Survivor: New Howard Tribal Thread (Tribal Council Due 10 PM Sunday)

[path12]

A little more analysis (this is actually kind of what I do):

If we assume that 70 is the magic number we're looking at for points, I have broken down each province by the percentage of those 70 points that it can get us. I then multiplied those percentages by $29 in order to get a relative dollar value to points ratio. This is how that comes out:

A. Greater Werewolvia: 33 points, 47.1% of 70 points, dollar value $14
B. Middle Werewolvia: 14 points, 20.0% of 70 points, dollar value $6
C. Lesser Werewolvia: 20 points, 28.6% of 70 points, dollar value $8
D. Fleabit Cove: 11 points, 15.7% of 70 points, dollar value $5
E. Dogbonia: 10 points, 14.3% of 70 points, dollar value $4
F. Dog Ear: 12 points, 17.1% of 70 points, dollar value $5
G. Homidia: 15 points, 21.4% of 70 points, dollar value $6
H. Lupinia: 16 points, 22.9% of 70 points, dollar value $7
I. Garouvia: 25 points, 35.7% of 70 points, dollar value $10
J. North Canis: 17 points, 24.3% of 70 points, dollar value $7
K. Lake Wolfsbane: 18 points, 25.7% of 70 points, dollar value $7
L. South Canis: 29 points, 41.4% of 70 points, dollar value $12
M. Lower Fang: 23 points, 32.9% of 70 points, dollar value $10
N. Upper Fang: 21 points, 30.0% of 70 points, dollar value $9
O. Alpovia: 13 points, 18.6% of 70 points, dollar value $5

Now obviously this isn't written in stone, but as a starting point for our buy decisions this can give us a relative dollar value. The goal is to maximize our buy and get the most bang for our buck. Our challenge is that we have no idea if or how much other teams are willing to overpay for certain areas.

But I think this at least gives us some data for discussion.

[Marathoner]

In keeping with the general theme of recent days, it was me who just entered as guest if anyone saw it.

[Marathoner]

who got voted out last night?

[Jonathan Ezarik]

I think their votes are due at the end of today.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

That's some good stuff, path. I'm not sure what to make of it right now, but I'm sure it'll come in handy.

Do we want to try to win this challenge or focus on finishing no lower than third? If our goal is just to avoid being last, should we go after the big territories and ignore the small stuff?

[ntndeacon]

my thoughts would either be to put 2 on everything but 1 item or maybe pick 10 things so we can bid 3 on 9 and 2 on the last one.

[path12]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Ezarik

That's some good stuff, path. I'm not sure what to make of it right now, but I'm sure it'll come in handy.

Do we want to try to win this challenge or focus on finishing no lower than third? If our goal is just to avoid being last, should we go after the big territories and ignore the small stuff?

I'd like to win it. And really, 70 points may well do that. I'm pretty confident that there will be at least a couple of ties and split points.

Using the 70 was to establish a minimum baseline in order to give an initial valuation of the various properties. How to attempt to buy them is an entirely different problem.

So for the first question -- what do you think might be viable strategies for the other teams? If we can anticipate what they are likely to do (and I think at least one of them will do the bid on every property tactic for instance), then we can start to develop strategies that can beat them.

[path12]

Another strategy I'm thinking about regards the middle valuations. I think many of those will be available for 5-6 dollars apiece. Five of those might give us the points we need.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

If we think 70 points is what it takes, why not just put everything into Greater Werewolvia (33 pts), South Canis (29 pts), and Garouvia (25 pts)? It might be that that is too obvious, but that could be used in our favor.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Originally Posted by path12

Another strategy I'm thinking about regards the middle valuations. I think many of those will be available for 5-6 dollars apiece. Five of those might give us the points we need.

The only problem with this is that it might be hard to win five straight out.

[path12]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Ezarik

If we think 70 points is what it takes, why not just put everything into Greater Werewolvia (33 pts), South Canis (29 pts), and Garouvia (25 pts)? It might be that that is too obvious, but that could be used in our favor.

That's a valid one also. There's going to be guesswork here no matter what.

Here's a question for everyone: How many points do you think we need to win? Let's find a consensus on that. My guess is 68-75, I'd like to have at least 72.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Originally Posted by path12

So for the first question -- what do you think might be viable strategies for the other teams? If we can anticipate what they are likely to do (and I think at least one of them will do the bid on every property tactic for instance), then we can start to develop strategies that can beat them.

I think Helsing will probably do the bid every area as well. That seems like something Alan would push. As for the other two, they went with the obvious them of Werewolf for the poetry contest, so is it possible that they will go with the obvious strategy for this challenge? Then again, what is the obvious strategy? Go after the high value ones or stay away from them?

[path12]

I think the obvious strategy is to find the properties nobody is putting substantial bids on.

[path12]

Because -- if you lose a big bid you find yourself really behind the 8 ball.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

70 pts sounds like a good target to shoot for. That almost divides up the 277 pts evenly between all teams, and I don't think that will happen. So if we get at least 70 pts, we won't be last (and probably have a good shot at winning).

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Originally Posted by path12

I think the obvious strategy is to find the properties nobody is putting substantial bids on.

So this means avoiding the higher end areas and going after the middle to lower ones?

[path12]

I could see Helsing as you mentioned JE, putting a bid on all properties. That would be $15. I could also see them then putting the rest of their money into one or two of the big dogs.

I think at least one team (and I think it's likely to be Oz) will adopt a big point strategy.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

You think Oz will go with the strategy of wagering everything on three or four areas?

[Jonathan Ezarik]

I guess another question to ask is: What do the other teams think we will do?

[path12]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Ezarik

So this means avoiding the higher end areas and going after the middle to lower ones?

Maybe. I want to see what other ideas we have. But 10, 15, 16, 17, 18 get you 76 points right there. And do you really expect any of those to get bids higher than $5-6 dollars?

[path12]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Ezarik

You think Oz will go with the strategy of wagering everything on three or four areas?

I'm just looking at personalities. Ardent and cronin will drive their strategy most likely, maybe with some input from Raiders. They all seem to be more "go for it" types to me.

[path12]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Ezarik

I guess another question to ask is: What do the other teams think we will do?

That is a fantastic question. I have no idea.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Originally Posted by path12

Maybe. I want to see what other ideas we have. But 10, 15, 16, 17, 18 get you 76 points right there. And do you really expect any of those to get bids higher than $5-6 dollars?

Not necessarily get higher, but if we tie with another team, we'll have to split those points. A split 10 pt area is worth a lot less than a split 33 pts.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Originally Posted by path12

That is a fantastic question. I have no idea.

Especially since we have no idea what to do.

[path12]

I think there might be some value in Upper and Lower Fang. They're pretty good point values, but they're down a ways on the list order and not in the top 3, so might be somewhat overlooked.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Originally Posted by path12

I'm just looking at personalities. Ardent and cronin will drive their strategy most likely, maybe with some input from Raiders. They all seem to be more "go for it" types to me.

I don't really know their personalities all that well, so I'll defer to you on that. What do you think Lupus will do? Blade seems like the "balls to the walls" type to gamble everything on four areas, too.

[path12]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Ezarik

Especially since we have no idea what to do.

Very true. But despite what Cronin says in the main thread, neither does anyone else.

If these properties were players in the game, and any of them might be guarded at night, which ones would you target as a wolf?

[path12]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Ezarik

I don't really know their personalities all that well, so I'll defer to you on that. What do you think Lupus will do? Blade seems like the "balls to the walls" type to gamble everything on four areas, too.

I wouldn't rely on my personality assessments, that's for sure -- that's just guesswork. Blade is a high risk/high reward player, but Blade is also in my opinion the one most likely to be examining in detail every individual property to find the most likely scheme to win.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

That's a really tough question. Part of me says to go conservative, but the other part says that that's how I always play, so making taking a chance would be a surprise. In that case, I would probably go after the higher values.

[path12]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Ezarik

That's a really tough question. Part of me says to go conservative, but the other part says that that's how I always play, so making taking a chance would be a surprise. In that case, I would probably go after the higher values.

Interesting. You might have just answered your question about what others think we might do.

[ntndeacon]

lets go after all the values.

[path12]

And to follow up on that a bit, since I really think it's a valid point to try and figure out what others think we might do......

Marathoner is new to WW, so we'll leave him out of this for right now. I think the other three of us probably have reputations of smart yet somewhat under the radar players. The kind of players who might do something just like what I was putting out there before about trying to play the middle properties. Hmmm....

[path12]

Originally Posted by ntndeacon

lets go after all the values.

But how? I don't think just $1 apiece is going to do it. $2 apiece? $2 apiece except for the top two? What about ties?

I'm not opposed to it, I just want some clarification of how we'd like to get there.

[ntndeacon]

2 a piece except for the top one. remember $29 dollars right....

orrrr pick 9 of them at $3 and either 1 at $2 or 2 at $1

[path12]

Originally Posted by ntndeacon

2 a piece except for the top one. remember $29 dollars right....

orrrr pick 9 of them at $3 and either 1 at $2 or 2 at $1

What about seven at $3 and two at $4?

[path12]

I think it's likely that someone will bid $2 on each property.

[path12]

Dola, not necessarily one team doing that, but I think we should assume at least $2 will be bid on any individual property.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

We could really screw with everyone, bid $15 on Greater Werewolvia and $14 on South Canis for 62 pts. That might be good enough to win, and should be good enough to avoid last.

[ntndeacon]

so y'all dont think there will be enough non looked at properties left to win?

[path12]

Originally Posted by ntndeacon

so y'all dont think there will be enough non looked at properties left to win?

I think someone is going to bid at least a buck on all properties. That same group may well figure that someone else will try the same thing and in order to outsmart them will bid two bucks on each property. I could be wrong of course, and it could be that it's so obvious nobody will do it, but I don't know that I want to risk losing them for just a buck or two a bid.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Originally Posted by ntndeacon

so y'all dont think there will be enough non looked at properties left to win?

What do you mean by non looked at? Properties without bids, or just not high bids?

[ntndeacon]

Originally Posted by path12

What about seven at $3 and two at $4?

not a bad strategy. if we are dealing with $3 bids I would rather try 9 at $3 and one at $2 just to get that extra possiblitiy of points

[path12]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Ezarik

We could really screw with everyone, bid $15 on Greater Werewolvia and $14 on South Canis for 62 pts. That might be good enough to win, and should be good enough to avoid last.

That's the hard part about this one. (and I have to say that actually I'm having a lot of fun speculating about all these possibilities. Yes, I am a geek, why do you ask? )

It's why I related it to the wolf/bodyguard argument earlier. There's a ton of different ways to win. Which one is nobody else using?

[ntndeacon]

Jon I meant properties with out bids or at least properties with only a max of $1 on it

[ntndeacon]

the problem others are going to see about the $2 strategy is that will take up all their money. so I dont thnik others will go that route. so we would be able to get a bid over the $1 bids

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Originally Posted by ntndeacon

Jon I meant properties with out bids or at least properties with only a max of $1 on it

OK. I side with path on thinking that every territory will have at least a $2 bid. It's possible for us to go the route of the middle values, but I do think it's going to be harder for us to win that way. I see us splitting a lot of territories with the other tribes.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Originally Posted by ntndeacon

the problem others are going to see about the $2 strategy is that will take up all their money. so I dont thnik others will go that route. so we would be able to get a bid over the $1 bids

Just trying to think this one out. If this happens, how many territories could we expect to win? I'd say four for sure (Dogbonia, Fleabit Cove, Dog Ear, Alpovia) for 46 points. What else could we expect to win?

[ntndeacon]

I have a feeling that we would not get the bottom couple of territories as people try to out think each other. but that would leave others more open.

[ntndeacon]

maybe I am being too sneaky for my own good. and will be interesting to see afterwards how well that strategy would have work. I still think that a method of throwing out bids on the majority of lands is the way to go.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Originally Posted by ntndeacon

maybe I am being too sneaky for my own good. and will be interesting to see afterwards how well that strategy would have work. I still think that a method of throwing out bids on the majority of lands is the way to go.

I can see the value of doing something like this, but I also see it as something that other tribes will do as well.