You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 11, 2016, 07:55:21 AM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: The Siege of Carisbrooke Castle: OOC thread  (Read 9541 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Imogen

Re: The Siege of Carisbrooke Castle: OOC thread
« Reply #75 on: December 24, 2009, 09:49:45 AM »
Quote
And.....Imogen, did you mean you are loving this? O8) *hugs*

Err.. I think so...Wait..... Yes!!!!!  ;D

**hugs!**

Offline Remiel

Re: The Siege of Carisbrooke Castle: OOC thread
« Reply #76 on: December 24, 2009, 11:13:52 AM »
Quote
The usual ratio is one mafioso (or equivalent) for every two innocents.

I've wondered about that.  Is there any particular reason why this is the optimal ratio?  I've always played this game with a ratio of, say, one mafia/werewolf/vampire/conspirator for every three innocents (special roles included).  The way we've played so far, the voting patterns of the conspirators became more or less obvious after about, oh, the third or fourth round.   It's difficult for them to turn on each other, so unless they're much more devious and manipulative than usual, you can usually pick them out after a while.

What about limiting the number of conspirators? Say, 3 for 15 players, or 4 for 20.  I realize that this carries an element of risk of the villagers taking out all of the conspirators by pure chance, but I think it will make the game more interesting in the long run, and really challenge the conspirators to be persuasive.  I remember playing a game like this once, when I was in college.  We had a whole room full of people (about 20) and there were only two of us bad seeds, and we managed to take out the entire room, one person at a time.  So I know it can be done.   Granted, none of the innocents had special roles in that game.


Online ValerianTopic starter

Re: The Siege of Carisbrooke Castle: OOC thread
« Reply #77 on: December 24, 2009, 11:32:51 AM »
Oh, I'm always willing to experiment with things like that as long as the players are willing.  :)

As for the numbers behind that ratio, I couldn't say.  That's from the wiki article on the subject, and apparently that was the original ratio used by the creators of the game, but that's about all I know.

I think that pure chance may be more of a factor online.  In face to face games, the guardian, for instance, might have a better idea of who to protect on the first few nights because of the subtle cues of face, tone, and gesture that we just don't have here.  Those probably make it easier to find out who's an innocent who might need protecting, for example.

Anyway, I'll most likely be taking a bit of a break after Carisbrooke finishes up and give a special guest GM a chance to run the next round; but that variation is certainly something that could be tried at some point, if players are willing.

Offline Caeli

Re: The Siege of Carisbrooke Castle: OOC thread
« Reply #78 on: December 24, 2009, 02:32:43 PM »
The reason the ratio is always 1-to-3 is because the villagers actually have a huge advantage in this game - whoever is the mafia-equivalent almost never wins, even in RL games where you can't secretly collaborate with your fellows, and all 'planning' is done out in the open, during lynching debates.

If you made the numbers more in favor of the civilians (or councilors, in this game), mafia would have even less chance of winning. :P That's almost like fixing the game so they will lose.

The same thing goes for the votes. If you don't allow the lynch votes to be changeable (i.e., you can't change your vote), the voting patterns sway dramatically in the favor of the mafia. Yes, innocents can plead their guilt, but so can the mafia - and once they kill off enough people so that they make up half of the population (not all that hard, since theoretically, they could easily manage one innocent during the lynching, as well as their nightly victim), all they'd have to do is vote all together to win. Which would make the game boring, since it would be obvious who the mafia was by then. :P

When I play this game in RL, sometimes we even do no special roles for the innocents - and the mafia still loses. It just kind of shows you how much harder the game is for them.

Offline sinera

Re: The Siege of Carisbrooke Castle: OOC thread
« Reply #79 on: December 26, 2009, 12:20:31 PM »
OMG Ryven... *wonders where she can find a man hung like the one in Ryven's AV*

Offline Haibane

Re: The Siege of Carisbrooke Castle: OOC thread
« Reply #80 on: December 26, 2009, 12:32:12 PM »
I know one, but sadly he's taken!  :P

Offline sinera

Re: The Siege of Carisbrooke Castle: OOC thread
« Reply #81 on: December 26, 2009, 12:35:17 PM »
well, yeah, I know a couple, but they're taken LOL

Offline Ryven

  • Keeper of Cowthulhu | Pure Awesomenesity
  • Knight
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Nov 2008
  • Location: The farthest reaches of your dreams
  • Gender: Male
  • The night's pleasure follows in my footsteps
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Siege of Carisbrooke Castle: OOC thread
« Reply #82 on: December 26, 2009, 07:13:18 PM »
OMG Ryven... *wonders where she can find a man hung like the one in Ryven's AV*

There are plenty here in the internet realm.  Sadly, you can't really ever touch them. ;)

Offline Mithlomwen

  • ~ E's resident kilt inspector ~ ~ Atropos ~
  • Goddess
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Oct 2008
  • Location: Somewhere between the dark and the light...
  • Gender: Female
  • ~ Thunder only happens when it's raining.... ~
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Siege of Carisbrooke Castle: OOC thread
« Reply #83 on: December 26, 2009, 07:15:20 PM »
I'll just share the one in Ryven's avi with him.  ;)

Offline Imogen

Re: The Siege of Carisbrooke Castle: OOC thread
« Reply #84 on: December 26, 2009, 07:28:50 PM »
Looking at that makes me want to write up some broad shouldered hunk in garage overalls with thick, tousled hair, smelling of petrol, just to get my greasy fingers on those remaining layers -sighs and dreams-

Offline Ryven

  • Keeper of Cowthulhu | Pure Awesomenesity
  • Knight
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Nov 2008
  • Location: The farthest reaches of your dreams
  • Gender: Male
  • The night's pleasure follows in my footsteps
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Siege of Carisbrooke Castle: OOC thread
« Reply #85 on: December 26, 2009, 07:44:17 PM »
Looking at that makes me want to write up some broad shouldered hunk in garage overalls with thick, tousled hair, smelling of petrol, just to get my greasy fingers on those remaining layers -sighs and dreams-

Sounds like the start of a good story. ;)

Offline Remiel

Re: The Siege of Carisbrooke Castle: OOC thread
« Reply #86 on: December 31, 2009, 12:53:59 PM »
The reason the ratio is always 1-to-3 is because the villagers actually have a huge advantage in this game - whoever is the mafia-equivalent almost never wins, even in RL games where you can't secretly collaborate with your fellows, and all 'planning' is done out in the open, during lynching debates.

If you made the numbers more in favor of the civilians (or councilors, in this game), mafia would have even less chance of winning. :P That's almost like fixing the game so they will lose.

The same thing goes for the votes. If you don't allow the lynch votes to be changeable (i.e., you can't change your vote), the voting patterns sway dramatically in the favor of the mafia. Yes, innocents can plead their guilt, but so can the mafia - and once they kill off enough people so that they make up half of the population (not all that hard, since theoretically, they could easily manage one innocent during the lynching, as well as their nightly victim), all they'd have to do is vote all together to win. Which would make the game boring, since it would be obvious who the mafia was by then. :P

When I play this game in RL, sometimes we even do no special roles for the innocents - and the mafia still loses. It just kind of shows you how much harder the game is for them.

Really?  I did some calculations, using a game of seven people, one of which was the murderer (i.e. 6 innocents and 1 murderer).  Using an extremely simple model which assumed that: 1) all innocents vote randomly, and do not change their votes, 2) the murderer always votes intelligently--i.e. for the innocent with the highest number of votes against him--and 3) all ties are decided in favor of the murderer, I discovered that the probability of the murderer surviving three rounds to win the game was a whopping 68.2%.   Of course, this does not take into account all the human factors of this game, including voting order and changing of minds.

Valerian, if you ever find that link, I would be extremely interested in seeing some of the mathematics behind this game.  It kind of reminds me of the Monty Hall puzzle, in that the outcome is weighted or influenced by dependent variables of the set.  In this case, those variables I refer to are the unlikelihood of the conspirators voting against each other, and the likelihood of the innocents to deduce innocence or guilt based on voting patterns.

Online ValerianTopic starter

Re: The Siege of Carisbrooke Castle: OOC thread
« Reply #87 on: December 31, 2009, 01:11:00 PM »
Well, there's a variant called Quantum Werewolf, which is just as convoluted as it sounds.  Think Schrödinger's cat.

I think this is the link I found before, though.  Approach with caution -- it's long and the math quickly becomes incomprehensible to me.  :P

Offline Haibane

Re: The Siege of Carisbrooke Castle: OOC thread
« Reply #88 on: December 31, 2009, 01:28:00 PM »
Without any evidence either way my gut feeling is this game is weighted in favour of the rebels/werewolves/mafia faction. Moreso via the internet because you can't see people's body language or hear their voices.

Offline Caeli

Re: The Siege of Carisbrooke Castle: OOC thread
« Reply #89 on: December 31, 2009, 03:01:13 PM »
The human factor is pretty important in this game, I feel. We always get to defend ourselves (in a RL game), and strategize out why our behavior is logical, while somebody else's behavior makes them suspect.

I can't say about the internet, of course, but you're assuming that people are voting randomly, if you just crunch numbers. That assumes no collaboration - and there is collaboration to some extent, even without body language.

Offline Haibane

Re: The Siege of Carisbrooke Castle: OOC thread
« Reply #90 on: December 31, 2009, 04:18:43 PM »
I'm not sure your post was in answer to mine there Caeli, but if I may please make a comment in return?

The only hard, solid, true and meaningful collaboration you can have online is between the rebel/mafia faction players since they have certain known facts at their disposal that none of the other players have.

Even the player who, once per night, can learn the status of one other player has difficulty making use of that information since he/she cannot prove they are the person they say they are and their information is as unproven as anyone else's and to stick their neck out and state who they are gets them noticed as a possible target of the rebel/mafia faction...

I haven't played the game IRL but in that situation I would think it is easier for the councillors/townsfolk to identify each other via visual and vocal cues.

Offline Remiel

Re: The Siege of Carisbrooke Castle: OOC thread
« Reply #91 on: December 31, 2009, 05:06:53 PM »
Well, once a conspirator is suspected, you can usually identify the rest of his fellow co-conspirators by looking for hesitation, stalling tactics, diverting tactics, etc.  Some of these still come across online, but not all of them.

But yes, I agree, one advantage is that the conspirators know they can trust each other, while an innocent cannot trust anybody

Offline Caeli

Re: The Siege of Carisbrooke Castle: OOC thread
« Reply #92 on: January 02, 2010, 01:50:43 AM »
Out of curiousness, is there going to be a set date for when we will officially move on, regardless of who has yet to vote?

Offline Caeli

Re: The Siege of Carisbrooke Castle: OOC thread
« Reply #93 on: January 05, 2010, 07:26:59 PM »
Well, that sucks. -.-; Healer...

Offline sinera

Re: The Siege of Carisbrooke Castle: OOC thread
« Reply #94 on: January 05, 2010, 08:22:36 PM »
yeah... at least the Seer's still out there; I've never known the Healer to be all that effective anyway. Every game I've been in, the healer never managed to save anyone.

Offline Caeli

Re: The Siege of Carisbrooke Castle: OOC thread
« Reply #95 on: January 05, 2010, 11:26:15 PM »
When Aiden and I worked together, we made a pretty good team together. :-)

Offline Haibane

Re: The Siege of Carisbrooke Castle: OOC thread
« Reply #96 on: January 06, 2010, 06:24:16 AM »
Well now I hope some of the Rebels should be obvious!

Darn good play there though, Rebel team!

*continues to drift through the halls and corridors of the castle bringing a restless chill to the guilty*

Offline Aiden

Re: The Siege of Carisbrooke Castle: OOC thread
« Reply #97 on: January 06, 2010, 10:23:30 AM »
Silly noblemen! I told you I was innocent!

Offline Imogen

Re: The Siege of Carisbrooke Castle: OOC thread
« Reply #98 on: January 06, 2010, 10:34:30 AM »
And you expected us to believe that....from the guy who's been coveting his 666's? :-P

Offline Haibane

Re: The Siege of Carisbrooke Castle: OOC thread
« Reply #99 on: January 06, 2010, 10:58:49 AM »
Yeah, gotta say Aiden, your style of play made you few friends...

One to chalk up to experience I think... :P