araver

@Y-San thank you for this wonderful little gem. It was fun, even to watch in the afterlife. Re: lynch switch - I agree with the host but needless to say, the host rules as final, even if others don't agree For the sake of conversation: the lynch switch is not susceptible to an invincible combo. If it were my game, I would have restricted both the lynch switch and the lynch save to "not two days in a row" and figure out a mechanism where baddies could forego a night action (the redirect) to have the lynch switch active in consecutive days. However, on the overall balance, I don't agree it was balanced. And since gut alone can't be brought on as an argument, a quick inspection using BrandonB's weighting system:

I figure the odds of a red arrow hitting the right target are still slim, so ... there's no harm in saying it loud, right? Right? Then don't let it hit the left target.

Interesting. Sooo ... does anyone care for N1 discussions?

Watchtower: Y-san Roster: 1. Aaryan 2. Panther 3. dee_tot 4. Kikacat123 5. Araver 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11.

*bump* TMM Mafia XII: High School Club Mafia Principals: Auramyna & Brainiac100 Rules 1. Flamebirde 2. nana77 3. Kikacat123 4. 5. TheCube 6. 7. Minato 8. marksmanjay 9. araver 10. Yodell 11. Backups: Plasmid

Principals: Auramyna & Brainiac100 Rules 1. Flamebirde 2. nana77 3. 4. 5. TheCube 6. 7. Minato 8. marksmanjay 9. araver 10.Yodell 11. Backups 1. plasmid Adding my name, it's been a while since I last played on BD.

One final take on the "special" cases missed in the first solve and TSLF's correct scenarios. And for the more general case:

The general question still remains ....

And a slight variation on the puzzle, what if applying the same rule (no matter how many times) counts as a single step?

Not sure why you had to use a spoiler, as I find it very obvious (unless I'm missing something obvious ), but out of respect to you I will use spoiler too Let me rephrase it:

Nice to see you too This 3-part puzzle is unlike the game in at least 3 ways (one of which may or may not be a red-herring). But for the purposes of this puzzle (optimal adaptive strategy), one may assume the worst-case, in which the carnivore has ample time to prepare and share any kind of information. So if the strategy has a weak point, assume the adversary (carnivore) always finds it (and has time to find it).

Indeed it does. For all they know, all the other creatures look like herbivores so there is no point in trusting or not trusting any input in the deliberations. P.S. Don't ask me how they know there is exactly one carnivore around. The backstory doesn't explain it. so take it as a more abstract MacGuffin

Hi! Indeed LTNS. To clarify the sequence of events, abbreviating Day/Night, the following timeline is assumed strict: during N1 - They can discuss / agree on strategy end of N1 - Each herbivore can inspect one other and receive 1 result (according to it's species type) end of N1 - carnivore strikes a chosen secret target, 1 herbivore dies beginning of D1 - 3 herbivores and 1 carnivore left during D1 - They can discuss and each of them (including the carnivore) get a vote which they MUST (or in case of (2) CAN) use on the other alive creatures. end of D1 - If a plurality is reached, that creature is "sacrificed" The rest of the timeline repeats itself, N2 follows, then D2, etc.with the same night/day events. However I cannot answer your question other than using spoilers:

Yes. As MollyMae said above, unless "if you spy an Indy". Also other secret abilities may interfere

During a cloudy night, on a far away distant barren planet in a far way galaxy, five creatures of five different species meet in a clearing near a lake. The planet is barren and hostile enough for all of them to survive better as a group. Four of them are herbivores, one of them is carnivorous (however it is not obvious which is which). A certain gas in the composition of the atmosphere makes all creatures develop only short-term memories and carnivorous creatures have developed to mimic their herbivore counterparts, so no herbivore species is able to recognize a carnivorous creature as being carnivorous until something (a scent, a sound, a series of movements) triggers an ancenstral memory. They are however sufficiently developed as species to follow (some form) of logical reasoning. Each night, the carnivore may strike deadly to eat one of the herbivores. Each night, the herbivore's instinct makes them investigate (exactly one) element in their surroundings to discover a threat. Unfortunately they don't know what type they are, as they posess no long-term memory (more than 5 days). * One of the species is notorious for being fearful of everything. We'll call them PARANOIDS because after they investigate another animal (even one of the same species) their brains marks the target as a carnivore threat (even if it is herbivore). * The second species is notorious for being too trustful. We'll call them NAIVE because all their investigations lead to them trusting the targeted creature * The third species is confused, to say the least, INSANE to be more precise. They always trust carnivores upon inspection and distrust herbivores (for no apparent reason). * The fourth species is SANE. Their advanced senses make their results spot on. Always. Each day, they can all share their results and discuss. Each day, all alive creatures must cast a vote for one of them to be sacrificed as a possible threat to the group. Votes can be changed once they are cast. If one of them reaches plurality (largest number of votes from total number of possible votes, not necessarily a majority of votes) at the end of the day he is sacrificed by the others and all will learn if they've sacrificed a herbivore or a carnivore before a new night begins. 1) Prove (or disprove) that there is a strategy that can be agreed beforehand (during first night) so that the herbivores win (win = no carnivore is alive in the group). 2) Prove (or disprove) that there is a strategy that can be agreed beforehand (during first night) so that the herbivores win if abstaining is allowed. 3) Prove (or disprove) that there is a strategy that can be agreed beforehand (during first night) so that the herbivores win if changing of votes is NOT allowed. Or in a simpler setting:

So far I'm at a loss here .. just thinking about the 2-color-version of the problem makes my head spin for a second Just thought I'd share my thoughts - haven't done this exercise in a very long time EDIT: Spoiler titles don't like me.

Yeah, well, none of you are addressing what I said, and that makes me sad. Overall, it was far too short-a-Mafia (can't complain, cause I was away for a day as well). @plasmid - you really are not getting the hang of the game. The priorities are #1 win #2 win and #3 win. There's no other logical option. Add your chances and see which side guarantees a win in a 3vs2 situation. @Aura - nice try. As usual, I can't pin anything on you, since you always respond with 4 short different posts and claim to not to know anything. And I can't argue that you should've known and did know :shrug: Cat was obvious when she talked about her uncertainties, that was outing. That did not pass the Segul test. I fail lynching you again and again and again. I wish I could be as believable if I said I did not notice stuff

Host: Yuli and Molly Mae 1. plasmid - voting for AraVer 2. Flamebirde 3. MiKi 4. 'Cat'astrophe - DEAD - Lynched D1 and found to be a legitimate gangster 5. KlueMaster - DEAD - Killed N2 6. maurice - DEAD - Killed N1 7. Auramyna 8. Araver - voting for Auramyna @plasmid - your vote is (again) wrong. I told you D1 when I voted, I will tell you again. You keep missing things that are obvious. Read Cat's post again: read my defense of her, then look at the people who still kept or even switched their votes on her and lynched Mr. Green. Look for Aura's justification that her role is more important than Cat's. If that does not smell baddie, I don't know what you expect. And no, after you've just claimed to be Mr. White, I don't believe you have proved anything. If anything, you've just proven the desire to win with the Baddies/undercovers by continuing to advocate mass-outing and outing yourself now. Not acting 2 nights in a row is not a goodie behavior. If you had acted, you had very good chances of saving a fellow teammate. Talking about flash-votes at the end-of-day? who would flash-vote other than the proclaimed Mr. White wanting to side with the baddies?

@Plasmid - I must point out that you are missing a lot of information that can be deduced based on what people said (or more importantly, have not said). I am actually starting to doubt my first impression (that you are simply not seeing this), and starting to see a pattern here. I do agree about your conclusion about anyone claiming the Boss after N2, but because of a different reason. And one more bit - you keep mentioning the word optimal play. Mafia is much more heavily based on WiFoM - around every corner there's a branch point where one needs to make a choice. There is no optimal play, this is not a puzzle, there are always more unknowns and possibilities than certainties. One needs to take this into account at all times. E.g. if killing X is optimal play, then the save role will target X stopping the NK, so not killing X becomes a better alternative, etc.

Host: Yuli and Molly Mae 1. plasmid - voting for AraVer 2. Flamebirde - voting for 'Cat'astrophe 3. MiKi - voting for flame 4. 'Cat'astrophe voting for Auramyna 5. KlueMaster - voting for 'Cat'astrophe 6. maurice - DEAD - Killed N1 7. Auramyna - voting for 'Cat'astrophe 8. Araver - voting for Auramyna Adding my vote first: @Aura - for not commenting on plasmid's plan (at all) and for discarding Cat's posts so easily - I don't really understand what kind of a hint you were expecting from her other than what she posted. @plasmid - you are correct about how I reacted in Tombstone - when I read curr3nt's simple plan and knew EDM was active enough to vote for me, I did try to resist it openly. And guess what, I needn't have bothered, since she didn't follow it anyway (eventually she did, but that's OOC here). If I were you I wouldn't generalize from that one: first, because it was I who gave you the reference and the advice that plans should be much shorter and simple and have contingencies, and second because I did tell you about the things you've missed to incorporate in your plan, unlike a lot of people who said nothing on it (Btw, not sure what sort of expectancy do you have from baddies anyway?). I still disagree with outing more than one role per cycle, since it creates a double-exposure. And I again urge you to have patience and deal with this Mafia-way and try mass-outing-plans only when the situation is dire / lost otherwise. That's not waving off, that's just a disagreement (for now at least, read my post in N1 again). Now, returning to your vote, not sure what you want from me and what I can reply to it. I'm still following what I wanted to do from the beginning of the game and I haven't read nothing that makes me change otherwise. OOC: It's probably the first scum weekend I'm actually using to full extent - being the designated driver at a wedding sucked.

@plasmid - just a last thought before turning in for the night, depending on how N1 & D1 end, the odds may change and force such a plan as an only way. But for now, I'm discouraged by the fact very few actually wanted to discuss it *shrug*

And a late addition to 4 which may have been too bitterly written - don't get me wrong the human side of the game is not all-bad, it leads to interesting stuff, including a lot of clever moves that involve mostly lying and misdirection. Just meant it's not a static puzzle. OOC: Where's Hirk when you need someone to explain how the dark side Sith stuff works?