webadict]

Hahaha.

Yep, I'm the idiot.

That's why I'm right.

You know what your problem is Book? Your problem stems from have an inflated sense of self-esteem. See, admitting you're wrong would be pointless in your mind, since you're more of an arguer for whatever nonsense you've decided is the logical way, regardless of what has already been established. Instead, you've got to argue about just about everything to prove your point is right, instead of just looking at the evidence. It also provides you with this nasty sense of hindsight, where you say you did something you didn't do and knew it. See, you "knew" that kookclaiming was a nulltell, and you'll eventually use this particular game as evidence. I mean, in spite of the fact that I really wanted more games to counterprove my original point that millers are more likely to be claimed by town than scum (for plenty of reasons, and as evidenced by the data). The goal is to turn it into a nulltell by either destroying the ability for town to claim is or to make it something scum is likely to do. Unfortunately, as Dariush can attest to, scum do not like claiming miller. The reason for this is psychological. Just as many things are in this game.

So, really, you don't want to admit to something that's evident because it'd make me right and you wrong. Even if I would enjoy if you were right, and, indeed, am trying to switch the tide toward such beliefs, you are not.

It's simple, really. You're the most important person in the world.

Problem. Solved.

[Bookthras]

You know what your problem is Book?

Heh. Ad hominem attacks only serve to show you've exhausted actual arguments, dude! We're talking about the ideas, not about the people proposing/defending them.

For the record:

Hahaha. Yep, I'm the idiot.

I didn't say you were an idiot. I said you were wrong, and perhaps that your argument was idiotic, but with reasons. You're the one calling people names. No need to get nasty just because your ideas fail.


But I think we agree on more than we disagree. Like:

you've got to argue about just about everything to prove your point is right,

Yes, I like arguing. I like it a lot, which is why I got hooked into this game. I mean, questioning people and dissecting their arguments and toy with their brains and lie through my teeth/see through their lies, and win, without actually starting bar fights? What's not to love?

It also provides you with this nasty sense of hindsight, where you say you did something you didn't do and knew it. See, you "knew" that kookclaiming was a nulltell, and you'll eventually use this particular game as evidence.

I'm not sure what you mean here... I've been pushing the null-tell thing for years (hell, here's an example from 2010). Sure, I may use this or that or some other game as example (like, say, BYOR9, where this conversation was also held), but I don't see what you mean by "something I didn't do and knew it".

If you're referring to this game, I thought Dariush was scummy (and you too), and said so on deadchat long before either of you flipped/admitted, but that's just because I'm good, not because of his claim (since that's a null tell).

I mean, in spite of the fact that I really wanted more games to counterprove my original point that millers are more likely to be claimed by town than scum (for plenty of reasons, and as evidenced by the data). The goal is to turn it into a nulltell by either destroying the ability for town to claim is or to make it something scum is likely to do.

Here we also agree, on goals but not methods. I also would like people to not think of it as a town tell, and for scum to use it more often. My method is logic (unassailable logic, at that). Your method seems to be some sort of reverse psychology or wishful thinking or something (tell people kook claims must be town, so they will stop being! sure...).

You don't need to turn it into a null tell, it already is. What you need is to promote it as a scum tactic.

Unfortunately, as Dariush can attest to, scum do not like claiming miller. The reason for this is psychological.

I don't follow this either. He didn't seem to dislike it, in fact in scumchat seemed quite eager to do it. I also enjoyed it when I did it. Sure, it has a psychological impact, in the form of increased scrutiny or trepidation that too many actual kooks exist, but as you say many things in this game are psychological, including the adrenaline rush of performing a bold and dangerous scum move. Some people may not like it. Some others may.

I'm also a big fan of unpredictability. If people always play the same way, or if moves people will make could really be foretold statistically, the game would be much more boring. Different strategies are good. People should be more unpredictable more often, make crazy gambits, take risks. Keeps the game fresh.

So, really, you don't want to admit to something that's evident because it'd make me right and you wrong.

No, I've been wrong before, and survived. I don't admit to this because I disagree that it's evident, not because it'd make me wrong.

I think this is the main point of disagreement: you think previous behaviour is a predictor of future behaviour (by different people on different circumstances, even!). I on the other hand think that every game, and indeed every move of every player of every game, should be evaluated on their merits and particular context.

If one refers to previous performances at all, it should be restricted to that particular player's previous performances (has he been known to bus buddies?) rather than an aggregate (how many percent of scum deaths have been due to bussing?), and should not ever prescribe absolute conclusions. Just because so-and-so has never fakeclaimed kook it doesn't mean he can't or won't ever; everything one ever does was once done for the first time.

It's simple, really. You're the most important person in the world.

Heh. Here we also agree. But you're second-most, wuba baby!

[Dariush]

Make him mutually exclusive with a vig.

Shitty idea. If someone gets vigged and another gets abducted, the town can relax because they're definitely not an OH.

Except when it's camo'd Exty+OH, in which case the town is double fucked.

I have to disagree. Tiruin didn't win, but that's as much a problem with the lack of activity as anything else. Quite frankly, there are almost no situations where two dopps, with one being a guard, aren't going to win when the game gets down to 3. An Exterminator with his Shield left at that point would do it, but little else. If the town had played better he'd have had a better shot, although of course it was never going to be guaranteed.

No. Tiruin could only win if either Wuba or both me and Toaster got lynched or abducted by him, in addition to the remaining dopp(s) not getting guarded by town. Otherwise he would be unable to bypass the guard and would be killed by the remaining one.

As for the kill...the part of the point of the OH is to make an abduction that the Exterminator can actually use Combat Camo to look like. If we'd had an Exterminator disguising his kills as an OH, the flavor would have been exactly the same.

Then make OH's abductions non-revealing and make Exty's corpses pop up after two days (on D4). I find the whole idea flawed, though: this way, Exty won't have any reason to camo as anybody else.

Overall I think it still has potential and I'd need to see it in a game with better activity to really make a decision on it. The OH has two advantages over an Exterminator. One, Abductions can't be Guarded against, making his Kills pretty much guaranteed unless someone role-blocks him. Two, the Omni kill at the end is very powerful. It gets rid of most or all of the remaining players, and like the Exterminator the Organ Harvester wins if it gets down to a 1-1 standoff (although if we somehow had a 1-1 OH vs Exty the Exty would win). Tiruin only lost because he was the only target for the dopps to kill. If he and Pandarsenic had pushed for a no-lynch/tie, he could have actually won.

...You said OH loses in a standoff versus a dopp. In any case, if there are a lot of guards, omnikill will fail aplenty. If there are too few guards, too many kills will happen that will make OH unable to complete the abn (because I'm seriously tired of typing a non-abbreviatable 11-letter word every time). It's a lose-lose scenario for the OH, really.

Pandarsenic and Tiruin should've voted NL.

Didn't matter. If dopps killed Tiruin, game over. If they killed Pandar, it's a Toaster vs Tiruin standoff on D5 and game over. There was literally nothing that could prevent a dopp victory by D4.

You know what your problem is Book? Your problem stems from have an inflated sense of self-esteem.
-snip-

QFT.

[ToonyMan]

Yeah Book, I would say miller claims are a towntell if the last few games I've been in only had town claiming miller.  Even if you say it's a nulltell from the basic roots that isn't taking into account actual pragmatic gameplay.

EDIT:
This is completely different than whose alignment is chosen by a RNG.

[Urist Imiknorris]

As for the kill...the part of the point of the OH is to make an abduction that the Exterminator can actually use Combat Camo to look like. If we'd had an Exterminator disguising his kills as an OH, the flavor would have been exactly the same.

Then make OH's abductions non-revealing and make Exty's corpses pop up after two days (on D4). I find the whole idea flawed, though: this way, Exty won't have any reason to camo as anybody else.

The ability to have a bulletproof vig claim is not to be underestimated.

You can take a medium tech in a large tech slot, right?

[Toaster]

As for the kill...the part of the point of the OH is to make an abduction that the Exterminator can actually use Combat Camo to look like. If we'd had an Exterminator disguising his kills as an OH, the flavor would have been exactly the same.

Then make OH's abductions non-revealing and make Exty's corpses pop up after two days (on D4). I find the whole idea flawed, though: this way, Exty won't have any reason to camo as anybody else.

The ability to have a bulletproof vig claim is not to be underestimated.

You can take a medium tech in a large tech slot, right?

That's what the Replicator is for.