#1
|
|||
|
|||
Pretty boring strategy which should define \"good player\"
Setup: Vanilla game
If you are villager/seer just make one post every day "I am a villager" If you are a wolf just make one post every day "I am a wolf" Be 100% honest. If everyone plays like this, village wins every game, wolves lose every game. So basically this means to be a good player, you need an average win rate over all roles that is > 1-chances_of_being_wolf This is higher than expected because I always assumed 60% is a very good win rate. This is probably also very obvious, just wnated to put it up here. Now let's get the turbo league going and see who can achive that 1-3/13 = 77% win rate. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Pretty boring strategy which should define \"good player\"
the flaw in your reasoning IMO is that the wolves won't follow the strategy. In theory, with a correctly balanced game with just good/evil, anything above 50% means you're better than expected, but in practice many of the theme games aren't balanced and/or contain neutral roles.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Pretty boring strategy which should define \"good player\"
what u are proposing is not a balanced game
a 13-er is considered pretty balanced...if we assume that it is balanced, then you should win 50% of the time, no matter what side u are randed to...so anything >50% over the very long run would mean you are better than average |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Pretty boring strategy which should define \"good player\"
I'm just saying there is a dumb strategy that gives everyone a 77% win rate in a 13er. So I'm thinking to be really good you'd have to beat that.
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Pretty boring strategy which should define \"good player\"
i don't think that works
for that strategy to work, everyone has to follow it...if everyone does, it's no longer a balanced game (it's also basically impossible to get >77% over infinite trials if everyone follows that each game)...u've essentially changed the game by having everyone play that strategy...same thing as making it part of the ruleset a 13er is balanced, so 50% is rand() win rate...anything above is better than average... |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Pretty boring strategy which should define \"good player\"
Clown: that's not the win % of a good player. That's the % of the time you're a villager. Your theory is fundamentally flawed.
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Pretty boring strategy which should define \"good player\"
[ QUOTE ]
I'm just saying there is a dumb strategy that gives everyone a 77% win rate in a 13er. So I'm thinking to be really good you'd have to beat that. [/ QUOTE ] so you're not proposing it as an actual strategy from which to deviate, you're just using the resulting win% as a benchmark to establish a win % for a good player? ok, fair enough. Personally I think the village should win more but I have always been a village homer. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Pretty boring strategy which should define \"good player\"
What a useless thread
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Pretty boring strategy which should define \"good player\"
I'm saying a good player might give up his chances of winning as a wolf for a gurantee to win everytime as a villager or try to get as close to this as possible. This might be flawed and even dumb but I think it's a fair trade.
At least it should show people that it might not be such a good idea to mix up your village game to improve the wolf game simply because one is villager far more often. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Pretty boring strategy which should define \"good player\"
also to humor clownface
The goal isn't to win ~75% of the time ninny. It's to win 100% of the time. Your "strategy" renders that impossible. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|