My plan is to mass lynch into this world to confirm people as quickly as possible. Should be like this:
day 1 - we send scummiest player into the other world - they lynch their scummiest player
day 2 - we lynch scummiest player - they send us their towniest player
day3 - we send scummiest player - they lynch who we sent
...
...
This is the quickest way to do it. Of course if that would cut our ability to lynch in the other world we can adapt. We can read the other fucking thread and derive info from it.

yamato77

11589 Posts

December 12 2012 03:51 GMT

#42

So if we are swapping non hyper-town, non hyper-scum players, how about just swapping the lurkers? They aren't going to help us on lynch day and they don't hurt the other thread on their swap day.

Just trying to come up with a solid characteristic to determine who we swap.

sandroba

Canada4998 Posts

December 12 2012 03:52 GMT

#43

@blazing why not take advantage of the information already provided to you if it's going to make your life easier?

yamato77

11589 Posts

December 12 2012 03:52 GMT

#44

Sort of a solution to the Lynch a Lurker dilemma. Instead of lynching them, we swap them so they are less of a liability.

sandroba

Canada4998 Posts

December 12 2012 03:53 GMT

#45

@yamato why? How does it further the town agenda to send a lurker to another world?

sandroba

Canada4998 Posts

December 12 2012 03:54 GMT

#46

???? How is sending them there make them less of a liabity? They are still alive, we still have to kill all anti town players.

sandroba

Canada4998 Posts

December 12 2012 03:59 GMT

#47

@kei i guess you mean who. We are still going to lynch trying to lynch scum. We just make sure every lynch starting from day 3 is from players from this world, so we have confirmed town as quickly as possible.

Blazinghand

United States25562 Posts

December 12 2012 04:00 GMT

#48

Yamato I don't like the lurker swap because it doesn't solve our problems or do anything useful. a townread swap is superior because it moves townies out of the way of the lynch, and doesn't risk moving scum out of the way of the lynch. It's better than this "swap scum" idea from sandro.

The issue isn't that I don't want to take advantage of info provided, the issue is that your plan makes it harder to lynch scum easily. Your plan to produce confirmed townies changes 2 lynches over the course of 4 cycles into 3 lynches into this pool, which is nice, but it takes a lynch out of the other pool and tacitly admits to mislynching (since the extra 3rd lynch is only useful if we mislynch). The simplest solution is to hunt scum in this pool, knowing there are 2, and lynch them. Not some weird swapping solution, and definitely not some weird swapping solution starting in 2 cycles.

Blazinghand

United States25562 Posts

December 12 2012 04:02 GMT

#49

I guess what I'm getting at is that the simplest solution is to swap townies and lynch scum. We don't want things getting crazy or getting chaotic. Our goal is to lynch scum and to make analysis and if we're swapping targets instead of lynching targets, we're making our job harder.

sandroba

Canada4998 Posts

December 12 2012 04:03 GMT

#50

@bh it's going to make d1 here 10x more productive. And it doesn't admit to mislynching because the day 3 here is a swap and if they lynch mafia and we lynched mafia on the previous day of course they aren't going to lynch whoever we send there.

Blazinghand

United States25562 Posts

December 12 2012 04:04 GMT

#51

All these weird swap plans that aren't like "lynch scum, swap town" are bad.

[image loading]

yamato77

11589 Posts

December 12 2012 04:07 GMT

#52

If you swap players who there is a consensus town read on, you skew the numbers away from the balanced starting position each thread starts in toward a scum favored one on lynch day.

Swapping lurkers or null read players makes them less of a liability on lynch day because it takes away a voice town doesn't want to lynch but also doesn't want to trust, plus it makes it easier to lunch a scum for town players because it potentially lowers the votes required to secure a lynch.

Swapping scum is bad because you're giving them another day of freedom to persuade town not to lynch them. Swapping our towniest players doesn't help them survive, as I once thought, it only takes away a town vote on lynch day.

So the only solid characteristic we can look or is players who aren't scummy but not very town favored either, a group that includes and is normally dominated by lurkers.

Blazinghand

United States25562 Posts

December 12 2012 04:08 GMT

#53

On December 12 2012 13:03 sandroba wrote:
@bh it's going to make d1 here 10x more productive. And it doesn't admit to mislynching because the day 3 here is a swap and if they lynch mafia and we lynched mafia on the previous day of course they aren't going to lynch whoever we send there.

Um ok clearly you haven't thought this through at all. Let me show you, you mostly-turqoise ham-shredder:

Day 1) they lynch scum, we swap them a scum
Day 2) they swap us a townie, we lynch a scum
day 3) they lynch our guy, he flips scum, we swap them someone
Day 4) They swap someone, and we're lynching into... only townies? wat

your plan is only useful because it adds one more lynch to our side by D4, but that's only useful if we mislynch-- if we get 2 lynches right, on D4 we're lynching into a pool of only townies.'

now can we stop it with these freaking plans

Blazinghand

United States25562 Posts

December 12 2012 04:09 GMT

#54

On December 12 2012 13:07 yamato77 wrote:
If you swap players who there is a consensus town read on, you skew the numbers away from the balanced starting position each thread starts in toward a scum favored one on lynch day.

Exactly! Yamato77 knows what's up. If we swap a townie, we're more likely to hit scum with our lynch statistically.

Blazinghand

United States25562 Posts

December 12 2012 04:13 GMT

#55

Oh also I'd be comfortable sending Sandro over. His ideas are bad but scum wouldn't come out swinging with a plan like that. I think he genuinely believes it's a good plan, and it's not like it's a plan that would be construed as good but secretly give scum an advantage-- it's just sub-optimal. Treating our vote here like a lynch vote would also stimulate discussion, as he mentioned. This strikes me as town motivated, and a town motivated explanation.

I'd still prefer me but Sandro is acceptable as a swap candidate.

sandroba

Canada4998 Posts

December 12 2012 04:14 GMT

#56

Hmm yes you have a point. At that point we would have to lynch the guy they thought is townie until they start sending their scum to us. Which could be solved by them sending us who they think is scum too. We just lynch from our pool first and the list is still confirmed.

GreYMisT

United States6736 Posts

December 12 2012 04:16 GMT

#57

Please Note: Swap votes are Plurality Vote While Lynch votes are Majority Vote.

This means a no-swap is impossible while a no-lynch is possible due to not reaching a majority on a player (#Players in world/2 + 1)

sandroba

Canada4998 Posts

December 12 2012 04:18 GMT

#58

I don't want to be sent cuz I want to be here on the lynch tomorrow. -sandro all you got left are dummies (j/k)
Let's pretend to agree to send scum. We can talk it over later on.

sandroba

Canada4998 Posts

December 12 2012 04:18 GMT

#59

Wow my plan is even better now. Sup.

sandroba

Canada4998 Posts

December 12 2012 04:22 GMT

#60

@yamato your ideia kinda makes sense, but it doesn't deal with the lurkers at all. They will just keep getting swapped and never getting lynched and that makes mafia more likely to lurk which is the opposite of what we want.