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

[econophile]

books

who needs seers?

[DustinG]

[ QUOTE ]
if i'm reading durron's rules right, the possible seer allocations are:

<font class="small">Code:</font><hr /><pre>normal plus insane paranoid plus naive useless
8 10 6
7 12 5
6 12 6
5 12 7
4 14 6
3 14 7
2 14 8 </pre><hr />

[/ QUOTE ]

You have it wrong. There are more useless seers than paranoids/naives, and more paranoids/naives than normal/insane.

[ QUOTE ]

# Useless Seer is within 1 of # Paranoid Useless (so like 37 of each or 37 of one and 38 of the other, obviously those numbers are wrong)

Both of those have more of each than

Paranoid = Naive; these are the same.

Both of those have more of each than Normal and Insane, which are also within 1 (so there are 5 normal seers and 5 insane seers, or 4 and 5, etc. but not 3 and 5).


[/ QUOTE ]

[Neil S]

If peeking the dead works, we're in great shape, heh.

[econophile]

dustin,

durron says that the number of useless is within 1 of the paranoid, but does not say that there are more useless than paranoid.

[HerbieGRD]

[ QUOTE ]
if i'm reading durron's rules right, the possible seer allocations are:

<font class="small">Code:</font><hr /><pre>normal plus insane paranoid plus naive useless
8 10 6
7 12 5
6 12 6
5 12 7
4 14 6
3 14 7
2 14 8 </pre><hr />

[/ QUOTE ]
I believe the rules are
Useless = (Paranoid useless +-1)
Paranoid = Naive
Regular = (Insane +-1)
(U+PU) &gt; (P+N) &gt; (R+I)

The above chart is....not right. I will work out all possible combos when I get some time here at work if no one else has done it already.

[econophile]

ack dustin

you're right . . . didn't realize there were 6 types of seers.

[DustinG]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also as my previous posts imply it is imperative that everyone post their correct peeks every day and not FPS them even if you suspect that you are a real seer and may get eaten for posting it (Luckay I am talking to you).

[/ QUOTE ]Hmmm... the question is, who gets the greater information advantage if we all pool our data? I'm leaning against this being a good idea but I'm not sure yet. If they're not finding out who we peeked until after we did it, they can't mess it up. I'll have to think about it.

[/ QUOTE ]
If we don't pool our data then we are essentially playing an average speed game with no seers. The only way that the village will ever get any useful information this game is by compiling peeks and figuring out who could be what kind of seer.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this helps the wolfs a lot more than it helps us. They are going to be able to start narrowing it down quicker, and to make nightkills that really screw us up if we try and read into them too much.

But that is also their dilemma too- if we all post of our peeks, and the wolves then go an off somebody who implicates them they have a problem. But they also can't just let possible seers either. I think if we all coordinated early then we could probably get one or two wolfs as a result before our useful/paranoid seers got killed off (and the wolfs will know who they before we do). And then after that we could have no seers with 5 wolfs still out there.

[Zurvan]

[ QUOTE ]

I think we play normally for the first few days and try to lynch a wolf. If you get a wolf response from your peek I would then either peek yourself or a dead villager to see if they come back 'villager'. That is the easiest way to narrow down the type of seer you are. You could still be useless under that scenario, but you are more likely to be a straight seer or insane which is almost as good.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can't peek yourself or dead people.

[Zurvan]

Oh yeah, my strategy contribution. I hesitate to say this, because as soon as I post it, most people will decide to do the opposite.

But, the first 3 or 4 days, you should be trying to peek people that are likely to die, to calibrate your seerness as much as possible. We should not be posting peek info. That allows the wolves to [censored] with us too much, and narrows down the real seer possibilities for them very quickly.

Once you think you have yourself nailed down in terms of usefulness, then come out. If you think you're a real seer, try to get a few peeks of people unlikely to die. If you think you're NOT a real seer, say so, and say why. But listing peeks daily is ridiculous. Durron might as well post a list of real seers in thread on Wednesday for the wolves.

[MDoranD]

[ QUOTE ]
Also as my previous posts imply it is imperative that everyone post their correct peeks every day and not FPS them even if you suspect that you are a real seer and may get eaten for posting it (Luckay I am talking to you).

[/ QUOTE ]

herbie,

why would we do this? Seems like the wolves will have 1/2 of us crossed off their "real seer" list on the 1st day.