# MAFIA: The Road to Canterbury - Game Thread **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [June 21, 2012, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-road-to-canterbury-game-thread/625807 "2012-06-21T01:57:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![fubbleskag](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c2a13f/32.png) [@fubbleskag](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fubbleskag)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2012, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-road-to-canterbury-game-thread/625807/141 "2012-06-24T19:30:49Z")
> [@Mahaloth](#): > > Hey, all, my apologies for lack of posting. > > Anyway, here is what I think. > > 1. I actually think it would be cool, and kind of effective, if all the investigators investigate toNight. Let us know what you find in the morning(if you survive) and that way the power is not wasted. > > 2. Everyone using their power toNight? Huh, I guess that is kind of a possibility, I’m not totally against it, but I think it will be really hard to get us all to actually do that. > > Vote Visorslash > > The incorrect ratio thingy. And overall, I am just getting a scum vibe off him. That is my first vote, anyway. **unvote Mahaloth** (Note: unvote is not an endorsement of the content of his post, merely an acknowledgement of it.) > [@Alka\_Seltzer](#): > > **@fubbleskag** - Are you disagreeing with me that **Inner Stickler** providing a glossary of terms and **TexCat** ’s FOS are null? Nope. I’m satisfied with your explanations so far. **unvote Alka Seltzer** > [@Alka\_Seltzer](#): > > **@Fubbleskag** - In post #133 you complain I’ve only answered part of your case. Why are you giving **Enderw24** a free pass, when he made no attempt whatsoever to answer? I haven’t yet decided how I feel about the response he did provide. ---
**Author:** ![Stanislaus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stanislaus/32/3391_2.png) [@Stanislaus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stanislaus)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2012, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-road-to-canterbury-game-thread/625807/142 "2012-06-24T21:00:07Z")
> [@Enderw24](#): > > But there’s something about the way **Snickers** has gone about trying to get us to hold off on D1 lynchings that’s been nagging at me for awhile. Can you elaborate on this please? ---
**Author:** ![sinjin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ebca7d/32.png) [@sinjin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sinjin)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2012, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-road-to-canterbury-game-thread/625807/143 "2012-06-24T21:16:22Z")
> [@Enderw24](#): > > Well, to clarify, I didn’t say that I’m in favor of not lynching. I said “I think, theoretically, a continued no-lynch can work to town’s favor.” Mainly I was just sort of thinking out loud to see if others can help critique my line of thinking. The first thing I wasn’t sure about was whether a no-lynch strategy would lead to a win. It won’t. It will, at best, lead to a stalemate. At worst, I’m missing something crucial in our toolbox or we’ll misstep and town will end up losing. Not worth the risk, IMO, but I wanted to play it through in my head just to see. > > Anyway, I agree with what someone said above. Why bother playing for a stalemate? > > So no. I’m not in favor of a no-lynch. I’m really not in favor of a no-lynch for night one. > > I agree with many of you that **Visorslash** \*\*\*\* has been intentionally confrontational and it’s not surprising he’s garnered the votes he has. But there’s something about the way **Snickers** has gone about trying to get us to hold off on D1 lynchings that’s been nagging at me for awhile. > > Vote Snickers Snickers is arguing against N1 investigations not for D1 no-lynch. His arguments make little sense to me. I would like to encourage our investigators to use their powers tonight based on the model that the first one named in the role list investigates someone between 1-6 on the player list, the second investigates someone between 7-12 and the third someone from 13-19. I disagree that scum would immediately try to take out those who investigate as town because when the dead town flips “town” that would semi-confirm his/her investigator. The problems involved with the cloak and a possible scum false claim of investigator will be with us until the end of the game. In most previous games detectives could investigate every night. under those circumstances it makes sense to hold off claiming til later in the game. In this game with single use powers it makes no sense not to use them right away. Note: I am not demanding or ordering any investigators do anything other than what they think best. I will not be willing to purposefully “mis-lynch” a player who didn’t act on my suggestion as someone previously suggested might occur. Now that I write that I’m going to go back and look at that post again. ---
**Author:** ![Stanislaus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stanislaus/32/3391_2.png) [@Stanislaus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stanislaus)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2012, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-road-to-canterbury-game-thread/625807/144 "2012-06-24T21:25:09Z")
**vote Hal Briston** There’s a consistent pattern here: happy to talk about strategy, and potential scum tool choices; no effort at all to find scum. Open spoilers to see all posts, quoted in full: > [@Hal\_Briston](#): > > What was the URL for the Wiki? Maybe it’s archived on the Wayback Machine. If so, I’ll mirror a copy on my site. > > Me too – since the rules say they’re _must_ be taken: > Absolutely. The idea of “lynch all liars” is critically flawed because town lying to scum is one of a vanilla player’s best weapons. If a vanilla townie can subtlety make themselves a desirable target for scum to nightkill, then they’ve done a great service to town – they’ve taken a kill that could’ve taken out a power role. Of course, the gamble is that you’ll garner doctor attention and waste a protection that could’ve _saved_ a power role, which is why it’s a tricky thing to pull off. But if you can do it, it’s a thing of beauty. > > That said, it’s also much less effective in a “no-vanilla” game like this. Maybe down the road, after some powers have been used. > [@Hal\_Briston](#): > > NETA: Wha-oops…I see **MHaye** already discovered the bit about the knives. Stupid customers, interrupting my posting… General Mafia strategy. > [@Hal\_Briston](#): > > Howzabout this: > > Players #1-6 vote on a target for The Friar > Players #7-13 vote on a target for The Man of Law > Players #14-19 vote on a target for The Reeve > > Hopefully scum will be spread out enough that they won’t be able to influence any of the votes too much. Thoughts? > [@Hal\_Briston](#): > > Just came in to say pretty much the same thing. I know I posted a method of communally choosing investigative targets, but that was without thinking whether or not we _should_. After giving it some thought, I’m in favor of letting the investigators investigate on their own terms, whenever and on whomever they choose. Two posts about choosing investigation tactics. > [@Hal\_Briston](#): > > Of course, that could be just want he _wanted_ you to think. > > _Dun dun duuuuuun!_ This joke is the nearest Hal comes to hunting scum. If he does genuinely suspect **MHaye** , he’s not following through on it. > [@Hal\_Briston](#): > > How so? The point of the cloak is to throw off investigators. If they use it on a townie, and then that townie is investigated, they’ll come up as scum. They’ll protest their innocence, we’ll dog-pile them, and at dusk we’ll find out that we’ve been duped into a mislynch. > > The original question is a good one, though. Unless he was recruited, we have a vig, so the question remains – would the reveal of a nightkilled scum wearing the cloak _state_ that they were wearing the cloak? > [@Hal\_Briston](#): > > Let’s keep in mind that if we _were_ to try and arrange a mass investigation, then it should absolutely, without a doubt, be done toDay. That way the Cloak of Lies isn’t in play yet, so we can remove that possible false result from the table. > [@Hal\_Briston](#): > > NETA: Errr…or would it? If scum place the Cloak on someone toNight, then I suppose it would effect an investigation that was done toNight as well, wouldn’t it? > [@Hal\_Briston](#): > > From what I can tell, this would likely only be useful at the very endgame when Scum can effectively grab a win if they can pull off two kills. Choosing this would be a high-risk/high-reward ploy for scum. They’d be taking an awfully big chance that they actually be able to use it. I have serious doubts that it’s in play. > [@Hal\_Briston](#): > > Oh, good point – hadn’t thought of that. Hopefully scum didn’t either when it came time for tool selection. Discussion about the Cloak and Spear. It’s all very hypothetical; it doesn’t even help us make good decisions, still less find scum. There’s also an element of “Look, I haven’t even thought about scum tools until now!” which is faintly disingenuous. Between **visorslash** and **Hal Briston** , I’d currently lynch **Hal**. But I’ll leave a vote on \*\*visor \*\* until I hear what \*\*Hal’s \*\*got to say. ---
**Author:** ![Hal\_Briston](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/a9a28c/32.png) [@Hal\_Briston](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hal_Briston)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2012, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-road-to-canterbury-game-thread/625807/145 "2012-06-24T22:43:15Z")
> [@Stanislaus](#): > > There’s a consistent pattern here: happy to talk about strategy, and potential scum tool choices; no effort at all to find scum. > > \ > > Discussion about the Cloak and Spear. It’s all very hypothetical; it doesn’t even help us make good decisions, still less find scum. There’s also an element of “Look, I haven’t even thought about scum tools until now!” which is faintly disingenuous. > > Between **visorslash** and **Hal Briston** , I’d currently lynch **Hal**. But I’ll leave a vote on \*\*visor \*\* until I hear what \*\*Hal’s \*\*got to say. Talking strategy is _all about_ trying to find scum – or at the very least it’s setting the groundwork for it. Until A) a power role uncovers scum, B) we have bodies and a vote record giving us data, or C) there is a scum slip, then there isn’t anything beyond pulling info out of your ass with which to find scum. And C is the only one we that can realistically happen until toNight. And I’m definitely calling you out for your mischaracterization of my comments about scum tools. I gave my opinions about what scum might do with them and what choices might be made, so it’s a flat-out falsehood, when I didn’t consider _one aspect_ of a tool, to trying and paint it as if I said “I haven’t even thought about scum tools until now”. I clearly _had_ been looking at their list of tools and trying to piece together what they might be using. It’s a load of crap to try and paint it any other way. ---
**Author:** ![Enderw24](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ba9def/32.png) [@Enderw24](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enderw24)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2012, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-road-to-canterbury-game-thread/625807/146 "2012-06-24T23:32:06Z")
> [@Stanislaus](#): > > Can you elaborate on this please? Sure thing. First as **sinjin** said, it was D1 investigations, not lynchings. I mistyped. If that’s all you were asking about, cool. But here’s a couple that caught my eye: > [@Snickers](#): > > Is it really the best thing, though, to burn all our investigations on night one? Yeah, it could give us good information right out the gate, but like \*\*Stanislaus \*\*said, what if it comes back that they’re all town? Does that really do us any good? I know that Day 1 is a day of pretty much no info, but surely it’s better to wait for more details to come out before burning all of our investigations at once. > [@Snickers](#): > > I’s just thinking that staggering the investigations might allow for more time to make the targets of those investigations clearer, instead of pretty much shooting in the dark. Isn’t it more likely that early investigations will probably always turn up town, just because of the odds? So we’re not really getting any good info by burning through them right away. > [@Snickers](#): > > I guess my reasoning is that this early in the game, shooting in the dark for investigations, you’re really not going to get quality results anyway. Sure, it’s more likely that someone investigated as town really _is_ town, but you’re not going to get any sort of iron-clad confirmed unless at least two of the three investigators investigate the same target. You’re always going to need that confirmation, but you’re just burning through more investigations to do so. The chance of one (or more) of our investigators being scum + the cloak + little chance of confirmation because it just burns more investigations = very little actual information, if we have our investigators all investigate on N1. IMO, only. **Snickers** thinks that D1 investigations are going to be a waste of time. But the reasoning seems really off. First, he thinks that investigations won’t result in any scum showing up. In reality, the liklihood of a scum result from three D1 investigations would be (assuming we don’t bother to plan against overlap) 1- (15/19)^3 = 51%. Second, he keeps going on about a strategy of multiple investigations against the same person, which wouldn’t work unless we REALLY winnowed down the players in the game and would be a complete waste of resources in this game when all investigations are a one-shot deal. Something Snickers should know, unless he’s trying to convince us to both delay and waste our time. So yeah, these things pinged my radar a bit, and I’ve been mulling it over for a few days. That Snickers hasn’t posted any more means there’s nothing more for me to view that mitigates my initial impression. ---
**Author:** ![Visorslash](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/ee59a6/32.png) [@Visorslash](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Visorslash)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2012, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-road-to-canterbury-game-thread/625807/147 "2012-06-24T23:43:59Z")
When does day end, so I have an idea of when I can expect to die? ---
**Author:** ![Visorslash](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/ee59a6/32.png) [@Visorslash](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Visorslash)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2012, 11:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-road-to-canterbury-game-thread/625807/148 "2012-06-24T23:52:31Z")
> [@Tengu](#): > > Eh. I’ve no strong opinion on the Investigators using their powers toNight\*, but the others I don’t think so. The protective powers are nearly useless if cast blindly, and the Shipman’s attack worse than that - it’d be basically giving toDay 2 blind lynches\*\*, both of which are most likely to hit Town, just by the numbers. > > - It’s a bit of a vicious circle, really - it’d be nice to have the information from the investigators, but will it really be useful information if they investigate without any information to go on? But how will they get the information if they don’t? > > \*\* Frankly, I’d rather see the actual lynching held off until we have some information, too. So… > > **Vote No Lynch** > > But since that’s not likely, and we’ve got multiple votes: > > **Vote Visorslash** > > He’s dangerous, IMO. Randomly aggressive out of the gate and far too cavalier about the possibility of a mislynch, especially with the strong odds of hitting an investigator that his mis-chosen ratio gave. I’m dangerous? I’m flattered. It’s what scum would do, isn’t it? They would go out of their way to be aggressive and ‘anti-town’. (But, you say, what about the WIFOM, he could be doing that, to make himself seem unlikely scum! And tell me, how many times has it been sucessful? Zero? That’s what I thought.) TexCat should be lynched, not me. ---
**Author:** ![Mosier](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ea924/32.png) [@Mosier](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mosier)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2012, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-road-to-canterbury-game-thread/625807/149 "2012-06-25T00:06:57Z")
> [@Visorslash](#): > > I’m dangerous? I’m flattered. It’s what scum would do, isn’t it? They would go out of their way to be aggressive and ‘anti-town’. (But, you say, what about the WIFOM, he could be doing that, to make himself seem unlikely scum! And tell me, how many times has it been sucessful? Zero? That’s what I thought.) > > TexCat should be lynched, not me. I honestly think you play this way so that when you eventually do become scum some game, nobody will be able to point to your behavior as evidence of it because that’s just “how you are”. It might be a fun and effective way to play for the long term, but it makes playing individual games with you very frustrating, at least in the beginning. But then again, I guess that’s the point. You are dangerous, though. ---
**Author:** ![Mosier](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ea924/32.png) [@Mosier](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mosier)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2012, 12:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-road-to-canterbury-game-thread/625807/150 "2012-06-25T00:08:53Z")
> [@Visorslash](#): > > When does day end, so I have an idea of when I can expect to die? Thursday between 1 and 4, I believe. Votes before 1 count for sure, and the day will end between 1 and 4 with the exact time unknown, in order to make last-minute vote changing more challenging. If you vote after 1 on Thursday, there’s a chance your vote won’t count. ---
**Author:** ![Mosier](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ea924/32.png) [@Mosier](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mosier)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2012, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-road-to-canterbury-game-thread/625807/151 "2012-06-25T00:12:50Z")
> [@Mosier](#): > > Thursday between 1 and 4, I believe. Votes before 1 count for sure, and the day will end between 1 and 4 with the exact time unknown, in order to make last-minute vote changing more challenging. If you vote after 1 on Thursday, there’s a chance your vote won’t count. Between 1 and 5, actually. Not sure what time zone though. ---
**Author:** ![fubbleskag](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c2a13f/32.png) [@fubbleskag](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fubbleskag)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2012, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-road-to-canterbury-game-thread/625807/152 "2012-06-25T00:12:56Z")
Visorslash (3): Stanislaus #98, Mahaloth #136, Tengu #138 Enderw24 (2): fubbleskag #128, Alka Seltzer #131No Lynch (2): TexCat #122, Tengu #138 Mahaloth (1): [del]Alka Seltzer #118[/del], Mental Guy #124, [del]fubbleskag #128[/del] TexCat (1): Visorslash #20 KellyCriterion (1): fubbleskag #128 Snickers (1): Enderw24 #140 Hal Briston (1): Stanislaus #144 Suburban Plankton (0): [del]Visorslash #10[/del] Alka Seltzer (0): [del]fubbleskag #128[/del] ---
**Author:** ![fubbleskag](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c2a13f/32.png) [@fubbleskag](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fubbleskag)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2012, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-road-to-canterbury-game-thread/625807/153 "2012-06-25T00:17:52Z")
Visorslash (3): Stanislaus #98, Mahaloth #136, Tengu #138 Enderw24 (2): fubbleskag #128, Alka Seltzer #131 No Lynch (2): TexCat #122, Tengu #138 Mahaloth (1): [del]Alka Seltzer #118[/del], Mental Guy #124, [del]fubbleskag #128[/del] TexCat (1): Visorslash #20 KellyCriterion (1): fubbleskag #128 Snickers (1): Enderw24 #140 Hal Briston (1): Stanislaus #144 Suburban Plankton (0): [del]Visorslash #10[/del] Alka Seltzer (0): [del]fubbleskag #128[/del] ---
**Author:** ![Stanislaus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stanislaus/32/3391_2.png) [@Stanislaus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stanislaus)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2012, 6:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-road-to-canterbury-game-thread/625807/154 "2012-06-25T06:52:11Z")
> [@Hal\_Briston](#): > > Talking strategy is _all about_ trying to find scum. How’s that working out? What suspicions have you developed? > [@](#): > > And I’m definitely calling you out for your mischaracterization of my comments about scum tools. I gave my opinions about what scum might do with them and what choices might be made, so it’s a flat-out falsehood, when I didn’t consider _one aspect_ of a tool, to trying and paint it as if I said “I haven’t even thought about scum tools until now”. I clearly _had_ been looking at their list of tools and trying to piece together what they might be using. It’s a load of crap to try and paint it any other way. As well as the point about the Spear, you had two questions for the mod aboit the cloak. The impression is of someone who’s only really thinking.about scum tools now. ---
**Author:** ![Hal\_Briston](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/a9a28c/32.png) [@Hal\_Briston](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hal_Briston)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2012, 1:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-road-to-canterbury-game-thread/625807/155 "2012-06-25T13:41:44Z")
> [@Stanislaus](#): > > How’s that working out? What suspicions have you developed? Apart from the guy who is _still_ trying to mischaracterize my comments, I’m leaning towards **TexCat** ’s no lynch proposal. While I can’t recall a previous game where its been a good idea, this setup is unique. We have enough information about the setup laid out in front of us to make this a potentially wise play. The only problem is that there will be (as there probably should be) some players who won’t use their ability toNight. Still, a mislynch toDay would definitely cause us to lose out on pro-town powers. I’m tentatively in favor of this plan. In fact… Vote No Lynch > [@Stanislaus](#): > > As well as the point about the Spear, you had two questions for the mod about the cloak. The impression is of someone who’s only really thinking.about scum tools now. “Now”? As in, a few real-world days into Day 1 of the game? Why yes, that _is_ when I’m taking a closer strategic look at the scum tools and trying to figure out which ones they’d have likely used. I looked at them in Night Zero, trying to figure out which I might take if I we’re picked as scum (anyone who didn’t wasn’t playing as smartly as they could’ve), and now that the game is on I’ve looked again now that I know my role isn’t being swapped out. Your whole “you’re not talking about the tools except for all these times that you did talk about them” thing is _seriously_ pinging me. You’re trying to build this all off the fact that there was one possible use of the Spear that I didn’t consider? ---
**Author:** ![Stanislaus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stanislaus/32/3391_2.png) [@Stanislaus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stanislaus)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2012, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-road-to-canterbury-game-thread/625807/156 "2012-06-25T16:24:47Z")
> [@Hal\_Briston](#): > > Your whole “you’re not talking about the tools except for all these times that you did talk about them” thing is _seriously_ pinging me. You’re trying to build this all off the fact that there was one possible use of the Spear that I didn’t consider? Not at all. Let’s go back: I said I found you suspicious because you’d only talked about strategy and hypotheticals, but hadn’t tried to find scum. I also said: > [@me](#): > > There’s also an element of “Look, I haven’t even thought about scum tools until now!” which is \*\*faintly \*\*disingenuous. I think it’s pretty clear that my suspicions are mainly aroused by the overall pattern of your posts, and that the tone I pick up from your conversation about scum tools only pings me, em, faintly. Nevertheless, that’s the part of my case you spend most time defending. And you defend it first by saying that: > [@Hal](#): > > it’s a **flat-out falsehood** , when I didn’t consider one aspect of a tool, to trying and paint it as if I said “I haven’t even thought about scum tools until now” and then by saying that: > [@Hal](#): > > “Now”? As in, a few real-world days into Day 1 of the game? Why **yes** , that is when I’m taking a closer strategic look at the scum tools[…] B]now \*\*that the game is on I’ve looked again \*\*now \*\*that I know my role isn’t being swapped out. Let me clarify that when I said, "There’s also an element of “Look, I haven’t even thought about scum tools until now!” I meant “now that the Day has started” rather than “up until the very second I typed this”. Isn’t that accurate - that the impression I got off your posts of someone who hadn’t thought hard about the scum tools during Night Zero is exactly what you’re saying is the case? The difference is that I think there’s a slight possibility that you created that impression deliberately. > [@Hal](#): > > Your whole “you’re not talking about the tools except for all these times that you did talk about them” thing is _seriously_ pinging me. I’ve never said that my suspicions were based on you not talking about the tools. They were based \*\*mainly \*\*on you talking about them rather than finding scum, and \*\*partly \*\* on doing so in a way that highlighted that you were only seriously thinking about them now. I understand that you think there are benefits to working out what tools the scum picked, but I don’t see it. Let’s say we agree that they picked the poison, spear and cloak alongside the knives: what do we with that? What decisions can we make to deal with those choices? As far as I can see, none. ---
**Author:** ![Snickers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/5daacb/32.png) [@Snickers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snickers)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2012, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-road-to-canterbury-game-thread/625807/157 "2012-06-25T16:52:56Z")
**Ender** , I don’t want to go on too much more about it - I think I’ve probably said enough. My reasoning against all investigators investigating N1 basically boils down to these points: 1. There’s very little information available on D1 to guide investigators to targets. I really feel that they’re just shooting in the dark. Yeah, they’ll investigate whomever they feel is most scummy, and that’s a good thing, but I just don’t think there’s much to go on. 2. There’s not going to be any confirmation, unless two of the investigators accidentally double up on the same person. And you’re right - that’s a total waste of resources since they’re all one-shot investigations, and it’d just be stupid to try to get that confirmation. I was seeing too much of “but then we’ll know their alignment” as if the results of those investigations were iron-clad confirmeds, when they’re not. (Admittedly, I’m probably reading too much into it.) 3. There are a couple other factors in play (one of our investigators being scum, the cloak of lies) that make the investigations problematic. I think holding off on investigating to gather more info might help offset this. But as has been mentioned, these issues don’t go away the longer we play anyway, so this is probably worthless reasoning. I do think I’m discounting how valuable the results will be for later days. Anyway, I don’t think I explained myself very well. Babale says things better than I could’ve in [post 95](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=15194369&postcount=95) - I really like this post. However, something I just noticed: Back in [post 53](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=15191564&postcount=53), **Stanislaus** calculates the chance of one of our investigators being scum as 53%. Yet in [post 146](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=15202973&postcount=146), you calculate the chance of our investigators revealing scum as 53%. I don’t speak math. Are the calculations of “what are the chances that one in three people are scum in a field of 15 good/19 total” and “what are the chances that one in three investigations reveal scum in a field of 15 good/19 total” really the same? (Worded like that, it seems they are.) Anyway, just seemed weird to me (and surprisingly high). ---
**Author:** ![Snickers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/5daacb/32.png) [@Snickers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snickers)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2012, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-road-to-canterbury-game-thread/625807/158 "2012-06-25T16:56:43Z")
Whoa! NETA: There’s an error in my quoting. **Ender** calculates the odds of the investigations revealing at least one scum as 51%, not 53%. My bad. Clearly, I need to read more closely. Apologies. Are these calculations valid? Should someone as math-challenged as me be trying to understand odds? And what’s for lunch, anyway? ---
**Author:** ![Enderw24](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ba9def/32.png) [@Enderw24](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enderw24)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2012, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-road-to-canterbury-game-thread/625807/159 "2012-06-25T17:08:44Z")
> [@Snickers](#): > > Whoa! NETA: There’s an error in my quoting. **Ender** calculates the odds of the investigations revealing at least one scum as 51%, not 53%. My bad. Clearly, I need to read more closely. Apologies. > > Are these calculations valid? Should someone as math-challenged as me be trying to understand odds? And what’s for lunch, anyway? I _think_ I’m correct. But I’d be glad for the double-check. I went on the assumption that any investigator can pick any person. In that case, the odds of NOT hitting scum is 15/19. The odds of not hitting scum by three investigators is 15/19_15/19_15/19. Subtract that answer from 1 and you get 51% ---
**Author:** ![Snickers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/5daacb/32.png) [@Snickers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snickers)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2012, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-road-to-canterbury-game-thread/625807/160 "2012-06-25T17:18:48Z")
> [@Enderw24](#): > > I _think_ I’m correct. But I’d be glad for the double-check. I went on the assumption that any investigator can pick any person. In that case, the odds of NOT hitting scum is 15/19. The odds of not hitting scum by three investigators is 15/19_15/19_15/19. Subtract that answer from 1 and you get 51% Oh. That makes sense. And I’m sure your result is correct, but I have to nitpick your equation transcribing: that should be 1 - ((15/19)\*3), not 1 - (15/19)^3 (as you posted). I was all, “raised to the third? What?” 😉 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-road-to-canterbury-game-thread/625807.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-road-to-canterbury-game-thread/625807.md?page=9)