True Blood: Russel's Revenge Vanilla+ WW Game Thread - 10/24
10-24-2011
, 06:34 PM
10-24-2011
, 06:34 PM
10-24-2011
, 06:36 PM
10-24-2011
, 06:38 PM
10-24-2011
, 06:38 PM
Quote:
That's okay; according to sooted English isn't my first language, so I'm probably using it wrong anyway.
So, thoughts on how we can prevent the wolves from adding two people to their pack? Seems like they've got the advantage in finding the Lost Persons, since they can talk amongst themselves and w/e in figuring out likely targets. I don't know who in the village is responsible for selecting the Lost Person peek every night, but does this mean that we should basically openly search for the Lost Persons? Seems like a pretty big swing if we manage to get them both and shut the wolves out entirely.
So, thoughts on how we can prevent the wolves from adding two people to their pack? Seems like they've got the advantage in finding the Lost Persons, since they can talk amongst themselves and w/e in figuring out likely targets. I don't know who in the village is responsible for selecting the Lost Person peek every night, but does this mean that we should basically openly search for the Lost Persons? Seems like a pretty big swing if we manage to get them both and shut the wolves out entirely.
Quote:
Let me be clear:
If we can find the two Lost Persons before the wolves do, we functionally (1) gain two villagers; (2) kill two wolves; (3) gain a vig and a peek; and (4) prevent the wolves from gaining a vig and a peek. Surely achieving this outcome should take priority for the village, because this is a HUGE swing. The two complications are that, first, the Lost Persons presumably have no particular incentive to be found by one side rather than the other, and, second, the wolves can pool their resources in finding the two Lost Persons in a way that the village cannot (unless the village does so openly). Given all of this, how can/should the village maximize its chances of finding both Lost Persons before the wolves are able to do so?
Incidentally, I don't know whether Anarchist is correct about the village getting two Lost Person peeks per night (via the two seers) to the wolves' one peek per night. The OP states only that "[e]ach team gets a lost person peek," which implies that each side has an equal number of lost person peeks per night (specifically, one peek per night). Moreover, the wolves do not have a full-time seer -- they have a jack-of-all-trades, who has a peek among his abilities, but based on my experience in HP3 I assume (perhaps wrongly) that the wolf JOAT has to cycle through each of his abilities, which would mean that he could NOT use a peek every night -- which is, again, inconsistent with the wording for the Lost Person peeks. Rather, I suspect that the wolves get a "team peek" each night to find a Lost Person, just as the wolves get a team nightkill.
If we can find the two Lost Persons before the wolves do, we functionally (1) gain two villagers; (2) kill two wolves; (3) gain a vig and a peek; and (4) prevent the wolves from gaining a vig and a peek. Surely achieving this outcome should take priority for the village, because this is a HUGE swing. The two complications are that, first, the Lost Persons presumably have no particular incentive to be found by one side rather than the other, and, second, the wolves can pool their resources in finding the two Lost Persons in a way that the village cannot (unless the village does so openly). Given all of this, how can/should the village maximize its chances of finding both Lost Persons before the wolves are able to do so?
Incidentally, I don't know whether Anarchist is correct about the village getting two Lost Person peeks per night (via the two seers) to the wolves' one peek per night. The OP states only that "[e]ach team gets a lost person peek," which implies that each side has an equal number of lost person peeks per night (specifically, one peek per night). Moreover, the wolves do not have a full-time seer -- they have a jack-of-all-trades, who has a peek among his abilities, but based on my experience in HP3 I assume (perhaps wrongly) that the wolf JOAT has to cycle through each of his abilities, which would mean that he could NOT use a peek every night -- which is, again, inconsistent with the wording for the Lost Person peeks. Rather, I suspect that the wolves get a "team peek" each night to find a Lost Person, just as the wolves get a team nightkill.
Quote:
Actually, let me flip that so the villa can see how potentially screwed we are if we DON'T find the two Lost Persons first:
If the wolves find both Lost Persons, they gain two wolves, a one-time vig, AND a one-time peek. We're at 16 villa, 5 wolves, and 2 lost persons now. Let's say that we mislynch tonight and tomorrow (worst-case scenario, but by no means unlikely), and the wolves find one lost person on n1 and the other on n2. Forgetting about the villa and wolf vigs for the moment, and including the n1/n2 nightkills, that would put the balance at 12 villa and 7 wolves heading into d3 -- and the wolves would then have THREE nightkills on n3. Even if we assume that the wolf vig hits a villa on n1 and the villa vig hits a wolf on n2, we're still at 11 villa and 6 wolves at the start of d3 -- which means that a mislynch would put it at 7 villa and 6 wolves (OR MUST LYNCH) at the beginning of d4. As I said, obviously this is a near-worst case scenario, but it's still eminently plausible.
Simply put, WE NEED TO FIND THE LOST PERSONS BEFORE THE WOLVES DO.
If the wolves find both Lost Persons, they gain two wolves, a one-time vig, AND a one-time peek. We're at 16 villa, 5 wolves, and 2 lost persons now. Let's say that we mislynch tonight and tomorrow (worst-case scenario, but by no means unlikely), and the wolves find one lost person on n1 and the other on n2. Forgetting about the villa and wolf vigs for the moment, and including the n1/n2 nightkills, that would put the balance at 12 villa and 7 wolves heading into d3 -- and the wolves would then have THREE nightkills on n3. Even if we assume that the wolf vig hits a villa on n1 and the villa vig hits a wolf on n2, we're still at 11 villa and 6 wolves at the start of d3 -- which means that a mislynch would put it at 7 villa and 6 wolves (OR MUST LYNCH) at the beginning of d4. As I said, obviously this is a near-worst case scenario, but it's still eminently plausible.
Simply put, WE NEED TO FIND THE LOST PERSONS BEFORE THE WOLVES DO.
Quote:
Taking your last sentence first, I don't think it's at all clear that the village gets more lost person peeks per night than the wolves do -- in fact, I think the wording of the OP suggests that this isn't the case. Hopefully we can get some clarification on how the village is supposed to peek lost people, but until then I'm just assuming that there's some mechanic whereby each side gets one peek a night -- possibly the villa peek is hierarchical and handed down, as someone suggested earlier. And my intention is not to push this to the forefront to the exclusion of wolfhunting; I think we can and should be wolfhunting regardless, and to be honest I'm not exactly sure how we can go about maximizing the chances that the villa will be the one to find the lost people -- that's why I wanted to throw it open for discussion, because nobody was talking about it and it seemed like a crucial mechanic to me.
As to your other questions:
[1] I'd guess that the wolves are looking for Lost Persons in the same way that they generally look for lost wolves -- by reading over people's posts for potential signals. (Dagmar's Bat-signal pretty obviously comes to mind, but I'm sure they're looking for more subtle things than that as well.)
[2] I'd like to figure out if there's a way to optimize our ability to get the lost persons on our side without having to sacrifice them. If there isn't, I definitely think that sacrificing them to ensure that the wolves can't get/use them is a viable strategy, although perhaps one better employed in retrospect -- i.e., if kowboys announces that a lost person has been found but doesn't say which side has found them, then we can try to figure out whether they're more likely to have been found by villa, wolves, or both, and (if one of the latter) proceed from there by looking at past posts for signals and questioning players on that basis, much as we would with a lost wolf who has been found (see the recent Batman vanilla+ game for a great example of this).
[3] Both. The former more than the latter, I think, because a one-time vig and one-time seer are probably worth slightly more to the wolves than they are to the villa, and the extra numbers for the wolves obviously have a greater marginal value as well.
As to your other questions:
[1] I'd guess that the wolves are looking for Lost Persons in the same way that they generally look for lost wolves -- by reading over people's posts for potential signals. (Dagmar's Bat-signal pretty obviously comes to mind, but I'm sure they're looking for more subtle things than that as well.)
[2] I'd like to figure out if there's a way to optimize our ability to get the lost persons on our side without having to sacrifice them. If there isn't, I definitely think that sacrificing them to ensure that the wolves can't get/use them is a viable strategy, although perhaps one better employed in retrospect -- i.e., if kowboys announces that a lost person has been found but doesn't say which side has found them, then we can try to figure out whether they're more likely to have been found by villa, wolves, or both, and (if one of the latter) proceed from there by looking at past posts for signals and questioning players on that basis, much as we would with a lost wolf who has been found (see the recent Batman vanilla+ game for a great example of this).
[3] Both. The former more than the latter, I think, because a one-time vig and one-time seer are probably worth slightly more to the wolves than they are to the villa, and the extra numbers for the wolves obviously have a greater marginal value as well.
Clearly I would try to stimulate discussion about the fact that we could very easily face must lynch ON DAY FOUR if we don't figure out a good strategy about Lost Persons, when nobody else had apparently noticed this. Clearly. Makes total sense.
10-24-2011
, 06:39 PM
10-24-2011
, 06:40 PM
10-24-2011
, 06:40 PM
10-24-2011
, 06:44 PM
