Split Seer Lists

[LuckayLuck]

Split Seer Lists. Basic Concept: If the seers are named, the seers can split the player list in half, one seer covers half of the list, the other seer covers the other half.

Main Pro: Seer peeks are not duplicated
Secondary Pro: It's possible to disguise your peeks well, because if you're assigned to peeking the A-H list, and you've peeked 2 of them as villagers, you can have a villager list of 2 people from the A-H list and 3 people from the I-Z list and it'll be certain that the A-H list is your peeks (of course, now you have to be more subtle than that since I just revealed this strategy to the wolves, lol)

Main Con: There may simply be more people one wants to peek on the other side of the list.
Secondary Con: If the split seer list is followed, once one seer goes down, the wolves know particularly to look for the seer who's been peeking the other side of the list.



Personally, I believe that split seer lists are mega-good, since duplicating peeks sucks. Each peek is an additional CONFIRMED VILLAGER. This is obvious, but it sounds better when the words "confirmed villager" are attached. Most theme werewolf games on this forum are imbalanced in favor sometimes because there are too many confirmed villagers. Duh. Duplicating a seer peek = -1 confirmed villager. The suck.

[lastchance]

Depends on the game and the value of a villager peek vs. a wolf peek.

In a normal AS game, hell yes divide up the seer list.

[antidan444]

If it's possible to do, I'm all for it. This should be common sense.

[traz]

I think it sucks, is not in the spirit of the game, and just isn't fun. In any game I mod, I will not give the seers names

[wdcbooks]

I would not name the seers as a mod and make this impossible. However, in a game with named seers this is clearly within the rules and clearly good. The mess comes with how you make absolutely sure that each seer knows which side of the list to peek and how to make sure that everyone agrees.

[Neil S]

I think it's a doubtful idea.

Seers must give hints in case they are killed. These hints must be clear enough once re-read to find them. Wolves have the same information the villagers have when looking for those hints.

Anyone whose hints favor one half of the list over the other, or whose hints are CORRECT always on one side of the list, will therefore be a target for the wolves.

So it only works safely if you can fake seer as accurately as you can do the real thing.

[FCBLComish]

[ QUOTE ]
I would not name the seers as a mod and make this impossible. However, in a game with named seers this is clearly within the rules and clearly good. The mess comes with how you make absolutely sure that each seer knows which side of the list to peek and how to make sure that everyone agrees.

[/ QUOTE ]

In some games it is good, while in others (LOTR etc) it really sucks. If the seers are absolutely equal, and they have no other special abilities, it may be ok, provided it is a villager who makes up the peek list.

Having said that, what if all the wolves are alphabetically on one side of the list or the other? One seer will have good peeks, the other not so good. I think most of our players are good enough that they should be able to peek those people they think are wolfy, not restricted to a certain half of the list.

METAGAME- If I am a seer in one of these games, I will primarily stick to my half, unless I see a reason to deviate. If so, I will have no problem whatsoever peeking whoever the heck I want to for whatever reason I deem fit.

[lastchance]

[ QUOTE ]

Having said that, what if all the wolves are alphabetically on one side of the list or the other? One seer will have good peeks, the other not so good.

[/ QUOTE ]
Think about it mathematically. It's really the same as having both seers peek.

Also, remember, if you think about peeking someone (on the other half of the list), the other seer has probably already peeked this person.

[FCBLComish]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Having said that, what if all the wolves are alphabetically on one side of the list or the other? One seer will have good peeks, the other not so good.

[/ QUOTE ]
Think about it mathematically. It's really the same as having both seers peek.

Also, remember, if you think about peeking someone (on the other half of the list), the other seer has probably already peeked this person.

[/ QUOTE ]


Hypothetically, Xorbie, Zurvan and Xoom are the three wolfiest posters day 1. Shall I assume the M-Z seer will be able to peek all 3 of them?

Each game is different. Sometimes the split list will work, and sometimes it will not. The individual seers will have to decide if and when to deviate from basic strategy, just as a good card counter will.

[LuckayLuck]

[ QUOTE ]
Hypothetically, Xorbie, Zurvan and Xoom are the three wolfiest posters day 1. Shall I assume the M-Z seer will be able to peek all 3 of them?


[/ QUOTE ]
yeah, he can peek them over 3 days
it's not always best to post the wolfiest posters anyways, since you want your peeks to live a long life

if the A-M seer were to peek xoom, the M-Z seer would probably eventually peek xoom anyways, so the split list is nearly always optimal