Re: Hacker Attack (All Info Game Thread - Feb 19 Start)
 

[ QUOTE ]
SKIP THIS POST IF YOU DON'T CARE ABOUT THE MATH DETAILS

Ok I am just getting into the math now - lets start with this. The possibility of wolfy manipulation is being ignored for now. If you are a regular (R), insane(I), useless(U), or paranoid useless(PU) seer you have a

.5% chance of peeking 0 of your "type"
5.2% chance of peeking 1 of your "type"
22.3% chance of peeking 2 of your "type"
42.2% chance of peeking 3 of your "type"
29.8% chance of peeking 4 of your "type"

If you are regular or useless your "type" is good
If you are insane or paranoid useless your "type" is evil

Obviously if you are paranoid(P) or naive(N) you have a 100% chance of peeking 4 of your "type"

The seer distributions below are {R/I, P/N, U/PU} - the order of R/I and U/PU are not relevent

I believe that there are 4 reasonable guesses for starting seer distributions: {2/2, 3/3, 7/7} or {2/2, 4/4, 6/6} or{1/2, 4/4, 7/6} or {2/3, 4/4, 6/5}. While other combinations are possible within the rules they contain either 2 or 6 useful seers which I find unlikely.

This is all foundational stuff - I will post some analysis in a little bit

[/ QUOTE ]
Fnord - for you

Re: Hacker Attack (All Info Game Thread - Feb 19 Start)
 

This is what I have so far dan:

http://i119.photobucket.com/albums/o...r/untitled.jpg

Re: Hacker Attack (All Info Game Thread - Feb 19 Start)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Then I think bluff has a very high probability of being a real seer.

[/ QUOTE ]

no [censored] you "think" so. i think there's a VERY good chance that bluff was railroaded by some wolves because it would look this way.

fwiw, the odds of a useless seer splitting peeks is fairly high (around 25%).

Re: Hacker Attack (All Info Game Thread - Feb 19 Start)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Analysis

Using the distributions in my previous post the odds of someone who has at least one good peek and one evil peek is about 17% useful 30% wolf and 53% useless. If we go under the assumption that any individual is not a wolf that means they are useful 24% of the time and useless 76% of the time. I will be using the "not a wolf" assumption for the rest of the math in this post. I am also still using the "no wolfy manipulation" assumption.

The person we have the most information about right now is Traz. He is clearly useless (no offense Traz). Other than that the person we have the most information about is Amplify. If we assume that Amp is either insane or paranoid useless and then account for the fact that he has two data points supporting the idea of him being insane then it is 36% likely that he is an insane seer and 64% that he is paranoid useless. If Luckay is a wolf then it is 67% likely that Amp is an insane seer and only 33% that he is paranoid useless. If Luckay and Xorbie are both wolves it becomes 88% that Amp is an insane seer and only 12% that he is paranoid useless.

I am actually doubting my math here as these are not the conclusions I expected to reach - I did not expect our peeks to be worth so little at this point - especially considering I am using the most optimistic assumptions possible (Amp is never a wolf and no wolf interfered with any of Amp's peeks). If someone wants to run through this themselves that would be great - I am afraid I am doing it wrong.

Cliff notes - peeks are virtually worthless right now but I may have done the math wrong

[/ QUOTE ]
And the follow up analysis post

Re: Hacker Attack (All Info Game Thread - Feb 19 Start)
 

After reading/editing a dozen basketball boxscores in addition to studying the peek stuff, I'm about to poke my eyes out with a fork. My head hurts.

Re: Hacker Attack (All Info Game Thread - Feb 19 Start)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Then I think bluff has a very high probability of being a real seer.

[/ QUOTE ]

no [censored] you "think" so. i think there's a VERY good chance that bluff was railroaded by some wolves because it would look this way.

fwiw, the odds of a useless seer splitting peeks is fairly high (around 25%).

[/ QUOTE ]

Ummmm, I think that because of the 2/2 split and because he has me correct. I wasn't here for the railroading yesterday, but my vote was on neil, again, because he is the correct lynch still. Stephen is an accecptable lynch, and wdc might be fine as well. I have you peeking me evil, bluff peeking me good, and an almost certain paranoid peeking me evil.

Re: Hacker Attack (All Info Game Thread - Feb 19 Start)
 

tfg is an almost certain paranoid peeking you as evil?

Re: Hacker Attack (All Info Game Thread - Feb 19 Start)
 

BTW, my last post is slightly off. I have the gray cells as peeks that could have been given, but weren't. Chuckles could either fall into the gray cell or X category, depending on how you look at it. He was silenced, so he couldn't reveal it, but he wasn't dead yet.

Re: Hacker Attack (All Info Game Thread - Feb 19 Start)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Then I think bluff has a very high probability of being a real seer.

[/ QUOTE ]

no [censored] you "think" so. i think there's a VERY good chance that bluff was railroaded by some wolves because it would look this way.

fwiw, the odds of a useless seer splitting peeks is fairly high (around 25%).

[/ QUOTE ]

Ummmm, I think that because of the 2/2 split and because he has me correct. I wasn't here for the railroading yesterday, but my vote was on neil, again, because he is the correct lynch still. Stephen is an accecptable lynch, and wdc might be fine as well. I have you peeking me evil, bluff peeking me good, and an almost certain paranoid peeking me evil.

[/ QUOTE ]

I peeked you good. I could still be Paranoid, though.

Re: Hacker Attack (All Info Game Thread - Feb 19 Start)
 

[ QUOTE ]
tfg is an almost certain paranoid peeking you as evil?

[/ QUOTE ]

ummmm zurvan maybe?