WW CXXXV-Dragonball Z - Saiyans Win

[The Jackal]

Hm yeah, good call adding in the chance of scanning wolf vs villager.

[The Jackal]

Also have to take into consideration the chance that the seer could scan the person the wolves kill, but then we're just gonna go crazy.

[Autumn]

Just tell me how you got your "chance of scan" jackal.

[The Jackal]

Originally Posted by Autumn

Just tell me how you got your "chance of scan" jackal.

It's just the inverse of the chance of the seer being killed. If there's a 1/7 chance the seer is killed, there's a 6/7 chance they get their scan in. Obvious number, but just wanted to include it.

[Autumn]

Originally Posted by The Jackal

Also have to take into consideration the chance that the seer could scan the person the wolves kill, but then we're just gonna go crazy.

Yeah, I'm getting there already. Right, that happens pretty regularly, which is why in most games I suggest we not really rely on the seer to win. In bigger games at least it's gut calls and vote history that win it. I feel like it's different in this size game, but maybe not, there's still a lot that could go awry with the seer.

[Autumn]

what's perhaps of interest is the cumulative chance of the seer getting a scan on day two. By which I mean the 80% chance of a day two scan times the 76% chance the seer lived thorugh day one. That gives us a 60.8% chance of getting two scans if we lynch today.

Do the same for no lynch, 83% times the 87.5% chance that the seer lives through day one without a lynch, and we get a 72.6% chance of getting two scans.

So is a 12% increase in getting two scans worth losing the 20% chance of lynching a wolf today? Maybe not. It's not as much of an increase as i would expect.

[The Jackal]

And there's also the unquantifiable stat of vote history. If we do go the no lynch route for a 12% increase we're also losing D1 vote history. And if the seer was to die with no reveal that'd play even more into the wolves favor. Lots of maybe's and if's, that's what's great about this game!

[PackerFanatic]

Originally Posted by The Jackal

And there's also the unquantifiable stat of vote history. If we do go the no lynch route for a 12% increase we're also losing D1 vote history. And if the seer was to die with no reveal that'd play even more into the wolves favor. Lots of maybe's and if's, that's what's great about this game!

You beat me to this - I was just about to point out the vote history. I think that is more important than all these crazy number you cats are throwing around

[Chubby]

i get the whole math part of it, i just think we are losing a lot by losing a day of voting history.

[Autumn]

Actually those numbers weren't right. With a d1 lynch there should be a 67% chance of a scan (since the seer could be lynched as well as night killed) on D2. So 67% times 76% gives 51% chance of two scans if we lynch today.

If we don't lynch that increases to .... 62% chance.

so that doesn't change much, except making the numbers seem more reasonable.

So all of that makes me think that it's not a good idea to no lynch today. Not a big enough difference to be giving up the chance at a wolf today, and the vote history. So I guess it's worth it that I spent all that time.

(This was interesting in a mechanics sense though explaining why a lot of rule sets give the seer a random N0 scan. Makes losing the seer early less of a horror.)

[Autumn]

So back to who to vote.

UNVOTE NO LYNCH

[Autumn]

I'm wary of voting Darth, I feel that's too easy a vote after his run in the Dark Knight game, gives people an easy excuse for piling onto him. Packer and Narcizo and Jackal and Chubby are piping up a lot, I hate to vote active people early. Crimson Fox has had early luck lately so I'm ont going to pick him for no reason. Mckerney, Niccus, Mauboy have all been quite so far, so I'll probably go there. Niccus isn't going to get my D1 vote (unless he gets all suspicious looking) since he's new, but is hereby warned ;-) Mckerney has one vote, so I'll add Mauboy to the mix.

VOTE MAUBOY1

[Chubby]

I'll throw a vote in for someone who it appears registered on the boards just for this game, which makes me think they are a vet trying to hide their identity.

Vote niccus

[PackerFanatic]

Originally Posted by Chubby

I'll throw a vote in for someone who it appears registered on the boards just for this game, which makes me think they are a vet trying to hide their identity.

Vote niccus

Interesting thought.

I am going to throw a dreaded second vote out because I don't want to spread things out.

VOTE MAUBOY

[Zinto]

Darth Vilus- Crimson (58)
McKerney- Narcizo (61)
Mauboy- Autumn (112), PackerFanatic (114)
Niccus- Chubby (113)

[PackerFanatic]

Eh, looking back, looks like mau won't be around much today. Would rather have my vote on someone that is around and can garner some discussion.

UNVOTE MAUBOY

[Autumn]

It sounded to me like mauboy will be available after three, PF.

[The Jackal]

Little pressure on DV, who from my recollection has coasted the first few days not saying much the last couple times I've played with him.

VOTE DV

[Narcizo]

Originally Posted by Chubby

I'll throw a vote in for someone who it appears registered on the boards just for this game, which makes me think they are a vet trying to hide their identity.

Vote niccus

I don't actually have any problem with that even if it is the case (unless it's Blade or Poli, I guess). As we don't know if Niccus knows someone here, googled Dragonballz or what his story is I feel really uncomfortable with someone taking that line. We want to encourage new players and I don't think we're going to do that by throwing meta-accusations at anyone who shows up.

[JAG]

Originally Posted by Chubby

I'll throw a vote in for someone who it appears registered on the boards just for this game, which makes me think they are a vet trying to hide their identity.

Vote niccus

FWIW, I was thinking friend of Zinto.

[Chubby]

Originally Posted by Narcizo

I don't actually have any problem with that even if it is the case (unless it's Blade or Poli, I guess). As we don't know if Niccus knows someone here, googled Dragonballz or what his story is I feel really uncomfortable with someone taking that line. We want to encourage new players and I don't think we're going to do that by throwing meta-accusations at anyone who shows up.

would be a real great way to hide a wolf too...

i would have assumed if it was a friend of somebody then they would have already said so (like when they signed up)... also playing UTR

[PackerFanatic]

Originally Posted by Autumn

It sounded to me like mauboy will be available after three, PF.

I will wait to apply the pressure until then, if need be

[PackerFanatic]

As interesting as it sounds, its a little too meta-gamey for me, Chubby. And really no way for us to know, so I wouldn't be anything into it.

[Narcizo]

Originally Posted by Chubby

would be a real great way to hide a wolf too...

He presumably didn't know he was going to be a wolf when he signed up so I don't understand your point. From a meta point of view (which this basically is anyway) I think we need to be careful about making accusations based on a theory but that's all I'm going to say about it.

[Chubby]

This of course perfectly illustrates why someone who has played a lot of WW would make another account, new screenname and UTR? free pass!

now if it was hoops and UTR? LYNCH HIM!

[Chubby]

and of course don't ignore the fact that saying you won't vote for somebody just because they have a new screenname is just as meta-gamey as voting for someone with a new screenname because it might be a vet in disguise.

[PackerFanatic]

I don't have any problem voting for him - I just wouldn't do it for that reason.

And I really think the people that play here wouldn't sink to creating a new screenname just to play a new game. That just seems...shady.

[PackerFanatic]

Also - I wouldn't consider someone UTR this early on Day 1...he was on pretty early this morning when he made his first couple of posts. Just saying.

[Chubby]

Originally Posted by PackerFanatic

Also - I wouldn't consider someone UTR this early on Day 1...he was on pretty early this morning when he made his first couple of posts. Just saying.

he has 2 posts since the game started, both around 3:30 AM EST, what would your definition of UTR be then?

[PackerFanatic]

Originally Posted by Chubby

he has 2 posts since the game started, both around 3:30 AM EST, what would your definition of UTR be then?

He hasn't been the most talkative, no, but saying he is UTR only ~12 hours into the game seems odd to me. He could be on an odd schedule like Narc or something.

But I am being ticky-tack about it anyway, so there is no point in harping

[Chubby]

i also think it's funny that we have 5 votes for 4 guys who haven't voted once between them (but that might change shortly with mckerney online)

[mckerney]

Glad we're not going the no lynch at this point, after thinking about I it don't think the positive of not lynching the seer doesn't make up for all we'd lose in voting records.

[mckerney]

Originally Posted by Chubby

i also think it's funny that we have 5 votes for 4 guys who haven't voted once between them (but that might change shortly with mckerney online)

Not sure where I'm going with my vote today, but at this point in the day I don't think I'll just be putting it on one of the other current candidates.

[Narcizo]

Originally Posted by Chubby

and of course don't ignore the fact that saying you won't vote for somebody just because they have a new screenname is just as meta-gamey as voting for someone with a new screenname because it might be a vet in disguise.

Yes, they're both meta-gamey. The difference would be one is aimed at welcoming and encouraging new players so they might hang around and play more, making bigger games more likely to take off, by allowing them to play a bit longer in their first game. The other is sending a message that "we don't trust you" based on a hunch. There's a world of difference.

And yes, I couldn't let it lie. [/pointless Vic Reeves quote that no-one has even heard of]

[Narcizo]

Anyway, back to the matter in hand. What I'm really hoping here is that all this "let's drop the no lynch idea" is designed to get everyone voting before all the villagers come out and say "Haha! Only fooling! We're actually going to vote no lynch today". Which is a great plan and all but unfortunately not one I can take part in and not one I'm convinced you're all planning anyway.

I think everyone is missing the point - I was earlier today. Which is fair enough because it's pretty much taken me the whole day to get it down to this. This has nothing to do with helping the seer. We have, basically, two lynches to nail a bad guy. If we don't, we lose (barring some sort of 3:2+1 miracle - which basically involves the wolves picking the sorceror to lynch or a villager getting the first vote in on a wolf). It doesn't matter if those lynches are made day one or day two, or if they're made day two and three. The only difference is that we have a better chance of getting a baddy if we wait till day two, in terms of pure liklihood of hitting a bad guy.

If we look at today as night 0 then it makes perfect sense. Notice this has absolutely nothing to do with the seer. Giving the seer extra help is just a happy bonus. The mistake I was making was forgetting that we only have two lynches to make things work, not that we had to get things done by day three.

I've made such a pig's ear of the statistics that I fear to try again but put simply - if things are just random;

Lynch: Day One 30% Assuming a miss, Day Two: 37.5% Day Three: we're screwed. Chance of hitting a baddy: 56.25%

No Lynch: Day Two 33% Assuming a miss, Day Three: ~43% Day Four: we're screwed. Chance of hitting a baddy: 61.80%

Arguing about getting better voting records by voting today is irrelevent because either way we get only one day of useful voting records before the critical day. In fact as a lot of us have already voted and there's going to be a to- and fro- over no lynch we actually get more voting records by voting no lynch. We get what we've been through today and then we get tomorrows.

What this doesn't account for is what happens after we've got one baddy. But my head hurts when I think about that. Instinctively though I think we're better off taking the heightened chances of getting a baddy early on then saving it for later.

My final argument is that there are no small games on BGG with even numbers. For why? I reckon because they've worked out that no lynch is the best move on day one in those cases.

[Narcizo]

I'm loathe to unilaterally move my vote where I believe it is right, as that will screw up voting records if you guys decide that we should lynch someone today.

[mauchow]

Is there a narcizo summary program out there? Catching up now. I may take a nap in the car ride but its a six hr drive so I'll have plenty of time.

[Narcizo]

Screw it.

Unvote mckerney
Vote No Lynch
Vote nightfall

Nightfall to signal that I won't have the opportunity to move the vote.

[Narcizo]

Originally Posted by mauboy1

Is there a narcizo summary program out there? Catching up now. I may take a nap in the car ride but its a six hr drive so I'll have plenty of time.

Ignore everything I've posted before around 15:00 PM. Read the latest long post. Sorry for spamming.

[Autumn]

I'm not following why you think we only have two lynches. We have three lynches to nail a wolf.

But if I'm understanding your argument, yo'ure saying aside from the chance of the seer getting a scan in, we should wait to lynch because our odds of getting a wolf go up? But the odds go up because we're getting closer to losing, because villagers are dying and wolves aren't, right? I mean that's a rather skewed statistic - we would actually make our chances of finding a wolf worse by finding a wolf today, if you see what i mean. Maybe I'm not getting your argument.

[Autumn]

I thought the no lynch was a good idea to save the seer a bit longer, but the numbers don't seem to stand up to that strongly enough. I'm not sure I get this other reasoning, but I think at this point we need to just vote

[mauchow]

Do we have a vote count?

I think its just one vote out there on someone. If we want to be successful we need to start going on someone or something (no Lynch in this case).

[Zinto]

Originally Posted by JAG

FWIW, I was thinking friend of Zinto.

He is and I am about to call or text him and see if he can get online.

[Zinto]

DV-Crimson (58)
Mauboy-Autumn(112), Packer(114)
Niccus-Chubby(113)
No Lynch- Narcizo(138)

[Zinto]

I lied Packer unvoted

DV-Crimson (58)
Mauboy-Autumn(112)
Niccus-Chubby(113)
No Lynch- Narcizo(138)

[mauchow]

Okay so we have four votes already. 4/10.

Not getting any early vibes yet, not like I was getting last game since most of the discussion today has been stats regarding no Lynch. I created some good action in the last game but I played it so horribly no one listened to me..

For the sake of getting things moving I'll get someone into the majority lead..
vote niccus

[The Jackal]

you are missing my DV vote zinto

[The Jackal]

post 118

[Zinto]

Thanks Jackal

DV-Crimson (58) The Jackal (118)
Mauboy-Autumn(112)
Niccus-Chubby(113) Mauboy(146)
No Lynch- Narcizo(138)

[PackerFanatic]

VOTE MAUBOY