With so few players and no information whatsoever, I Vote: No Lynch.
With so few players and no information whatsoever, I Vote: No Lynch.
And where will a no lynch get us, exactly?
We don't know anything right now, and there are so few players that it would be a huge risk to vote anyone out yet.
Okay, so let's sit around and do nothing and wait for the mafia to kill us all?
Why allow for two very possible townie deaths when we can only have one? But then again, we could possibly lynch a mafioso... It's unlikely, though.
Okay, instantly voting no lynch will get us nowhere. If we lynch someone it'll at least get us information. Even if we just vote randomly and don't lynch anyone it'll give us something to analyze later. Right now I'm waiting for more people to join in the discussion before I place my vote.
Sound like me Atomic. Voting no lynch will get us no where. Voting gives information. Voting No lynch makes me think that you're afraid of being lynched and not afraid of being nightkilled because you're mafia. Of course that's only one possibility. You may just be a townie afraid of being lynched. Otherwise no lynch is getting us nowhere.
Also, remember that day phases in this game last 3 real life days, so there's absolutely no point in rushing things or worry about eagerly voting someone out, because that would only set the town aback.
tl;dr over. Can we now please drop the subject? Debating lynch vs. no lynch on Day 1 for the 982th time is not helping scumhunting.
Who do you want to vote for, Zenax?
Voting for someone after I explained how we don't have to rush things would be pretty hypocritical, don't you think?
I never said anything about voting along with you; all I asked was who you were going to vote for.
What he's saying I think is that he's going to wait for more info before voting. Let's wait for others to post that haven't yet.
Ah, I see we have the typical "no lynch" vs "random vote" argument that happens in almost every single game, followed by [Zenax, Phoenicks, Ryuutakeshi, etc.] explaining how mafia games are actually played. TheMissingno. was disappointed, but he was not surprised.
Now Zenax, if you could indulge the thread further, please tell me why I shouldn't vote for you right now.
10 players alive. If we assume 3 mafia, that leaves 7 innocents. 2 mafia could be killed, giving 2 free nightkills. With 5 innocents left, there'd be 2.5 lynches, which rounds up to 3 -- one per mafioso. This sounds like too many on a vanilla setup. If we assume 1 mafia, that leaves 9 innocents, coming to 4.5 --> 5 lynches. Too high. Hence I am assuming 2 mafia. This leaves 8 innocents, 7 after the free nightkill, for 3.5 --> 4 lynches. Lynch 4 innocents and we lose. This is the likeliest possibility.
Conclusion: Lynch 4 innocents and we lose.
If we assume 2 mafiosi, then lynching today is statistically suboptimal. With 10 players, we have 8 by Day 2, 6 by Day 3, and 4 by Day 5 (2 players left is impossible with one mafioso). If by Day 3 there are 2 mafia (out of 6 players), then the game is in MYLO (Mislynch or Lose) -- lynching an innocent loses the game automatically. The same occurs if there is 1 mafioso (out of 4) on Day 5. Another way of putting it is that MYLO is when the town has 2 more players than the mafia. Lynching wrong turns to night, which lets the mafia kill to tie in numbers and win.
LYLO (Lynch or Lose), in comparison, is when the town has 1 more player than the mafia. MYLO and LYLO are both "possibly the last phase". MYLO has one more innocent that LYLO -- meaning that the chance of lynching an innocent is higher in MYLO. The optimum result is only possible if there is at least one vote of "No Lynch".
Conclusion: We should vote not to lynch at least once.
As play progresses we have more data points about each player. Currently we're in the blind stage: we know next to nothing. A no lynch must occur at some point for optimal play. It makes the most sense to use it now -- extending the time different players interact. The more each player interacts, the more data we have when lynching begins in earnest.
Conclusion: This is the best time to vote to not lynch.
I will take responses now. Okay, I took them. Here's my rebuttal to a series of strawmen:
"We need to lynch someone today to get information immediately!"
Go read up about LYLO and MYLO. Now read this. Don't keep reading this sentence when you haven't understood what comes before it.
If we do not lynch today, we will have more time before we come to our first lynch. There will still be just as many lynching days as there would be with a no lynch. Getting the information immediately confers almost no benefit; so what if we get that information slightly earlier?
"We should lynch some other day besides Day 1."
Day 1 is the best day to not lynch because it's the day least likely to produce a mafia lynch. Once we have the "information" that starts the lynching chain there will be no convincing the town to stop. "He's surely scum, we have to act NOW!" <-- Actual quotation from the future.
"Why not save the no lynch for the final day when there are 3 townies and 1 mafioso?"
LYLO is optimal for the town; MYLO optimal for the mafia. Because the chances of killing an innocent are greater, the mafia will prefer MYLO. It is in the mafia's best interest to not kill at all when killing would shrink the game from MYLO to LYLO.
"What if the mafia decide to not kill after we no lynch so they can get to MYLO?"
If my plan doesn't work out then we can always default to your plan with no harm done. If anything, that would hurt the mafia -- the more days the town has to discuss something, the closer we get to rooting them out.
"Why haven't you advocated this policy before?"
This is an entirely vanilla game. There are no surprises -- doctor protects, bomb kills, vigilantes, etc. -- to change the basic calculation of what is the most optimal behavior.
"What if there are 3 mafia"
Okay. Assume 7 innocents and 3 mafia. If we mislynched today we'd be at 5 innocents and 3 mafia tomorrow; the town would have 2 players more than the mafia, putting the game in MYLO. It's not about the number of mafia -- it's about the number of players the game has at start. With an even number, a no lynch is optimal.
"What you're saying is optimal in theory, but what if lynching early gets more innocents confirmed or something? The usual way could work out better."
If we're going to play "what if" with the future, I'd rather go with the path that gives us the highest chance of winning. Nothing that could happen if we (read: the rest of you) lynch today can be accounted for at present.
"Phoenicks is arguing for a no lynch he's scum."
Did you not try reading my post.
"Phoenicks, you got the math wrong."
No I didn't.
"Phoenicks you're wrong."
No I'm not.
"Phoenicks why didn't you vote for No Lynch in your massive wallpost?"
Because we have 3 days to lock in a No Lynch. 3 Days to discuss. I don't want this to end up like Zenax's Mini Mafia where bandwagons developed quickly. (Bandwagons are not often optimal either; that's another day's post.)
Conclusion: We should vote to not lynch.