Quote:
Originally Posted by hoopsguy
Pass, if there is a person on this site who plays the math more regularly than me than I have yet to meet him. That said, the math usually is a foundation for my arguments and then I look to drill through posts to validate assumptions or choose between suspects offered up by the math.
If there are multiple wolves on the same team then they have unlimited PMs to coordinate team activities, for all intents and purposes. Sure they can only exchange 3 with a non-wolf (on a two person wolf team) but they can run the numbers and then work on moving the other person to their point of view.
Knowing for sure how two people on the team are going to act is a real advantage as well. The rest of us have to assume that the people in the thread are spending their points the way they suggest they are, rather than knowing who is banking points for later rounds.
I know EF is saying that everything was random. Maybe it was, and there were not two wolves on the same team. But I expect that a moderator would have taken steps to minimize/eliminate the chances of stacking up one team with wolves in this format. Most moderators with experience running games don't rely solely on random.org to set up their games. Instead, they use it as a starting point and will make slight adjustments as needed to create competitive balance.
|
I don't know. I think you're way overstating a potential benefit in having more than one wolf on a team. How would that imbalance the game? I just don't see it being as big a difference-maker as you do.
Personally, I know that Canada has NO wolves on it. How would that imbalance things vs. a team that had 1 wolf or even 2 wolves. IMO, if the moderator has said twice definitively that it was all completely random, then I believe him.