Werewolf XXXVI: Resident Evil (S.T.A.R.S. Wins! Post #1424) - Page 3

Mr. Wednesday · 10-25-2006, 12:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chubby

It's a fairly "straight forward" game, by that I mean everything is spelled out... no roles not mentioned in the rules, no hidden qualities like "can not night kill" (unless specifically mentioned in the rules). I do this because while I enjoy games with twists in them, it generally aggrevates me when these things pop up. Any twists in this game will not mess with what you are told in the rules (and won't break the rules as well), this is why I think that even tho there's a lot of possible roles that it will be enjoyable by both vets and newer players.

I think there's a little wiggle room there...

Fouts · 10-25-2006, 01:05 AM

Checking in. I do not like to eat brains.

Glengoyne · 10-25-2006, 01:05 AM

Checking IN.

For the Record. I think you're all stinking Zombies or Rain Gear.

Stay outta my freaking HEAD!

Chief Rum · 10-25-2006, 01:27 AM

I am Chief Rum. That is not Police Chief Rum. Or is it? Can I even say that? I guess not. Unless I am not the chief. But I am Chief. I give up.

Glengoyne · 10-25-2006, 01:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alan T

...

I am guessing the zombies will just go after anyone not them. They'll try to take out people similar to what normal bad guys do in games strategy wise. I think they are the ones least changed by having three factions.

So the zombies will be the ones acting normal? I'm not sure how to capitalize on that.

hoopsguy · 10-25-2006, 05:41 AM

OK, a whole lot of nothing to go after in the initial posts this game. I agree with the presiding thought on the Chief's voting record being especially important but I'm not sure what the other takeaways are from the early discussion, frankly.

As with just about every Day 1, nothing becomes interesting until we start to vote. Anyone have any new ideas on the best way to carry out a Day 1? I tend to subscribe to the two candidate runoff, which may be a better option than usual this game with two factions yielding positive results for STARS. Better chance of having someone we want in the crosshairs as opposed to two random villagers/STARS.

Alan T · 10-25-2006, 06:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

OK, a whole lot of nothing to go after in the initial posts this game. I agree with the presiding thought on the Chief's voting record being especially important but I'm not sure what the other takeaways are from the early discussion, frankly.

As with just about every Day 1, nothing becomes interesting until we start to vote. Anyone have any new ideas on the best way to carry out a Day 1? I tend to subscribe to the two candidate runoff, which may be a better option than usual this game with two factions yielding positive results for STARS. Better chance of having someone we want in the crosshairs as opposed to two random villagers/STARS.

I like the votes every day to be based around a small number of candidates as well since that is easier to track down the road than everyone spread out across 10 different people. I however am not going to trap myself on day 1 being forced to choose between two people who have some possibility of being a decent contributer during the game.

In most games there is usually one side that wants to eliminate those that do sound analysis, those that help drive -meaningful- discussion and those that are active and/or experienced. My goal at least on day 1 is likely to not do that team's work for them.

I might not go for the quietest player, or I might not go for the newest player.. However I'll likely consider all of those things when picking my day one vote. I think its a tad early just yet to be narrowing down to a few candidates to choose from right now. I'm more curious to see how people check in, and what discussion people are bringing to the table early in the game.

I don't know that there is a ton that we can discuss on day 1, however I don't really feel like sitting in day 5 or 6 with a bunch of people who won't be trying to work together to figure out voting records or discuss behavior patterns

LoneStarGirl · 10-25-2006, 07:17 AM

Okay, I got my role. Nothing special to see here. Just checking in and saying hi

KWhit · 10-25-2006, 07:37 AM

Hello, all. KWhit checking in.

I think it's such a crapshoot on day one that I will likely be voting for someone quiet. I feel that it's a mistake to lose a someone this early who is actually contributing to the discussion. It's tough to get a read on the quiet ones later in the game, so it hurts our chances of victory if we keep them around.

Chief Rum · 10-25-2006, 07:50 AM

Heading off to work for the day, but I will be back before deadline. Can't what to read the usual nonsensical reasonings for voting for people on Day 1 (to which I will then add my own).

Alan T · 10-25-2006, 07:51 AM

So in my pre-game reading of the rules, there were some other interesting dynamics in this game to make it a bit different than typical games.

Normally there is 1 bodyguard, 1 seer and perhaps some type of witness role in a game. This game due to three factions, there are quite many more walking around.

Stars have 2 roles that can learn faction information and 1 who can act as a witness type role from what I can tell. Umbrella has 1 that can learn information and both have 1 bodyguard each.

So where in normal games it is a percentage play to figure out the odds of player X being guarded, this game that chance is increased. I wouldn't be suprised to see a slightly different night kill game plan this game due to the extra bodyguards out there.

Lathum · 10-25-2006, 08:19 AM

Checking in ( I got blasted for not doing this last game). Nothingh special going on. I agree day one is a crapshoot. Since I will be gone all day then I am going to see Flogging Molly tonight!!! I have to put an early vote in.

LYNCH HOOPSGUY

thats for wanting to gun me dowm last game when I was your teammate.

spleen1015 · 10-25-2006, 08:28 AM

Hello, boys and girls. I'm here! Spleenie is 3-0 in WW. Let's keep that tradition alive!

Alan T · 10-25-2006, 08:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spleen1015

Hello, boys and girls. I'm here! Spleenie is 3-0 in WW. Let's keep that tradition alive!

I am ok with that as long as you are on my team.

hoopsguy · 10-25-2006, 08:32 AM

Thanks for that, Lathum. I spare you, allowing you to move on to ruling that cowpoke town and you use that as a reason to vote for me. Makes perfect sense.

Alan, while I think that getting our votes down to two candidates makes sense, I have no good thoughts on who those two candidates should be. I do not have any special insight on my team members.

Alan T · 10-25-2006, 08:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

Thanks for that, Lathum. I spare you, allowing you to move on to ruling that cowpoke town and you use that as a reason to vote for me. Makes perfect sense.

Alan, while I think that getting our votes down to two candidates makes sense, I have no good thoughts on who those two candidates should be. I do not have any special insight on my team members.

It seems like Lathum is nominating you to be one of the candidates. I take it you don't agree with that

spleen1015 · 10-25-2006, 08:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alan T

It seems like Lathum is nominating you to be one of the candidates. I take it you don't agree with that

Works for me. Hoops is candidate #1.

hoopsguy · 10-25-2006, 08:45 AM

If that is how people want today to play out, so be it. However, I'm with STARS and there are going to be two factions that will know I'm not part of their faction and will be more than willing to cast votes towards me. So including a member of STARS in the runoff is already less than ideal. Statistically, I don't think it is likely for us to get two members of STARS in a runoff, but if you choose to make me candidate #1 then it becomes a lot more likely.

OK, here comes the math, working with Alan's guesswork for faction numbers.
19 players, 11-5-3 ratio to start
Chance of having two STARS members in initial two-man runoff = 11/19 * 10/18 = 32%
Chance of having a second STARS member in initial two-man runoff after having first candidate (me) as member of STARS = 10/18 = 56%

So we are giving away a 24% edge by making a bad first decision and giving the other factions a chance to vote out a player who is generally pretty good at analysis as a good guy. Obviously I don't like this one bit.

There is a player who will not be voting for me who knows that I am speaking the truth about being on STARS.

Abe Sargent · 10-25-2006, 09:03 AM

Heya and good morning all! Still trying to muddle through the rules and what. Will post more later when I have more to say.

-Anxiety

Fouts · 10-25-2006, 09:17 AM

I won't be in the thread until later this afternoon. I have a feeling hoops is playing it straight this game. (I'll vote for the guy who killed me last, as I owe him one.)

vote st. cronin

BrianD · 10-25-2006, 09:26 AM

I'm already a bit confused as to the rules and the factions, so I am going to spend a bit more time reading over them. I'll be over on page 1 for a while if anyone needs me.

SnDvls · 10-25-2006, 09:37 AM

another player checking in

this game is alredy confusing with 3 factions.

Alan - I'm rereading some of your analysis so I have it straight and based on my gut the last two games I feel you've already started to earn some trust. I don't think a non-Stars player would be this helpful this early.

hoopsguy · 10-25-2006, 09:39 AM

I realized that there is another implication in my math earlier that I think is pretty important here. If we start with 11 members of STARS then the likelihood of having at least opponent in the mix, with a randomly selected starting two, is 68%. If we start with 10 members of STARS that number moves to 74%.

With that in mind, I am vehemently opposed to being the first member of the runoff - we give away way too much edge on the first day. Normally we are playing with less than a 40% chance of getting a "wolf" in a 19 person game with two factions, assuming 4 wolves.

Obviously anyone else can make the same argument and then cite my statistics as their rationale, but I'll leave that for others to judge.

Consider my suspicion of Lathum, Alan T, and Spleen dialed up a little above the norm for the initial vote and the whimsical suggestions that I would make a fine candidate.

spleen1015 · 10-25-2006, 09:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

I realized that there is another implication in my math earlier that I think is pretty important here. If we start with 11 members of STARS then the likelihood of having at least opponent in the mix, with a randomly selected starting two, is 68%. If we start with 10 members of STARS that number moves to 74%.

With that in mind, I am vehemently opposed to being the first member of the runoff - we give away way too much edge on the first day. Normally we are playing with less than a 40% chance of getting a "wolf" in a 19 person game with two factions, assuming 4 wolves.

Obviously anyone else can make the same argument and then cite my statistics as their rationale, but I'll leave that for others to judge.

Consider my suspicion of Lathum, Alan T, and Spleen dialed up a little above the norm for the initial vote and the whimsical suggestions that I would make a fine candidate.

My suggestion was all in good fun. I don't think I will be voting for you on Day 1. So, don't sweat it, homie.

st.cronin · 10-25-2006, 09:41 AM

I am going to assume that any player who casts an early vote is either zombie, umbrella, or police chief. Regular stars players will likely be looking for clues that somebody is the police chief. That said ...

vote hoopsguy

hoopsguy · 10-25-2006, 09:42 AM

SnDvls - have you ever played with Alan when he has been a wolf? I would expect nothing but helpfulness from him early in the game as a wolf. There should be plenty of others here who can back me up on that assertion.

Doesn't make him a "wolf" in any way, shape, or form. But I would be pretty cautious about assigning him trust based on helpfulness on Day 1.

spleen1015 · 10-25-2006, 09:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I am going to assume that any player who casts an early vote is either zombie, umbrella, or police chief. Regular stars players will likely be looking for clues that somebody is the police chief. That said ...

vote hoopsguy

So, using your analysis, you're a zombie, umbrella or the police chief.

hoopsguy · 10-25-2006, 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I am going to assume that any player who casts an early vote is either zombie, umbrella, or police chief. Regular stars players will likely be looking for clues that somebody is the police chief. That said ...

vote hoopsguy

You cast the 2nd vote.
The Police Chief knows that I'm with STARS.

So where does that leave you?

hoopsguy · 10-25-2006, 09:44 AM

Dola - 3rd vote, as Fouts voted for Cronin.

spleen1015 · 10-25-2006, 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

You cast the 2nd vote.
The Police Chief knows that I'm with STARS.

So where does that leave you?

My thoughts exactly.

st.cronin · 10-25-2006, 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

You cast the 2nd vote.
The Police Chief knows that I'm with STARS.

So where does that leave you?

This post is rhetoric, not analysis. Play along with my theory - either Lathum is the police chief, or he is not Stars. If he is the police chief, then you are either umbrella or zombie. If he is not Stars, then you could still be either umbrella or zombie (since I don't think they know which is which), but if you turn out to be stars, then Lathum gets lynched tomorrow.

Of course, it's also possible that Lathum is just regular stars and wanted to cast a vote. But that leaves me with making a random day 1 vote based on nothing.

SnDvls · 10-25-2006, 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

SnDvls - have you ever played with Alan when he has been a wolf? I would expect nothing but helpfulness from him early in the game as a wolf. There should be plenty of others here who can back me up on that assertion.

Doesn't make him a "wolf" in any way, shape, or form. But I would be pretty cautious about assigning him trust based on helpfulness on Day 1.

I have seen him do it before yes, but here it just feels different to me. Anyhow all I said was he started to earn some trust, not in a COT just yet.

Tyrith · 10-25-2006, 10:01 AM

I think we might be again reading too much into some of this. However, Lathum's quick vote for hoops does concern me. I would figure that if we were all on the same side we'd want to keep the best players alive to help us, and I don't think there is any doubt that hoops is quite good at this game. Multiple people have also talked about voting for quiet people on day 1, and here we are again, with a hoops/cronin showdown looming over our heads. Maybe we should slow down here for a minute, go over this again before we start maiming people...but I have to admit that cronin's "rhetoric" post makes some sense to me.

Of course, his day 1 thinking last game probably made some sense too, and it was dead wrong.

hoopsguy · 10-25-2006, 10:02 AM

Cronin, I think you are assuming a more aggressive game by the Police Chief than I would expect from the role. They are likely going to make pro-STARS votes every time out. They have information that they cannot reveal, but obviously helps the team out if we can figure out their identity. But their value increases as the game progresses and the impact of a wrong decision is magnified. So I would expect them to try and blend in early, rather than drawing attention to themselves.

You are suggesting that Lathum - by all accounts a pretty solid player who thinks through scenarios - would come after me in this role with the first vote in an attempt to identify himself to his constituents immediately. I have the luxury of knowing this is not the case, but I think anyone who thinks through the role and the player would conclude that Lathum is NOT the Police Chief.

Tyrith · 10-25-2006, 10:03 AM

Actually, screw all that. Lathum said he was gonna be gone all day. This is too overt to be a wolf move like that. Now I have other kinds of alarms going off. It's too early for all this.

Alan T · 10-25-2006, 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by st.cronin

This post is rhetoric, not analysis. Play along with my theory - either Lathum is the police chief, or he is not Stars. If he is the police chief, then you are either umbrella or zombie. If he is not Stars, then you could still be either umbrella or zombie (since I don't think they know which is which), but if you turn out to be stars, then Lathum gets lynched tomorrow.

Of course, it's also possible that Lathum is just regular stars and wanted to cast a vote. But that leaves me with making a random day 1 vote based on nothing.

Or Lathum is honestly not going to be here most of the day and had to put his vote out early and you are using that to try to have an excuse to vote for hoops. Considering you have this breakdown on what Lathum is or isn't and that led you to voting for Hoops as a second vote on him rather than voting for Lathum whom no one had voted for yet..

hoopsguy · 10-25-2006, 10:03 AM

Let me clarify - I have the luxury of knowing Lathum is not the Police Chief by virtue of his vote for me.

Anyone who does not know that I'm with STARS, but takes the time to consider the role and how Lathum might play it, should pretty quickly conclude that Lathum is NOT the Police Chief.

Alan T · 10-25-2006, 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

I realized that there is another implication in my math earlier that I think is pretty important here. If we start with 11 members of STARS then the likelihood of having at least opponent in the mix, with a randomly selected starting two, is 68%. If we start with 10 members of STARS that number moves to 74%.

With that in mind, I am vehemently opposed to being the first member of the runoff - we give away way too much edge on the first day. Normally we are playing with less than a 40% chance of getting a "wolf" in a 19 person game with two factions, assuming 4 wolves.

Obviously anyone else can make the same argument and then cite my statistics as their rationale, but I'll leave that for others to judge.

Consider my suspicion of Lathum, Alan T, and Spleen dialed up a little above the norm for the initial vote and the whimsical suggestions that I would make a fine candidate.

To be honest, I am tweaking you a bit. Its pretty easy to suggest there be a run off of two candidates on day 1, but then not have any suggestions on who those candidates should be. Then when your neck starts getting closer to the noose, that two candidate run off isnt as appealing to you.

I already have stated that I like narrowing down the selection to a few candidates to help us judge voting history from (whether 2 or 3 candidates). I also have stated what type of player I would like to lynch today, and you aren't in that description. You should know from my previous posts that if I voted for you today it would go against everything I already stated today.

hoopsguy · 10-25-2006, 10:07 AM

In terms of Lathum, after having played with him as a wolf last game, I would suggest that putting votes on him is an effective way to encourage participation even when he is "going to be away all day". Yes, he is out for stretches of the day but my perception was that he definitely was willing to give the villagers time to trip over themselves.

I have no idea if Lathum is a good guy or a bad guy here. I just know he is not the Police Chief based on his vote. And that voting for me on Day 1, based on specious logic (is there any other kind on Day 1? fair point) that I considered killing him last game is foolish.

spleen1015 · 10-25-2006, 10:08 AM

I'm going to believe in hoops this game because of odds.

He was a wolf last game and that game was pretty big. This game is also pretty big, so him being a wolf is pretty slim.

st.cronin · 10-25-2006, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

Cronin, I think you are assuming a more aggressive game by the Police Chief than I would expect from the role. They are likely going to make pro-STARS votes every time out. They have information that they cannot reveal, but obviously helps the team out if we can figure out their identity. But their value increases as the game progresses and the impact of a wrong decision is magnified. So I would expect them to try and blend in early, rather than drawing attention to themselves.

You are suggesting that Lathum - by all accounts a pretty solid player who thinks through scenarios - would come after me in this role with the first vote in an attempt to identify himself to his constituents immediately. I have the luxury of knowing this is not the case, but I think anyone who thinks through the role and the player would conclude that Lathum is NOT the Police Chief.

I agree that there is a good possibility that Lathum is NOT the police chief. I think there is much less probability that he is regular Stars.

My own point of view is that as regular stars, the last thing I want to do is cast a random vote on somebody. The only way for the day 1 vote to make sense is to lay back and let the umbrella/zombie/chief pick suspects - then day 2, we go through that info to see what we see.

Tyrith · 10-25-2006, 10:09 AM

Yeah, referring to what hoops was saying, I don't think the chief would be so brazen as to start pulling stunts like that immediately. He's going to be too valuable to our long term plans to take the chance it massively backfires. Furthermore, I would like to think that the people in these games are honest about their real lives and about when they aren't going to be around -- gaming to that degree seems over our unwritten line, personally. So I'm inclined to think the vote doesn't mean anything.

Alan T · 10-25-2006, 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

In terms of Lathum, after having played with him as a wolf last game, I would suggest that putting votes on him is an effective way to encourage participation even when he is "going to be away all day". Yes, he is out for stretches of the day but my perception was that he definitely was willing to give the villagers time to trip over themselves.

I have no idea if Lathum is a good guy or a bad guy here. I just know he is not the Police Chief based on his vote. And that voting for me on Day 1, based on specious logic (is there any other kind on Day 1? fair point) that I considered killing him last game is foolish.

Lathum never seems to be a heavy posted in early games from what I know of him. I agree that putting him on the block usually increases his participation, but he usually sits back and lets things develop early on.

This alone doesn't make him good or bad this game, but lathum really isn't the type of day 1 vote I'm looking for today. I have in my mind who I think I would probably vote for, but I am waiting for them to check in this game first before I decide for sure today. (Bulletsponge)

BrianD · 10-25-2006, 10:11 AM

Switching topics a bit, is there any reason that Umbrella would want to create Nemesis? It would "take care of" a STARS member, but it would also create another zombie which might eat them. I'm not sure I get the point of this...

Alan T · 10-25-2006, 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spleen1015

I'm going to believe in hoops this game because of odds.

He was a wolf last game and that game was pretty big. This game is also pretty big, so him being a wolf is pretty slim.

I disagree somewhat with this reasoning. This game I feel the odds of him being someone "bad" is bigger than in most games, despite the number of players.

In this game I wouldn't be suprised to see 40% of the players on some "bad" faction (either zombies or Umbrella) so I think its actually quite a decent possibility for any player in this game to be bad. I don't buy the whole arguement that a larger game means automatically less chance he is bad.

Tyrith · 10-25-2006, 10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I agree that there is a good possibility that Lathum is NOT the police chief. I think there is much less probability that he is regular Stars.

My own point of view is that as regular stars, the last thing I want to do is cast a random vote on somebody. The only way for the day 1 vote to make sense is to lay back and let the umbrella/zombie/chief pick suspects - then day 2, we go through that info to see what we see.

The problem with this is that it only works if other people are going to think along your same lines. A lot of day ones involve people just throwing things out there, and we can rest assured they aren't all going to be the police chief or a non-good guy. Are we just going to start killing people for independent thoughts on day one?

Alan T · 10-25-2006, 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrianD

Switching topics a bit, is there any reason that Umbrella would want to create Nemesis? It would "take care of" a STARS member, but it would also create another zombie which might eat them. I'm not sure I get the point of this...

Main reasons I can think of is to nullify a stars bodyguard or perhaps there is some unknown information about how nemesis works that would make it appealing to them.

I agree that I don't necessarily assume that the umbrella team would be happy about there being more zombies.

Tyrith · 10-25-2006, 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrianD

Switching topics a bit, is there any reason that Umbrella would want to create Nemesis? It would "take care of" a STARS member, but it would also create another zombie which might eat them. I'm not sure I get the point of this...

Random thought: They would know who Nemesis is and could try to get him....taken care of if he started doing goofy crap.

st.cronin · 10-25-2006, 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alan T

Or Lathum is honestly not going to be here most of the day and had to put his vote out early and you are using that to try to have an excuse to vote for hoops. Considering you have this breakdown on what Lathum is or isn't and that led you to voting for Hoops as a second vote on him rather than voting for Lathum whom no one had voted for yet..

If you really think so, then vote for me. I know for sure the police chief won't vote for me.

I don't have a breakdown, just a theory - one I hinted at last night. Normally I like to get a vote out there right away, but this game I waited to see who moved first.

Tyrith · 10-25-2006, 10:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spleen1015

I'm going to believe in hoops this game because of odds.

He was a wolf last game and that game was pretty big. This game is also pretty big, so him being a wolf is pretty slim.

Random.org cares not about who was what last game

10-25-2006, 01:27 AM	#104
Chief Rum Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Where Hip Hop lives	I am Chief Rum. That is not Police Chief Rum. Or is it? Can I even say that? I guess not. Unless I am not the chief. But I am Chief. I give up. __________________ . . I would rather be wrong...Than live in the shadows of your song...My mind is open wide...And now I'm ready to start...You're not sure...You open the door...And step out into the dark...Now I'm ready.

10-25-2006, 07:50 AM	#110
Chief Rum Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Where Hip Hop lives	Heading off to work for the day, but I will be back before deadline. Can't what to read the usual nonsensical reasonings for voting for people on Day 1 (to which I will then add my own). __________________ . . I would rather be wrong...Than live in the shadows of your song...My mind is open wide...And now I'm ready to start...You're not sure...You open the door...And step out into the dark...Now I'm ready.

10-25-2006, 09:03 AM	#119
Abe Sargent Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Catonsville, MD	Heya and good morning all! Still trying to muddle through the rules and what. Will post more later when I have more to say. -Anxiety __________________ Check out my two current weekly Magic columns! https://www.coolstuffinc.com/a/?action=search&page=1&author[]=Abe%20Sargent

10-25-2006, 09:41 AM	#125
st.cronin General Manager Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: New Mexico	I am going to assume that any player who casts an early vote is either zombie, umbrella, or police chief. Regular stars players will likely be looking for clues that somebody is the police chief. That said ... vote hoopsguy __________________ co-commish: bb-bbcf.net knives out

10-25-2006, 01:05 AM	#102
Fouts College Starter Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: California	Checking in. I do not like to eat brains.

10-25-2006, 01:05 AM	#103
Glengoyne Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Fresno, CA	Checking IN. For the Record. I think you're all stinking Zombies or Rain Gear. Stay outta my freaking HEAD!

10-25-2006, 05:41 AM	#106
hoopsguy General Manager Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Chicago	OK, a whole lot of nothing to go after in the initial posts this game. I agree with the presiding thought on the Chief's voting record being especially important but I'm not sure what the other takeaways are from the early discussion, frankly. As with just about every Day 1, nothing becomes interesting until we start to vote. Anyone have any new ideas on the best way to carry out a Day 1? I tend to subscribe to the two candidate runoff, which may be a better option than usual this game with two factions yielding positive results for STARS. Better chance of having someone we want in the crosshairs as opposed to two random villagers/STARS.

10-25-2006, 07:17 AM	#108
LoneStarGirl College Starter Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Little Rock, AR	Okay, I got my role. Nothing special to see here. Just checking in and saying hi

10-25-2006, 07:37 AM	#109
KWhit Coordinator Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Conyers GA	Hello, all. KWhit checking in. I think it's such a crapshoot on day one that I will likely be voting for someone quiet. I feel that it's a mistake to lose a someone this early who is actually contributing to the discussion. It's tough to get a read on the quiet ones later in the game, so it hurts our chances of victory if we keep them around.

10-25-2006, 07:51 AM	#111
Alan T Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mass.	So in my pre-game reading of the rules, there were some other interesting dynamics in this game to make it a bit different than typical games. Normally there is 1 bodyguard, 1 seer and perhaps some type of witness role in a game. This game due to three factions, there are quite many more walking around. Stars have 2 roles that can learn faction information and 1 who can act as a witness type role from what I can tell. Umbrella has 1 that can learn information and both have 1 bodyguard each. So where in normal games it is a percentage play to figure out the odds of player X being guarded, this game that chance is increased. I wouldn't be suprised to see a slightly different night kill game plan this game due to the extra bodyguards out there.

10-25-2006, 08:19 AM	#112
Lathum Favored Bitch #1 Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: homeless in NJ	Checking in ( I got blasted for not doing this last game). Nothingh special going on. I agree day one is a crapshoot. Since I will be gone all day then I am going to see Flogging Molly tonight!!! I have to put an early vote in. LYNCH HOOPSGUY thats for wanting to gun me dowm last game when I was your teammate.

10-25-2006, 08:28 AM	#113
spleen1015 Coordinator Join Date: Sep 2003	Hello, boys and girls. I'm here! Spleenie is 3-0 in WW. Let's keep that tradition alive!

10-25-2006, 08:32 AM	#115
hoopsguy General Manager Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Chicago	Thanks for that, Lathum. I spare you, allowing you to move on to ruling that cowpoke town and you use that as a reason to vote for me. Makes perfect sense. Alan, while I think that getting our votes down to two candidates makes sense, I have no good thoughts on who those two candidates should be. I do not have any special insight on my team members.

10-25-2006, 08:45 AM	#118
hoopsguy General Manager Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Chicago	If that is how people want today to play out, so be it. However, I'm with STARS and there are going to be two factions that will know I'm not part of their faction and will be more than willing to cast votes towards me. So including a member of STARS in the runoff is already less than ideal. Statistically, I don't think it is likely for us to get two members of STARS in a runoff, but if you choose to make me candidate #1 then it becomes a lot more likely. OK, here comes the math, working with Alan's guesswork for faction numbers. 19 players, 11-5-3 ratio to start Chance of having two STARS members in initial two-man runoff = 11/19 * 10/18 = 32% Chance of having a second STARS member in initial two-man runoff after having first candidate (me) as member of STARS = 10/18 = 56% So we are giving away a 24% edge by making a bad first decision and giving the other factions a chance to vote out a player who is generally pretty good at analysis as a good guy. Obviously I don't like this one bit. There is a player who will not be voting for me who knows that I am speaking the truth about being on STARS.

10-25-2006, 09:17 AM	#120
Fouts College Starter Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: California	I won't be in the thread until later this afternoon. I have a feeling hoops is playing it straight this game. (I'll vote for the guy who killed me last, as I owe him one.) vote st. cronin

10-25-2006, 09:26 AM	#121
BrianD Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Appleton, WI	I'm already a bit confused as to the rules and the factions, so I am going to spend a bit more time reading over them. I'll be over on page 1 for a while if anyone needs me.

10-25-2006, 09:37 AM	#122
SnDvls Pro Starter Join Date: Jul 2001	another player checking in this game is alredy confusing with 3 factions. Alan - I'm rereading some of your analysis so I have it straight and based on my gut the last two games I feel you've already started to earn some trust. I don't think a non-Stars player would be this helpful this early.

10-25-2006, 09:39 AM	#123
hoopsguy General Manager Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Chicago	I realized that there is another implication in my math earlier that I think is pretty important here. If we start with 11 members of STARS then the likelihood of having at least opponent in the mix, with a randomly selected starting two, is 68%. If we start with 10 members of STARS that number moves to 74%. With that in mind, I am vehemently opposed to being the first member of the runoff - we give away way too much edge on the first day. Normally we are playing with less than a 40% chance of getting a "wolf" in a 19 person game with two factions, assuming 4 wolves. Obviously anyone else can make the same argument and then cite my statistics as their rationale, but I'll leave that for others to judge. Consider my suspicion of Lathum, Alan T, and Spleen dialed up a little above the norm for the initial vote and the whimsical suggestions that I would make a fine candidate.

10-25-2006, 09:42 AM	#126
hoopsguy General Manager Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Chicago	SnDvls - have you ever played with Alan when he has been a wolf? I would expect nothing but helpfulness from him early in the game as a wolf. There should be plenty of others here who can back me up on that assertion. Doesn't make him a "wolf" in any way, shape, or form. But I would be pretty cautious about assigning him trust based on helpfulness on Day 1.

10-25-2006, 09:44 AM	#129
hoopsguy General Manager Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Chicago	Dola - 3rd vote, as Fouts voted for Cronin.

10-25-2006, 10:01 AM	#133
Tyrith College Starter Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Houston, TX	I think we might be again reading too much into some of this. However, Lathum's quick vote for hoops does concern me. I would figure that if we were all on the same side we'd want to keep the best players alive to help us, and I don't think there is any doubt that hoops is quite good at this game. Multiple people have also talked about voting for quiet people on day 1, and here we are again, with a hoops/cronin showdown looming over our heads. Maybe we should slow down here for a minute, go over this again before we start maiming people...but I have to admit that cronin's "rhetoric" post makes some sense to me. Of course, his day 1 thinking last game probably made some sense too, and it was dead wrong.

10-25-2006, 10:02 AM	#134
hoopsguy General Manager Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Chicago	Cronin, I think you are assuming a more aggressive game by the Police Chief than I would expect from the role. They are likely going to make pro-STARS votes every time out. They have information that they cannot reveal, but obviously helps the team out if we can figure out their identity. But their value increases as the game progresses and the impact of a wrong decision is magnified. So I would expect them to try and blend in early, rather than drawing attention to themselves. You are suggesting that Lathum - by all accounts a pretty solid player who thinks through scenarios - would come after me in this role with the first vote in an attempt to identify himself to his constituents immediately. I have the luxury of knowing this is not the case, but I think anyone who thinks through the role and the player would conclude that Lathum is NOT the Police Chief.

10-25-2006, 10:03 AM	#135
Tyrith College Starter Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Houston, TX	Actually, screw all that. Lathum said he was gonna be gone all day. This is too overt to be a wolf move like that. Now I have other kinds of alarms going off. It's too early for all this.

10-25-2006, 10:03 AM	#137
hoopsguy General Manager Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Chicago	Let me clarify - I have the luxury of knowing Lathum is not the Police Chief by virtue of his vote for me. Anyone who does not know that I'm with STARS, but takes the time to consider the role and how Lathum might play it, should pretty quickly conclude that Lathum is NOT the Police Chief.

10-25-2006, 10:07 AM	#139
hoopsguy General Manager Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Chicago	In terms of Lathum, after having played with him as a wolf last game, I would suggest that putting votes on him is an effective way to encourage participation even when he is "going to be away all day". Yes, he is out for stretches of the day but my perception was that he definitely was willing to give the villagers time to trip over themselves. I have no idea if Lathum is a good guy or a bad guy here. I just know he is not the Police Chief based on his vote. And that voting for me on Day 1, based on specious logic (is there any other kind on Day 1? fair point) that I considered killing him last game is foolish.

10-25-2006, 10:08 AM	#140
spleen1015 Coordinator Join Date: Sep 2003	I'm going to believe in hoops this game because of odds. He was a wolf last game and that game was pretty big. This game is also pretty big, so him being a wolf is pretty slim.

10-25-2006, 10:09 AM	#142
Tyrith College Starter Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Houston, TX	Yeah, referring to what hoops was saying, I don't think the chief would be so brazen as to start pulling stunts like that immediately. He's going to be too valuable to our long term plans to take the chance it massively backfires. Furthermore, I would like to think that the people in these games are honest about their real lives and about when they aren't going to be around -- gaming to that degree seems over our unwritten line, personally. So I'm inclined to think the vote doesn't mean anything.

10-25-2006, 10:11 AM	#144
BrianD Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Appleton, WI	Switching topics a bit, is there any reason that Umbrella would want to create Nemesis? It would "take care of" a STARS member, but it would also create another zombie which might eat them. I'm not sure I get the point of this...

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)