I still think that even if we were to agree as a whole that this was a decent idea, we would be best served waiting at least one day. I highly doubt everyone will have checked in by noon, and even people that checked in last night or this morning won't come back. Coordinating such a vote between so many people is tough, and I don't see it working out properly without a lot of in-thread agreement, which there hasn't been to this point.

It will be fun to see who people vote for, though. I imagine a lot of people are going to cast first votes on the people that they bet on getting lynched, and others will be stubborn to move away from their picks.

As far as you are aware, your bets and its results will remain private.

Can I give my money to another player?

One more thing then I'm shutting up for a while. I think a 9-4-4 ratio might be possible after all considering the wolves might off each other. A 13-4 ratio wouldn't be that out of whack in a normal game, no? 16-3 sounds a little tilted to the villagers, under normal circumstances.

Its possible JAG. 6-8 wolves, either way we've a lot to get rid of.

I had a similar dynamic in my Enter The Cube game, with two sets of wolves. I had three on each side and a similar number of players. Of course, I actually gave each set of wolves the identity of the other wolves and gave them a win condition of defeating one another before defeating the villager. ;)

I felt that 3-3 worked well enough in that one, but balance isn't so easy to determine for each game; the rules are different and that can change things alot.

I would still lean 3-3 or even 2-2, though, over 4-4. Consider that there aren't any actual established villager roles and that the villager services could be usurped by two different wolf teams that can pool their money. That seems like a lot of power in the wolves' hands. Only balance would be numbers.

Holy crap. Bets due now?

Do the bad guys get night kills normally, or is bidding on Knuckles the only way to get one?

Pretty sure they have to bid on it, and they also get access to bid on things that weren't listed there.

Going to get a vote out there before I get to my exercise and errands and things. J missed day one last time, was a wolf that made it to the end, and hasn't checked in yet to my knowledge, so here's some pressure!

VOTE J23

I think as a baseline, everyone should vote for who they bet, then we can work from there -- seems like a fair way to get initial votes going, then consolidate based on how it looks.

VOTE LATHUM

I'm not in favor of the idea, but I think the fact that he mentioned it makes him the most likely person to get lynched.

As a villager I almost have to vote for the person I bet because I'd really like to win the p.I. service to start cracking down on the Mafia.. but every Resident wants to do that. So I'm not sure what strategy should be employed here. I've got all afternoon to worry about it I guess.

To clarify, the Mafia may at times have black market services only they can bid for, but those will be visible to everyone in the services list.

And I wont be voting lathum because of that reason. Too many people will have won the bets and I think any extra money for the wolves is not a good thing. Votes to someone completely random shouuld be the way to avoid clumps of people cashing in on the first day.

so how does this work if a villager bids on that service?

I think it will be very interesting to see who votes me and who drives those votes.

He said only the mafia can bid on those services.

But it's interesting we'd get to know about it ahead of time. Maybe there won't be -too- many surprises.

I know, but those services will be listed with the other ones. Are they somehow defined as mafia only bids?

Good question, I'd imagine so.

Autumn: Do you "resolve" the bids in the order they are listed? In the cases where someone bids on multiple services anticipating winning the Lynch bid, but lose. How do you determine which order you will determine the winning bid for each role?

For example: Tank first, Mario second, etc?

Another good question!

I would guess so, although looking at today's list, it seems to me some of those services seem like the sort of thing that would only be available on the black market. But there is no indication there that villagers can't bid on all of them.

Can we retract bids or make multiple bids?

I think we should start that way -- make it known who we want to see lynched based on our bets. Then once we've got a distribution of (temporary) votes, the people who are on singletons or someone not really in the running can move to voting for someone who has a chance of getting lynched.

Don't know about the first part, but yes you can bid on multiple services, as per the rules on the first page. Though I wonder if you can bid more than you have total (such as 1k on two different services, even if you only have 1k, knowing you'd only get one - or if you'd have to say split it up to 500k on each).

hmm

Pass is pinging me a bit. First he jumped onto me pretty quick, making me wonder if he is a mobster trying to drive the vote and cash in. Now he is advocating everyone revealing their bets. I'm not sure how it would effect things, but it seems a bit reckless giving away that much info without at least some dialogue about it.

Dialogue away! :)

ha!

and for the record I did not bid on Pass. Obviously you only have my word about that

I didn't think you would have -- the stuff you said was pinging you was from after the bids were made. Before the bids were made, I said I didn't like the idea (which I don't) but I made the bid thinking your lynch was the most likely scenario.

If you can think of a reason why villagers would want to hide who they bet on (note: it's probably not a big deal, but we should try not to confuse bids and bets), I'm listening. I just figure people are probably going to vote for who they bet on anyway, so we might as well get that out of the way then we can work from there. This probably means the lynch will be decided by people who were the only one to bet on a player, and I'm okay with that. But if it did turn out that like 12 people bet that I (or whoever) would be the lynch, well, you guys might as well just lynch me (or whoever).

I'm not sure what damage could be done by revealing who we bet on, but I just think we should have some discussion about it before doing it.

I am also wondering how the two mob teams bet. Did they alll go for one candidate or spread things out so it isn't easy to group them together.

I'm fine with discussion. I'm NOT fine with sitting on our asses hoping someone will come up with a reason why we shouldn't do it, if no one's going to.

Seems to me we have a role to bid on that will help us with that - PING "Kalustian Betting Parlor - This bookie's got his fingers in every bet in town".

But it would be nice to know how much we win if we get our lynch bet right so I can bid accordingly.

Any Mafia-only services will be marked specially. The village will see their description but not be able to bid on them.

My hunch is that they're spread out. That way they stand to gain at least something in more cases, and like you said, it would be harder to group them together.

Good point, I should have specified this. If you wish to send in multiple you should list them in the order of priority. In other words you tell me which bid I should resolve first. If you run out of money, the rest of your bids will be removed.

Does that make sense?

Maybe we should start out by seeing who put in a bet?

At least I found a way to not get any day one lynch votes on me... :)

So if I understand this right, the plan being suggested is that we all vote for who we bet on, then we tally the numbers and decide where to go from there?

here is the thing I don't like about that, we are going to have the votes spread out way to much to get any real history or use.

The wolves aren't going to group their votes either since the obvious step will be to look first at the people who did group their votes.

It may be asking a lot, but I think the best thing we can do is treat today like a normal D1 and forget about who you bet.

I tend to agree with your general points here, although I would say also that I think the intent was for us to all vote soon, early, establsihing who the betting favorites are, and then we would follow with re-votes on one or two of those candidates to get an actual D1 vote.

My main issue with the process behind that is that we probably can't get enough people to vote and then be able to come back later and re-vote.