WW: LXXXIV - Middle Earth in Fifteen Minutes

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

what seems to me by far the most viable option: the wolves believed what Sally said and decided to kill her so as to avoid killing gifteds (ie avoid the heir's power taking effect) and kind of throwing the ball back to us.

Which makes us have the ball. (Wow what a wonderful speech this is shaping to be! ) I'm inclined to follow Nerwen's lead in what she said before she died: we're facing the same dilemma toDay as we faced yesterDay, so we had better accept the grim situation and start hunting wolves. Otherwise the wolves devour us while we wait them to hit the heir first. On the positive side, I think they can't try to avoid gifteds much longer either because basically all the gifteds become more dangerous for the evil side as the game proceeds.

Hmm, it is a tricky one. How many ordos have we left? (I'll count in a minute.)

Should we just accept that we have to hunt wolves or should we perhaps think about lynching our Hunter today? It guarantees that the Heir becomes another Hunter, and it takes a shot at killing someone else at the same time. Could be a wolf, could not; but it's the same chance as getting a wolf as our lynching would be, and it gets us the Heir as guaranteed.

Just thinking out loud here; please judge the idea critically.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Five ordos left, one of whom is the heir. Surely it won't go back and forth too long.

[Loslote]

Originally Posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim

Should we just accept that we have to hunt wolves or should we perhaps think about lynching our Hunter today? It guarantees that the Heir becomes another Hunter, and it takes a shot at killing someone else at the same time. Could be a wolf, could not; but it's the same chance as getting a wolf as our lynching would be, and it gets us the Heir as guaranteed.

It'd be better to lynch the Hunter toDay than yesterDay would have been, certainly - we worry less about the Hunter choosing wrongly.

Technically, the Heir doesn't actually need to ever come in play - in the wolves' minds. With three (three? I think three) Gifteds, if the wolves kill off all the ordos, that's it. We either need to hope the wolves accidentally hit a Gifted overNight, or we lynch a Gifted ourselves. The wolves won't take care of the problem for us, at least not if they can help it.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by Loslote

It'd be better to lynch the Hunter toDay than yesterDay would have been, certainly - we worry less about the Hunter choosing wrongly.

Technically, the Heir doesn't actually need to ever come in play - in the wolves' minds. With three (three? I think three) Gifteds, if the wolves kill off all the ordos, that's it. We either need to hope the wolves accidentally hit a Gifted overNight, or we lynch a Gifted ourselves. The wolves won't take care of the problem for us, at least not if they can help it.

Loslote, I am most happy to assume and believe that our wonderful and clever Hunter is going to choose correctly.

I am going to look at Sally's posts as I didn't have the chance to do it earlier. Not that I doubt the analysis of my fellow villagers but it's always good to check the evidence for yourself. A seer hint is still possible.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

I will more or less have to vote randomly again today as I'm going to be swamped with busyness for the remainder of the week, as I'm needed to moderate for this academic/jeopardy-like tournament area schools are competing in.

So, with my apologies of apalling inactivity and to to the Master Mod. I may be on late may not...

++Lommy



This logic just seems all too suspicious, and rather clever. Lommy's in fact pointing attention to the strange Nerwen votes, which she herself was a part of. It looks like an attempt to be fair and reasonable by drawing suspicion on something she did, in an attempt to exonerate herself from voting Nerwen.

I don't really follow the line of reasoning here. I thought Lommy was just saying in general that she thought analysing the Day 1 votes would have limited value because most were so ill-reasoned as to seem nearly random. I didn't pick up anything furry there.

Originally Posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim

Should we just accept that we have to hunt wolves or should we perhaps think about lynching our Hunter today? It guarantees that the Heir becomes another Hunter, and it takes a shot at killing someone else at the same time. Could be a wolf, could not; but it's the same chance as getting a wolf as our lynching would be, and it gets us the Heir as guaranteed.

I might support this, at this point. In addition to giving the chance of hitting a wolf and putting the Heir on the innocent side, there's something else I hadn't considered before: it would also be the only way we'd have of knowing for certain whether a revealed Gifted was legitimate or not, since obviously only the real Hunter will be able to take someone with him. The Heir replacing any other role leaves a lot of room for doubt as to the alignment of the one killed, unless the wolves Night-kill our first Gifted. If that happened, the most we'd know is that the deceased was innocent.

[Loslote]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

I might support this, at this point. In addition to giving the chance of hitting a wolf and putting the Heir on the innocent side, there's something else I hadn't considered before: it would also be the only way we'd have of knowing for certain whether a revealed Gifted was legitimate or not, since obviously only the real Hunter will be able to take someone with him. The Heir replacing any other role leaves a lot of room for doubt as to the alignment of the one killed, unless the wolves Night-kill our first Gifted. If that happened, the most we'd know is that the deceased was innocent.

You may be potentially evil, but that's actually a good point.

[Nogrod]

I have only managed to read the rest of yesterDay thus far but I'm going to go back into the thread in a moment. But before that I think I wish to raise a general point about our best interests and some quite suspicious behaviour related to it.

I don't understand why some of you wish to lynch the hunter. If the hunter is lynched s/he will take anyone with her/him. So early on there is a very imminent possibility lynching the hunter will mean losing two goodies with one lynch. If the wolves kill the hunter during the night s/he will not kill an innocent in retaliation but can take a wolf (and we'd gain a new hunter).

So let's hope the wolves get the hunter and not us.

If we need to consider lynching a gifted - which is an option we might face soon enough - I do suggest we go for the ranger (if the ranger is willing to sacrifice her/himself) because s/he is immediately re-installed and the new one can continue in the role.

Obviously the importance of the heir grows every lynching/killing-chance going by. Basically, the later it gets for the heir to jump in, the more decisive that event is.

I'm not sure if we'd need to try that already toDay (needs to do some counting and thinking), but if no wolf or gifted is dead by toMorrow I think we have no choice.

Okay, back to read.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Nah, I reckon Lommy called it. Good kill from the wolves. Nothing progresses.

[Nogrod]

This is plain crazy.

The wolves don't wish to kill the gifteds and we probably should hesitate lynching the wolves... especially if the game goes on for a Day or two. On the contrary, we need to consider lynching a gifted and the wolves probably hope at least in a half-hearted way that we'd get one of them before any gifted is dead...

This makes no sense.


In a way getting over and done with the heir would be most happy thing and we could start a real game. This just frustrates me. I mean really: I don't know whether lynching a wolf toDay is a good thing, I don't know if sacrifying a gifted is a good idea, I don't know how many ordinaries we can afford losing before the game turns into one where the balance of the whole game hangs on a thread of just good/bad luck with one decision either side makes...

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

This is plain crazy.

The wolves don't wish to kill the gifteds and we probably should hesitate lynching the wolves... especially if the game goes on for a Day or two. On the contrary, we need to consider lynching a gifted and the wolves probably hope at least in a half-hearted way that we'd get one of them before any gifted is dead...

This makes no sense.


In a way getting over and done with the heir would be most happy thing and we could start a real game. This just frustrates me. I mean really: I don't know whether lynching a wolf toDay is a good thing, I don't know if sacrifying a gifted is a good idea, I don't know how many ordinaries we can afford losing before the game turns into one where the balance of the whole game hangs on a thread of just good/bad luck with one decision either side makes...

I don't know whether Shasta invented this role or just borrowed it, but it's really great!

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

I don't understand why some of you wish to lynch the hunter. If the hunter is lynched s/he will take anyone with her/him. So early on there is a very imminent possibility lynching the hunter will mean losing two goodies with one lynch. If the wolves kill the hunter during the night s/he will not kill an innocent in retaliation but can take a wolf (and we'd gain a new hunter).

So let's hope the wolves get the hunter and not us.

Yes, but it guarantees there will be no additional wolf. It gives us a chance of taking down a wolf today (which is exactly the same as a normal lynch would give). All it really does differently is speed up the process of dead goodies, but with one certain benefit as compensation.

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim

Yes, but it guarantees there will be no additional wolf. It gives us a chance of taking down a wolf today (which is exactly the same as a normal lynch would give). All it really does differently is speed up the process of dead goodies, but with one certain benefit as compensation.

Lynching the ranger does the "compensation" (that we get the heir: the role of the gifted we lynch stays in the game) as well without the risk of losing two innocents.

[Nogrod]

Don't get me wrong though. Unless we have better ideas, let's go for the wolves with all we have. If not for anything else, it's according to the spirit of the game.

The problem - if you haven't thoiught about it - is that if we lynch a wolf we don't know we have done that, and thus we can't make any deductions on the basis of the relations that the lynched "role-haver" had with others + we'll have a "newborn" wolf which are always the hardest to hunt down as you can't use the first Days as basis of trying to figure them out.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

Don't get me wrong though. Unless we have better ideas, let's go for the wolves with all we have. If not for anything else, it's according to the spirit of the game.

The problem - if you haven't thoiught about it - is that if we lynch a wolf we don't know we have done that, and thus we can't make any deductions on the basis of the relations that the lynched "role-haver" had with others + we'll have a "newborn" wolf which are always the hardest to hunt down as you can't use the first Days as basis of trying to figure them out.

That's the beauty of killing the hunter, as Inzi pointed out. We would know exactly where we stand.

We don't have that with the guardian, though I accept it would be preferable.

[A Little Green]

Phew, what a day, only got here now, will try my best. So.

First off, I agree with Lommy on why Sally was killed - to find her seerish would have required the wolves assuming a double-bluffing Sally-seer.

Originally Posted by Lommy

To be honest I don't know what sense voting Nerwen made - aren't weirdness and "unproductiveness" much more usual signs of ordoishness than of wolvishness? I think the voting reasons of everybody in the nerwagon (including myself) are silly, but so were mostly the reasons of other votes. I think the biggest dilemma regarding analysing yesterDay is whether we can use the votes as valid anything or not, because a big part of the village was thinking they might as well vote random...

I agree with pretty much everything she says here, but I also get Boro's point about why there's something off here. It goes without saying that an honest villager can admit to making mistakes. However, the tone reminds me a bit of someone hastily pointing out their own flaws so that others can't do it. But then again, some of the stuff she has said has struck me as stuff a wolf wouldn't want to say.

Originally Posted by Eomer

Should we just accept that we have to hunt wolves or should we perhaps think about lynching our Hunter today? It guarantees that the Heir becomes another Hunter, and it takes a shot at killing someone else at the same time. Could be a wolf, could not; but it's the same chance as getting a wolf as our lynching would be, and it gets us the Heir as guaranteed.

Just thinking out loud here; please judge the idea critically.

Right now I think that is as good a plan as any. However if we want to do that the Hunter should come out rather soon because European bed-time is approaching.

Originally Posted by Nog

I don't understand why some of you wish to lynch the hunter. If the hunter is lynched s/he will take anyone with her/him. So early on there is a very imminent possibility lynching the hunter will mean losing two goodies with one lynch. If the wolves kill the hunter during the night s/he will not kill an innocent in retaliation but can take a wolf (and we'd gain a new hunter).

So let's hope the wolves get the hunter and not us.

If we need to consider lynching a gifted - which is an option we might face soon enough - I do suggest we go for the ranger (if the ranger is willing to sacrifice her/himself) because s/he is immediately re-installed and the new one can continue in the role.

Like Inzil said, killing the Hunter has the advantage that we can actually tell what role the Heir assumes. If we go with your plan and lynch the Ranger, there's always the possibility we lynch a false Ranger instead and would never be any the wiser. (Though how probable is it that the wolves want to take the risk and have one of them fake-reveal?) In any case, leaving the Hunter to the wolves would include an assumption that the wolves hit the exact one person they want to avoid of the ten-ish possibilities.

Nog is bothering me a little. Maybe it's just because I don't see his point, but my initial reaction was as follows. A wolf would really object to lynching the Hunter, if only deep inside his furry self. A bold wolf would say it aloud and hope to turn the village around.


EDIT: x-ed with Egg-nog and 2x Eomer

[wilwarin538]

Ok. I'm sorta here now. This is really the worst time for me to be playing a game (got 3 exams in the next 4 days, and I work for a greeting card company so Christmas season + Greeting cards = a busy busy me). I'm really sorry!

So I think the Hunter plan is still our best bet. Like Eomer said it still gives us the option of getting a wolf today and we guarantee that the Heir is on our side, and like Inzil said it's the only Gifted where we know for sure who it is, with the other's there's no way of knowing whether they were good or bad.

If we don't get this Heir business out of the way soon we're all going to go mad. Right now we're all trying not to kill a Wolf, and the Wolves are trying not to kill Gifteds, it's all screwy and so none of us know what to do. I think it's worth taking the chance.

I'll try to come back soon!

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by A Little Green

Like Inzil said, killing the Hunter has the advantage that we can actually tell what role the Heir assumes. If we go with your plan and lynch the Ranger, there's always the possibility we lynch a false Ranger instead and would never be any the wiser. (Though how probable is it that the wolves want to take the risk and have one of them fake-reveal?)

We will not be any wiser whomever we lynch if that person has a role, but the hunter of course. But lynching the hunter on D2 gives a great probability of losing another innocent - or even a gifted. The hunter would have a 30% chance of getting a wolf against 60% (70%) to kill an innocent, to be exact. That's hardly worth the risk. If we're in this situation tomorrow (meaning only innocents have been killed) I'd reconsider my stance as the odds of getting a wolf (and the desperation of getting rid of this "hanging situation") would be bigger then.

But actually, you bring out a hair-rising prospect: if I was a wolf I'd be more than happy to sacrifice myself. That would guarantee the heir takes the wolves' side and the murky new wolf would be just an ace to their game - not forgetting that we'd be still in darkness about whether I was a gifted or a wolf so nothing conclusive could be said about my interactions with others... So I mean, if they want to do that, they can do it.

In any case, leaving the Hunter to the wolves would include an assumption that the wolves hit the exact one person they want to avoid of the ten-ish possibilities.

That's a chance among others. I'm not claiming it would be an obvious or probable choice - but it would be a much more preferable way for the hunter to go than going by lynching.

A wolf would really object to lynching the Hunter, if only deep inside his furry self. A bold wolf would say it aloud and hope to turn the village around.

Here I do disagree. If I was a wolf I'd love the scenario where the innocents would take a 2/3 chance to kill an additional innocent. I'd understand wolves being afraid of killing the hunter on D4 (if there was this situation then aka. the heir wouldn't have yet been picked).

EDIT: x-ed with Wilwa