Werewolf LI Major League (GAME OVER!!! INDIANS--GOOD GUYS--WIN!!!)

[Lathum]

SCOUT: This is a nontraditional seer role. There is an in-game talent ranking for all players in the game which will determine how they can affect the nightly baseball game. The scout can investigate one player per day and will be told where in this ranking that player's character lies, be it first, second, third, last, etc. This ranking will remain static regardless of whether the players in are still alive. So if the fourth ranked talent is the top remaining talent in the game, the scout will still nonetheless be told that player has the ranking of fourth. The scout will NOT be told the player's in-game identity or allegiance. Wolves will also have talent rankings.

I think this answers the question about the player ranking.

[hoopsguy]

Originally Posted by KWhit

If that's the case, why wouldn't we want to reveal?

Do you think that the ability to influence the game is tied to the player name? I would imagine that CR would randomize that for the game (at least I'd hope so). Otherwise it would be too easy for the wolves to pick off the best players, don't you think?

He has said that the role is not related to the name (seer, bodyguard). But there is nothing that I've found, one way or the other, on ability to impact the game being related to role.

Chief only listed the roles in the game. He didn't compel us to publish them all in the thread. The players participating have done that before Chief was given an opportunity to respond to the question. Either way, 60% of the people in the game have claimed roles by now so if game-changing ability is related to the player name then we certainly have helped the Yankees in our first few hours today.

That is what I've been railing about this morning. Why are we rushing to put this info out there, when it is no benefit to the Indians? We aren't going to flush out traitors this way. If Chief comes back and says ability was generated through random.org then I would be happy to have everyone list their character name and enjoy role-playing them to their heart's content.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Lathum

I think this answers the question about the player ranking.

Does it? Are you thinking, then, that a player's baseball talent is random, and name has no effect on it? That's my thinking.

[hoopsguy]

Originally Posted by Lathum

I think this answers the question about the player ranking.

Right, so the scout can check out one of the stud players on Night 1 and start the ball rolling in terms of determining relative strength/weakness of players. But the scout description doesn't say anything, one way or the other, about how talent was assigned in the game.

[Barkeep49]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

I'm not paranoid/delusional enough to adequately capture his state of mind at the moment, I'm afraid.

Shame on you for casting aspersions. Hoops, you're smart enough to know that if you keep laying out the case against me, as you've been doing with posts starting with 82 and continuing with this one hopping that someone else takes the bait and goes against me, so you can later climb aboard. I think your game has been off. And that's more than good enough for a D1 vote.

[hoopsguy]

Barkeep, I'm not even interested in having anargument with you about how I'm gunning for you. As of right now, I'm not. I just think you are making a rotten Day 1 play.

I'm playing to help us get to the World Series. You are trying to vote off a contributing player, which inadvertantly (or intentionally, I don't know) helps the management weasels on our team.

You suggested I wasn't paying attention to the rules. I did. However, I do from time to time like to see what other people are paying attention to the game. Based on your posts on the rules, you did not (in my opinion) adequately consider the potential mechanics for the villager night actions. As it relates to the player role information, which we have (again, my opinion) foolishly published for the wolves.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

Right, so the scout can check out one of the stud players on Night 1 and start the ball rolling in terms of determining relative strength/weakness of players. But the scout description doesn't say anything, one way or the other, about how talent was assigned in the game.

Well what would the point of the Scout role be if it wasn't assigned randomly?

[hoopsguy]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Well what would the point of the Scout role be if it wasn't assigned randomly?

Who is more likely to help win a game, Jake Taylor or Pedro Cerrano? Or Rick Vaughn? Or Lou Brown? Or Willie Mays Hayes? I'm not sure, and that is the kind of thing that the Scout would determine.

However, I would suggest that all five of those guys are more likely to help get a win than Ivan Molina if the talent is not assigned randomly.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

Who is more likely to help win a game, Jake Taylor or Pedro Cerrano? Or Rick Vaughn? Or Lou Brown? Or Willie Mays Hayes? I'm not sure, and that is the kind of thing that the Scout would determine.

However, I would suggest that all five of those guys are more likely to help get a win than Ivan Molina if the talent is not assigned randomly.

my point is that the role of the scout seems pointless if roles aren't assigned randomly.

[hoopsguy]

Originally Posted by Lathum

my point is that the role of the scout seems pointless if roles aren't assigned randomly.

I'm not sure how you can make that point while quoting my post. The Scout can help us by publishing information that allows us to coordinate our night actions to better win games and gain the pennant.

He can tell us that Lou Brown is more important than Rick Vaughn. He can tell us that Pedro Cerrano is the most important person to winning games, so if he says he tried to win and another players actions were processed then Cerrano is full of crap.

The Scout has the same value, regardless of how talent is assigned. Because if it wasn't random then we still don't know the rankings, but can only make more educated guesses. The Scout won't be making educated guesses with the players he visits - he will know exactly where they stand.

[Barkeep49]

Hoops, I said it before and I'll say it again: I'm not concerned about winning baseball games. I read that part, considered it, and decided it was far less important than killing off the wolves.

[Lathum]

which means the roles are randomly assigned!!

are we even discussing the same point?

[PurdueBrad]

Better teach these guys some control before they kill somebody!

[Barkeep49]

Originally Posted by Lathum

which means the roles are randomly assigned!!

are we even discussing the same point?

I don't think so. I think hoops is hung up on winning baseball games which is where his whole analysis is coming from. It's just fine if that's your priority, I just don't see what it should be ours.

[hoopsguy]

Originally Posted by Lathum

which means the roles are randomly assigned!!

are we even discussing the same point?

Roles - yes (per the rules)

Talent - I don't know (not in the rules)

The Scout is looking at Talent, not roles.

The Seer (per the rules) is looking at identity and allegiance.

So, where is the confusion with this?

[PurdueBrad]

Originally Posted by Gonzo

I'm Willie Mays Hays. I can hit faster than "Mays" and run faster than..."Hays". Or it might be the other way round. And I'm a villager too.

You may run like Mays but you hit like ****!

Sorry, running out of Lou Brown quotes so I thought I should get them out here while I can.

[hoopsguy]

Originally Posted by Barkeep49

Hoops, I said it before and I'll say it again: I'm not concerned about winning baseball games. I read that part, considered it, and decided it was far less important than killing off the wolves.

Victory conditions suggest that we should be concerned about both.

There is no advantage to be gained by pushing for role reveals when it won't trap a wolf, per the rules.

[hoopsguy]

Originally Posted by PurdueBrad

You may run like Mays but you hit like ****!

Sorry, running out of Lou Brown quotes so I thought I should get them out here while I can.

Don't be afraid to scare us, Lou. I've heard that works well for motivating a team.

[DaddyTorgo]

I see my troubles getting on the board didn't result in me missing much of anything.

I think we're getting very sidetracked, which is okay given that we have a long D1, but let's keep it in focus. We don't want to have this discussion define the entire game. that's how we get way off track and behind the 8-ball.

[hoopsguy]

I'm fine with hashing through this discussion as long as people want, but ultimately Chief Rum is going to give us an answer on how talent was determined (random or not random).

But I agree that by tomorrow we should be discussing how to coordinate our actions to win the baseball game (night action).

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

Roles - yes (per the rules)

Talent - I don't know (not in the rules)

The Scout is looking at Talent, not roles.

The Seer (per the rules) is looking at identity and allegiance.

So, where is the confusion with this?

I meant talent is randomly assigned. Otherwise why have the scout?

[hoopsguy]

Originally Posted by Lathum

I meant talent is randomly assigned. Otherwise why have the scout?

OK, lets take another approach here. If it isn't randomly assigned, how would you rate the player names listed?

I'm guessing if you and I compared lists, we would have the same people at the top and the same people at the bottom, but the order would be different. Kind of like two sportswriters from different regions ranking college football teams. Which one of us would be closer to the computer rankings (Chief Rum, to extend the analogy)?

The Scout would have the ability to look at Chief Rum's rankings, and then help guide us to put together better rankings even if we have a rough idea of how they might sort themselves out.

Given that 60% of people have revealed already, I'm hoping that you are right and that my pet theory here is wrong. I hope talent is 100% assigned randomly. If/when Chief Rum says that, then I'll post my character name (although process of elimination has me down to a small set of selections, given that I've said I'm a position player) and happily move on with the rest of the game rather than continue to beat this badly bleeding horse.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

OK, lets take another approach here. If it isn't randomly assigned, how would you rate the player names listed?

I'm guessing if you and I compared lists, we would have the same people at the top and the same people at the bottom, but the order would be different. Kind of like two sportswriters from different regions ranking college football teams. Which one of us would be closer to the computer rankings (Chief Rum, to extend the analogy)?

The Scout would have the ability to look at Chief Rum's rankings, and then help guide us to put together better rankings even if we have a rough idea of how they might sort themselves out.

Given that 60% of people have revealed already, I'm hoping that you are right and that my pet theory here is wrong. I hope talent is 100% assigned randomly. If/when Chief Rum says that, then I'll post my character name (although process of elimination has me down to a small set of selections, given that I've said I'm a position player) and happily move on with the rest of the game rather than continue to beat this badly bleeding horse.

You really think so? I mean, from my memory of the movie, it's not like they really laid out who was more talented than others. I get what your saying about big names vs. unknown names, but for the rest, are you basing it off of how much screen time they get? I'm not sure how you can watch that movie and get an idea of who is more talented.

[path12]

Originally Posted by Barkeep49

Path: Just confirming: You're claiming to be Jack Parkman?

I am the one and only Jack Parkman.

[path12]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

And, I would suggest that some of the other "name" players agree with me as I've seen very few of the Indians marquee players come forward up to this point.

There is only one "name" player on the Indians. Jack Parkman. I don't care who knows it.

[path12]

I will be number one in talent.

[path12]

Oops, meant to quote Pass on that.

[PurdueBrad]

Originally Posted by path12

I will be number one in talent.

Parkman, there is no I in team. With that kind of attitude, it is no wonder we are in the position we're in.

[MikeVic]

I see what hoopsguy is saying. Even if you say that it's impossible to rank the players in the movie on talent based on screen time, it makes sense to me that the "screen time" players would have more talent than the fake players.

I think with every "screen time" player, though, they each have a strenght and weakness from the movies that could make them good or bad talents. If we're assuming the players all have talent based on their end-of-movie performances, then a guy like Eddie Harris, with little screen time, can be possibly ranked high with regards to talent. I believe he pitched something like 7 or 8 solid innings in their make-it-or-break-it game, didn't he?

Name-revealing could be useful in the strategy for when we should each use our "step it up" powers... but I don't think we should get all gung-ho about revealing names until we get an answer from ChiefRum.

[ntndeacon]

I am hopeful that talent is randomly granted. Of course just being up in the show is an honor.

[ntndeacon]

another thing we might want to address as a group, is who tries to use thier step it up power. since we have 3 uses of it, we might want to have 4 a day using it. This would take away us wasting too many chances. I say 4 because we want to have at least 1 true member to the team. (I am including a chance that someone gets paid off in the estimate of 4)

[hoopsguy]

On the topic of "step it up" - how long do people expect the game to go? We have fourteen players, and we are going to be losing one per day and probably people at night as well.

Five days? Six days? Seven at most?

With that in mind, I think we can put out a list of 5-6 people per day who are responsible for making a judgement call to use, or not use, their power that night. Some of the people will use it and others won't - depending on their individual decisions and how they think the other people in the group will go. Those people can choose to communicate with each other in the thread however they want about the usage.

I don't like the idea of everyone in the game making the decision each and every day as our standard format. I'm worried that too many people will burn through their "step it up" stuff too early under that structure.

As far as a selection criteria, maybe something like number listed in the signup thread - if we go with a group of five, then the people are grouped like so:

Night 1: 1, 4, 7, 10, 13
Night 2: 2, 5, 8, 11, 14
Night 3: 3, 6, 9, 12, ?

Obviously we'll have to move people into slots to fill these numbers as people get bumped. But I figured I could put out a potential framework to see how people feel about it.

[Barkeep49]

Originally Posted by ntndeacon

another thing we might want to address as a group, is who tries to use thier step it up power. since we have 3 uses of it, we might want to have 4 a day using it. This would take away us wasting too many chances. I say 4 because we want to have at least 1 true member to the team. (I am including a chance that someone gets paid off in the estimate of 4)

Except only one person's step it up matters a day. So if more than one person uses it in a day one of them will be wasting theirs.

[MikeVic]

I didn't think of using more than one step-it-up power a night, but that makes 100% sense.

Since I'm indispensable to the team, I can use mine when we most need it.

Oh, and I'm a simple villager too.

[PurdueBrad]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

Night 1: 1, 4, 7, 10, 13
Night 2: 2, 5, 8, 11, 14
Night 3: 3, 6, 9, 12, ?

Obviously we'll have to move people into slots to fill these numbers as people get bumped. But I figured I could put out a potential framework to see how people feel about it.

I appreciate the idea of a schedule but I'm concerned about the wolves picking off people based on who would be using their powers each night. Although I guess by process of elimination there, we might be able to figure out the wolves as well but we would be sacrificing some people for that info. I think we could ask people, last minute, to submit their powers in order to keep things concealed till last possible moment.

[MikeVic]

One more thing about revealing players...

There's 14 players, and 16 names. The wolves know which of the 14 are playing, so they can assume the role of the other two. But the wolves don't know who each other are.

However, if a wolf sees an identity being claimed that wasn't in the list of 14 players in the game, they now know who the other wolf is. This is a big advantage for them isn't it? We may have already tipped the scales in the wolves favour.

[hoopsguy]

Mike, did I miss something where the wolves don't know who each other?

[hoopsguy]

Originally Posted by PurdueBrad

I appreciate the idea of a schedule but I'm concerned about the wolves picking off people based on who would be using their powers each night. Although I guess by process of elimination there, we might be able to figure out the wolves as well but we would be sacrificing some people for that info. I think we could ask people, last minute, to submit their powers in order to keep things concealed till last possible moment.

Yep, and they can also pick people off to try and stack the deck for the schedule the following night. There are all kinds of ways for the wolves to attack our plan if we publish it for them.

But the alternative is an "every man for himself" approach, which I worry will result in a very sub-optimal use of our "step up" performances.

If we don't adopt the approach I've put out I won't be heartbroken. But I do hope that we have some kind of structured plan from day-to-day.

[MikeVic]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

Mike, did I miss something where the wolves don't know who each other?

(OOC, Umm I don't know, I thought they didn't know each other. I was reading another game where people were discussing almost accidentally lynching a fellow wolf. Do the wolves know who each other are in these games?)

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by MikeVic

(OOC, Umm I don't know, I thought they didn't know each other. I was reading another game where people were discussing almost accidentally lynching a fellow wolf. Do the wolves know who each other are in these games?)

Yeah, with rare exceptions, the wolves know each other.

[MikeVic]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Yeah, with rare exceptions, the wolves know each other.

Ok thanks, disregard my previous "revelation" then.

[hoopsguy]

Chief - will we publicly learn when a player has successfully used a "Step It Up" action to influence the outcome of a game? Is this captured in a night actions summary post, for example?

[ntndeacon]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

On the topic of "step it up" - how long do people expect the game to go? We have fourteen players, and we are going to be losing one per day and probably people at night as well.

Five days? Six days? Seven at most?

With that in mind, I think we can put out a list of 5-6 people per day who are responsible for making a judgement call to use, or not use, their power that night. Some of the people will use it and others won't - depending on their individual decisions and how they think the other people in the group will go. Those people can choose to communicate with each other in the thread however they want about the usage.

I don't like the idea of everyone in the game making the decision each and every day as our standard format. I'm worried that too many people will burn through their "step it up" stuff too early under that structure.

As far as a selection criteria, maybe something like number listed in the signup thread - if we go with a group of five, then the people are grouped like so:

Night 1: 1, 4, 7, 10, 13
Night 2: 2, 5, 8, 11, 14
Night 3: 3, 6, 9, 12, ?

Obviously we'll have to move people into slots to fill these numbers as people get bumped. But I figured I could put out a potential framework to see how people feel about it.

this is what I was talking about. I am ok with more than 4 but figured 4 was the minimum we should have trying at once. if we were to do it this way I would suggest just starting the list over like so:

Night 1: 1, 4, 7, 10, 13
Night 2: 2, 5, 8, 11, 14
Night 3: 3, 6, 9, 12, 1
Night 4: 4, 7, 10, 13, 2
Night 5: 5, 8, 11, 14, 3
Night 6: 6, 9, 12, 1, 4

[hoopsguy]

Originally Posted by ntndeacon

this is what I was talking about. I am ok with more than 4 but figured 4 was the minimum we should have trying at once. if we were to do it this way I would suggest just starting the list over like so:

Night 1: 1, 4, 7, 10, 13
Night 2: 2, 5, 8, 11, 14
Night 3: 3, 6, 9, 12, 1
Night 4: 4, 7, 10, 13, 2
Night 5: 5, 8, 11, 14, 3
Night 6: 6, 9, 12, 1, 4

Exactly, but the list is going to get edited by player deaths so forecasting out that far probably doesn't convey the results we are likely to get.

Since day and night actions are due at the same time it should help the Seer, Scout, and Bodyguard to have some idea of the people who will potentially be step-up performers. It doesn't mean they have to act in concert with one of those people, but it gives them more information to plan their action.

[path12]

Originally Posted by PurdueBrad

Parkman, there is no I in team. With that kind of attitude, it is no wonder we are in the position we're in.

I am the drink that stirs the camel's hump. I am the wings beneath the airplane. I am an engine of swat. Women covet me, men envy me -- for good reason.

No problem with having a schedule -- even if the wolves try to pick one of the people on the list off, someone else is going to get the chance to step up. Besides, if I was a wolf (instead of the incredibly handsome and talented Jack Parkman), I'd be looking for the seer and bodyguard rather than worrying about the games.

[KWhit]

I think a list makes sense too. At the very least, it will keep everyone from using their action on the same day.

[hoopsguy]

So, I'm hoping that we get some chatter going on our approach for tomorrow. No rush, but it has been over four hours since the last post. That is pretty much unheard of on a Day 1.

Oh, and I would love for someone else to pick up some votes so I don't get the axe on Day 1. But that is just me being selfish, I suppose ...

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Another villager checking in here. I'm going to hold off giving my name until we hear from Chief Rum regarding the distribution of talent.

A couple of thoughts reading through the thread:

* Barkeep's play today has me scratching my head. I saw absolutely nothing wrong with what hoopsguy was saying, and it seemed to me like Barkeep took it completely out of proportion.

* I'm somewhat surprised that Lou Brown is in the game. I can see how the rest of us can "step up" to win a game, but what can a manager really do?

* I feel pretty strongly that at least one of the big name players is a wolf and we would be going way off base (get it?) going after the no name players.

[Passacaglia]

It is a wonder that today was so quiet. I guess there's something to be said about the fact that there's not much to go on during Day 1, then throwing in the fact that today comprised only half of Day 1. I am with JE in being confused about Barkeep today -- but I'm willing to wait and hear what he has to say tomorrow.

[PurdueBrad]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Ezarik

* I'm somewhat surprised that Lou Brown is in the game. I can see how the rest of us can "step up" to win a game, but what can a manager really do?

Ouch! Who are you, Dorn?!? Questioning my value! I have the ability to sway a baseball game through motivation, late game replacements, etc. Hell, worse comes to worse, I can have a heart attack and Jake Taylor can give one of those sappy win one for the Gipper speeches!