Anyone else who disagrees with my idea
(To Execute people harder to read)
Feel free to chime in And I’ll gladly have a convo with you
@EliThePsycho i don’t think you ever answers my question about what you think of my plan for exe btw
So basically what you’re saying is the +5% chance is a very large if not the deciding factor in lynching someone because they flip mafia more
Confirm if I understand your POV
Because if I don’t then we have a problem from the start as I’m convincing you against something you don’t actuLly belive
Reasoning
Yes.
That is the underlining principle of statistics; that something with a higher chance of probability of occurring thus happens more often.
I get your POV; you may not trust those statistics, considering us following a 5% increase is counter-intuitive, an early-game mess when we should be prepping for late game. By the time our roles all settle, though, it takes only one clever individual to work out the one universe we’re in, because it’s the only possible world we could be living in. Thus, late game is not an issue, regardless of whether it’s easy for us to read others or not.
Of course, there never are ironclad guarantees around prediction, which is what Quantum Physics is about; the future can have more possibilities than we ever imagined. It’s important to know that statistics is not propaganda, even though I don’t believe that’s what you were getting at. Can you confirm this when you read it?
Last point for now; you’re saying that a 5% increase of odds don’t matter significantly, correct?
In a world where I roll a twenty-sided dice 6,000 times, which is close to the number of setups we started with, it will land on a perfect twenty 5% of the time, or 300 times. Applying this to the fm, this means that for every mafia kill targeting a specific player will instantly collapse 300 worlds of that person being mafia. For me, that means there are already 900 worlds where I cannot be mafia.
Tl;dr - I agree with your consensus.
The reasoning explains why I believe it, and mostly anything you use to argue against statistics, unless unexpected, I will quote from that.
Okay so on a fundamental level
I don’t necessarily disagree with what you’re saying and I don’t think it’s bad
My issue is that I think theirs a way which is better and I’m going to attempt to better extrapolate why I think that to you
———-
So what I’m gonna do is give you a few scenarios and ask your opinions on them Pre me saying anything other than the scenario. For the purpose of simplicity and making this not take the rest of the game it’s going to be a closed system where we aren’t considering other more unpredictable actions. It’s going to have a player, A, who is considered easier to read as well as player B who is harder to read. Their gladiated and based off info I give we’ll decide who to Execute and why
Does that make sense
Generally, I agree with this concept. However, if you base A and B obviously off players within this game, I’m going to assume them as such and react following that idea.
Proceed.
Okay so some of my questions might be dumb but just for the sake of being thorough some of these will sound dumb
——-
Player A has a 20% chance to flip scum
Player B has a 25% chance to flip scum
(Ignore the thing I said about one being easier to read that was an example I failed to explain just answer based off the info I give)
Who do you execute
