The Syndicate

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:If someone out there is a bad guy trying to acquire power, I think it's more likely he/she/they'd be among the people making a show of their candidacy (banners, Trump impersonations, etc).

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Golden wrote:Jay, why did you vote for yourself?

I think I'm suited for the task and I got sick of all the anti-me paranoia. I'm not really seeing much to instill confidence about other people anyway. Perhaps I'm arrogant, but oh well. I also expected to be gone through the deadline, but apparently me and sleep don't mix right now.

Jay, I have a question for you.

Here you noted you got sick of anti-you paranoia. Did you think any player's paranoia was specifically either or both: (I) particularly illogical or unwarranted; (II) suspicious at face value?

I) I would say it is illogical yes, but still understandable. It comes with the territory when I play the way I play.

II) I've been considering this though Day 0. The prevailing narrative has been that I am a civilian asset and a dangerous baddie, so it might not be worth the risk of putting power in my hands. What hasn't been acknowledged is that this works both ways -- baddies can have the same ulterior motive to resist me receiving power as a townie that I could have as a baddie myself pursuing that power. I've decided though that I don't think it's suspicious. Those who promoted this perspective the most (DDL, Bass, and Scotty perhaps among others) did so in such a way that it appears more like genuine paranoia than an underhanded tactic to weaken my influence. If someone out there is a bad guy trying to acquire power, I think it's more likely he/she/they'd be among the people making a show of their candidacy (banners, Trump impersonations, etc).

Yellow: Should I take this to mean you believe these players are more likely civilian than not at this point, even if barely, or is it completely alignment indicative?

Orange: Does this mean you find anyone doing this to be suspicious at this time, even if barely?

Bah, error. Completely NOT alignment indicative*.

To clarify and provide input to my own inquiries, I have nothing at the moment. My rainbow list is all yellow. Let's try and fix that.

MovingPictures07 wrote:Yellow: Should I take this to mean you believe these players are more likely civilian than not at this point, even if barely, or is it completely alignment indicative?

I would lean civilian on them right now. I am trying to eliminate/significantly reduce total neutrality in my Mafia play, because I think it's useless -- so they'd be town reads GTH.

MovingPictures07 wrote:Orange: Does this mean you find anyone doing this to be suspicious at this time, even if barely?

"Suspicious" is a stronger word than I'd use for it, but their conduct makes me less inclined to support their prefect candidacy rather than more. I think the baddies will have a stronger motive than the average townie to get at least one of their number among the three prefects, so I'd theorize they're more likely to promote themselves however they must. It's a guess.

I think you bring up a good point though, Sock. Jay, why are you sick of anti-you paranoia on Day 0?

Turnip Head wrote:I think you bring up a good point though, Sock. Jay, why are you sick of anti-you paranoia on Day 0?

It's annoying to be at the center of consistent illogical paranoia even when it's understandable.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Yellow: Should I take this to mean you believe these players are more likely civilian than not at this point, even if barely, or is it completely alignment indicative?

I would lean civilian on them right now. I am trying to eliminate/significantly reduce total neutrality in my Mafia play, because I think it's useless -- so they'd be town reads GTH.

MovingPictures07 wrote:Orange: Does this mean you find anyone doing this to be suspicious at this time, even if barely?

"Suspicious" is a stronger word than I'd use for it, but their conduct makes me less inclined to support their prefect candidacy rather than more. I think the baddies will have a stronger motive than the average townie to get at least one of their number among the three prefects, so I'd theorize they're more likely to promote themselves however they must. It's a guess.

I agree that total neutrality is useless, but I feel I'd have to force myself to see something that isn't there to declare anyone a GTH read worth anything, so while I find your civilian leanings intriguing and worth discussion, I disagree there.

I do think that the mafia will have motive to get one of their number among the three prefects, but having hosted many times, I know baddie teams usually are disorganized, especially this early in the game. So I'm not inclined to throw suspicion at anyone trying really hard to become a prefect, because I can justify that it could be coming from a civilian really wanting to help out their team as well.

I think the better question now is: Why did you not share these thoughts until I pressed you for them, if you really hold GTH reads on players based on their Day 0 activity, even if slightly? Wouldn't it be prudent for a civilian JJJ to bring this up earlier in the Day 0 period as a matter of formal discussion, rather than to passively say "I'm sick of anti-me paranoia"? I'd argue that the way you approached this was anti-conducive to starting conversation regarding reads and opinions among the thread, which is what a civilian should strive to do.

Went with daisy and eloh. Girls ftw

@Jay I didn't get the impression that there was any serious, actionable paranoia about you, though. Did you? And would you not want to process that paranoia into your reads of players?

MovingPictures07 wrote:I agree that total neutrality is useless, but I feel I'd have to force myself to see something that isn't there to declare anyone a GTH read worth anything, so while I find your civilian leanings intriguing and worth discussion, I disagree there.

I do think that the mafia will have motive to get one of their number among the three prefects, but having hosted many times, I know baddie teams usually are disorganized, especially this early in the game. So I'm not inclined to throw suspicion at anyone trying really hard to become a prefect, because I can justify that it could be coming from a civilian really wanting to help out their team as well.

I think the better question now is: Why did you not share these thoughts until I pressed you for them, if you really hold GTH reads on players based on their Day 0 activity, even if slightly? Wouldn't it be prudent for a civilian JJJ to bring this up earlier in the Day 0 period as a matter of formal discussion, rather than to passively say "I'm sick of anti-me paranoia"? I'd argue that the way you approached this was anti-conducive to starting conversation regarding reads and opinions among the thread, which is what a civilian should strive to do.

I'm actively trying not to blow this thread up in Day 0. I don't want this massive player list to be filled with lurkers, and nothing inspires people to not bother with a game thread than one that gets away from them before the game even actually starts. I know this is atypical of my usual shtick, but it's what I've decided to do in this game. I am not going out of my way to say things and promote discussion, at least not yet. I'll do that when there's a proper lynch poll.

Turnip Head wrote:@Jay I didn't get the impression that there was any serious, actionable paranoia about you, though. Did you? And would you not want to process that paranoia into your reads of players?

I don't think it was "serious" either. But it was still annoying. I do want to process that paranoia into my reads -- I just talked about that with MP.

If it's unclear, this is specifically what I have found "annoying":

"We should be wary of supporting JJJ for prefect, if he's bad it could be a disaster.

On the other hand, I like this guy's cute picture." *vote*

Yeah I see that. Your replies make sense, which I will certainly process in my own read of you

Linki: it's Day 0, are you surprised by randomness?

I want S~V~S to be second in command.

And I will be leader.

Simon wrote:I want S~V~S to be second in command.

And I will be leader.

I love that the Epi emoji is that.

Also, what's up? Why SVS?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:I agree that total neutrality is useless, but I feel I'd have to force myself to see something that isn't there to declare anyone a GTH read worth anything, so while I find your civilian leanings intriguing and worth discussion, I disagree there.

I do think that the mafia will have motive to get one of their number among the three prefects, but having hosted many times, I know baddie teams usually are disorganized, especially this early in the game. So I'm not inclined to throw suspicion at anyone trying really hard to become a prefect, because I can justify that it could be coming from a civilian really wanting to help out their team as well.

I think the better question now is: Why did you not share these thoughts until I pressed you for them, if you really hold GTH reads on players based on their Day 0 activity, even if slightly? Wouldn't it be prudent for a civilian JJJ to bring this up earlier in the Day 0 period as a matter of formal discussion, rather than to passively say "I'm sick of anti-me paranoia"? I'd argue that the way you approached this was anti-conducive to starting conversation regarding reads and opinions among the thread, which is what a civilian should strive to do.

I'm actively trying not to blow this thread up in Day 0. I don't want this massive player list to be filled with lurkers, and nothing inspires people to not bother with a game thread than one that gets away from them before the game even actually starts. I know this is atypical of my usual shtick, but it's what I've decided to do in this game. I am not going out of my way to say things and promote discussion, at least not yet. I'll do that when there's a proper lynch poll.

That's fair enough. Thanks for elaborating.

I haven't even read anything yet, but I realized the poll was about to close so I voted quickly. Hopefully it won't bite me later on.

I'll check in and catch up properly later today.

MP you liar, you wouldn't write walls of texts in this game, and here are you doing it.

(This is not a critiscism though, feel free to keep doing them)

Also I love Simon's avatar. Gengar is the best pokemon.

I'll catch up in three hours or so.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:MP you liar, you wouldn't write walls of texts in this game, and here are you doing it.

(This is not a critiscism though, feel free to keep doing them)

Also I love Simon's avatar. Gengar is the best pokemon.

I'll catch up in three hours or so.

Hey I never said anything about walls of text, just being active and posty.

If anything, the fact that I'm around less will increase the chance that I will be posting walls of text, but within less posts and probably still less content overall.

It's possible I'll be even less active than I was going to be originally. My wisdom tooth socket got an infection so I'm now taking more medicine for that, which is making me kind of sick. I've got two assignments due on top of that so whenever I'm feeling good I'll probably prioritise that. With that said, I promise I'll still post and vote every day but I can't guarantee that you'll be hearing from me a lot (at least until tuesday - the day my assignments are due)

Please bear with me, but if you can't, I understand.

---

On a game related note, I'm curious about the dialogue between JJJ and TH. TH picked out the 'anti-JJJ paranoia' thing from JJJ's posts and he's kind of run with it as though it's something more significant than I think it is. What's your thinking behind this, TH?

I brought it up because I don't think a civilian Jay should have much reason to be paranoid this early in the game, but maybe a baddie Jay does.

Quin wrote:It's possible I'll be even less active than I was going to be originally. My wisdom tooth socket got an infection so I'm now taking more medicine for that, which is making me kind of sick. I've got two assignments due on top of that so whenever I'm feeling good I'll probably prioritise that. With that said, I promise I'll still post and vote every day but I can't guarantee that you'll be hearing from me a lot (at least until tuesday - the day my assignments are due)

Please bear with me, but if you can't, I understand.

---

On a game related note, I'm curious about the dialogue between JJJ and TH. TH picked out the 'anti-JJJ paranoia' thing from JJJ's posts and he's kind of run with it as though it's something more significant than I think it is. What's your thinking behind this, TH?

Why are you curious about that dialogue and not mine with JJJ?

Who will be your prefects? Choose wisely!

Poll ended at Wed Aug 17, 2016 2:33 pm

Bass_the_Clever
0
No votes

birdwithteeth11
0
No votes

Boomslang
0
No votes

Bubbles
1
Golden (19)
2%

Bullzeye
0
No votes

DFaraday
0
No votes

DisgruntledPorcupine
0
No votes

Dom
1
Dom (49)
2%

Dragon D. Luffy
3
Turnip Head (13), Scotty (33), Dragon D. Luffy (41)
5%

DrWilgy
4
Metalmarsh89 (2), insertnamehere (9), Bullzeye (35), Jan (37)
6%

Dunny
0
No votes

Elohcin
3
Elohcin (16), nutella (53), Sorsha (57)
5%

Glorfindel
0
No votes

Golden
1
Quin (24)
2%

insertnamehere
8
leetic (8), nijuukyugou (17), Boomslang (40), Dragon D. Luffy (42), timmer (43), Russtifinko (45), Dunny (51), birdwithteeth11 (61)
13%

JaggedJimmyJay
8
Metalmarsh89 (3), TheCapsFan (6), MovingPictures07 (11), Elohcin (15), sig (22), Russtifinko (46), JaggedJimmyJay (48), Glorfindel (56)
13%

Jan
0
No votes

leetic
1
insertnamehere (10)
2%

LoRab
0
No votes

MacDougall
0
No votes

Metalmarsh89
1
Boomslang (39)
2%

MovingPictures07
1
TheCapsFan (5)
2%

Nerolunar
0
No votes

nijuukyugou
2
Dom (50), nutella (54)
3%

nutella
1
Spacedaisy (25)
2%

Quin
2
Turnip Head (14), Golden (20)
3%

rabbit8
1
Bass_the_Clever (27)
2%

Russtifinko
0
No votes

Scotty
8
Nerolunar (29), DFaraday (32), Scotty (34), Bullzeye (36), JaggedJimmyJay (47), Dunny (52), Glorfindel (55), birdwithteeth11 (62)
13%

sig
3
sig (21), Nerolunar (30), Jan (38)
5%

Simon
1
Simon (59)
2%

Soneji
0
No votes

Sorsha
0
No votes

Spacedaisy
3
nijuukyugou (18), timmer (44), Sorsha (58)
5%

S~V~S
2
Bass_the_Clever (28), Simon (60)
3%

TheCapsFan
2
leetic (7), MovingPictures07 (12)
3%

timmer
1
Spacedaisy (26)
2%

Turnip Head
2
Quin (23), DFaraday (31)
3%

He Jin (The Host, the Non, the Dead)
2
Epignosis (1), juliets (4)
3%


Total votes : 62

What follows is an account of the three chosen prefects, whose appointments coincided with the rise of the Yellow Turban revolt and the emergence of the menace from Nanzhong.

Jagged Jimmyjay, whose courtesy name was Mehniposts, was from the province of Rym, where he had established himself as a man of wisdom. People sought his advice on many subjects, and he was especially consulted on judicial matters. However, he was a man known equally for his impropriety. When invited to have tea with an administrator, he wore improper clothing and used incorrect dishes and utensils. He unknowingly said things that caused embarrassment for the administrator’s wife. When it came time to appoint new prefects, his supporters asked that his clumsy behavior be overlooked in favor of his jurisprudential insight.

In a neighboring province called J’tm lived a shrewd businessman named Scot Ty. Before continuing, there is a proverb from that province that says, “Count on your ass to have less to count,” which comes from when Scot Ty was concentrating on his suanpan while riding a donkey through the village. When something spooked the beast, the preoccupied rider lost control and was deposited into a merchant’s tent. Many of the merchant’s wares were ruined, and Scot Ty had to provide a recompense. Despite this setback, Scot Ty engaged in one successful venture after another, and his political supporters all said that his business accomplishments made him suitable for the office of prefect.

It is now time to turn to Insert Namhere. He had a notorious reputation in the province of Me-Dia for his wanton vanity and anger. It was said that the wife of some official, who was rumored to be a witch, had cast a spell on him as a child, such that whenever anyone spoke his name in his presence, he became more powerful than before. Because of this, he demanded that all in his house speak his name whenever anyone was in the same room as he was. One day, a servant insisted on using his courtesy name instead. Insert Namhere ordered the servant taken outside, where he was whipped until he had said his master’s name twenty-five times. Because of the prodigious fear in the land over Insert Namhere’s accumulated power, he was made a prefect so that he would be appeased.

The following chapters will unfold what becomes of these three men.

Wait we have to choose another three prefects?

I think Epi might have copypasted the format from the previous write-up and forgot to edit it.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I swear y'all should go to 100 posts per page. I'm not even into page 3! Obviously the thread is the same length, but it feels less overwhelming to me when I look down at the page clickers.

Oddly enough, it's always been the opposite for me -- I get overwhelmed and impatient scrolling through long pages. I can't stand anything above 20ppp. I think that continuously clicking onto next pages holds my attention span and feels like I'm progressing through the thread faster.


Congrats to our newly elected and most honorable prefects.

Thanks to my voters, you're all obviously awesome people, and now let's get started lynching baddies.

So these prefects are now characters in the FT?

Thank you for your kindness, supporters!

I'll have you all know I am now invulnerable to death, but please don't lynch or night kill me to make certain.

This Scot Ty fellow is a good apple. I lol'd

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Quin wrote:It's possible I'll be even less active than I was going to be originally. My wisdom tooth socket got an infection so I'm now taking more medicine for that, which is making me kind of sick. I've got two assignments due on top of that so whenever I'm feeling good I'll probably prioritise that. With that said, I promise I'll still post and vote every day but I can't guarantee that you'll be hearing from me a lot (at least until tuesday - the day my assignments are due)

Please bear with me, but if you can't, I understand.

---

On a game related note, I'm curious about the dialogue between JJJ and TH. TH picked out the 'anti-JJJ paranoia' thing from JJJ's posts and he's kind of run with it as though it's something more significant than I think it is. What's your thinking behind this, TH?

Why are you curious about that dialogue and not mine with JJJ?

I'd just read that first post and that caught my attention so I went through his conversation, which left me wanting. I didn't even think to go back and read what you had said actually. It was like 2 in the morning.

I've since read yours though, and I don't think I'd have asked you anyway. You've given lots of detail and I agree with your sentiments.

MovingPictures07 wrote:So I would also like to hear more from DDL on why he was harping on that and whether he found anyone suspicious for Day 0 activity.

Just arguing against something I disagreed with. One thing I like to do the most in mafia games is pointing out people's BS. So if I see BS, I quickly reach for the reply button.

I realize that kind of makes me an hypocrite because I made an even less informed vote, but I'd rather be an hypocrite than not say the things I notice in a game.

And I saw a bunch of random posts that looked somewhat suspicious, but not enough to be worth building a case on someone, or heck, reeading back in the thread to list them all. Sorry.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Golden wrote:Jay, why did you vote for yourself?

I think I'm suited for the task and I got sick of all the anti-me paranoia. I'm not really seeing much to instill confidence about other people anyway. Perhaps I'm arrogant, but oh well. I also expected to be gone through the deadline, but apparently me and sleep don't mix right now.

Jay, I have a question for you.

Here you noted you got sick of anti-you paranoia. Did you think any player's paranoia was specifically either or both: (I) particularly illogical or unwarranted; (II) suspicious at face value?

I) I would say it is illogical yes, but still understandable. It comes with the territory when I play the way I play.

II) I've been considering this though Day 0. The prevailing narrative has been that I am a civilian asset and a dangerous baddie, so it might not be worth the risk of putting power in my hands. What hasn't been acknowledged is that this works both ways -- baddies can have the same ulterior motive to resist me receiving power as a townie that I could have as a baddie myself pursuing that power. I've decided though that I don't think it's suspicious. Those who promoted this perspective the most (DDL, Bass, and Scotty perhaps among others) did so in such a way that it appears more like genuine paranoia than an underhanded tactic to weaken my influence. If someone out there is a bad guy trying to acquire power, I think it's more likely he/she/they'd be among the people making a show of their candidacy (banners, Trump impersonations, etc).

To be fair I was more worried about the idea of people blindly following you, than whether you might be tricking us or something. At this point of the game hardly anything a player does matters much.

I just don't want to see, 5 cycles from now, someone going "I trust Jay. He had been leading town since the start!" Because that is where the danger lies.

Quin wrote:It's possible I'll be even less active than I was going to be originally. My wisdom tooth socket got an infection so I'm now taking more medicine for that, which is making me kind of sick. I've got two assignments due on top of that so whenever I'm feeling good I'll probably prioritise that. With that said, I promise I'll still post and vote every day but I can't guarantee that you'll be hearing from me a lot (at least until tuesday - the day my assignments are due)

Please bear with me, but if you can't, I understand.

---

On a game related note, I'm curious about the dialogue between JJJ and TH. TH picked out the 'anti-JJJ paranoia' thing from JJJ's posts and he's kind of run with it as though it's something more significant than I think it is. What's your thinking behind this, TH?

Hope you get better soon.

nutella wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I swear y'all should go to 100 posts per page. I'm not even into page 3! Obviously the thread is the same length, but it feels less overwhelming to me when I look down at the page clickers.

Oddly enough, it's always been the opposite for me -- I get overwhelmed and impatient scrolling through long pages. I can't stand anything above 20ppp. I think that continuously clicking onto next pages holds my attention span and feels like I'm progressing through the thread faster.

I second this post.

Quin wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Quin wrote:It's possible I'll be even less active than I was going to be originally. My wisdom tooth socket got an infection so I'm now taking more medicine for that, which is making me kind of sick. I've got two assignments due on top of that so whenever I'm feeling good I'll probably prioritise that. With that said, I promise I'll still post and vote every day but I can't guarantee that you'll be hearing from me a lot (at least until tuesday - the day my assignments are due)

Please bear with me, but if you can't, I understand.

---

On a game related note, I'm curious about the dialogue between JJJ and TH. TH picked out the 'anti-JJJ paranoia' thing from JJJ's posts and he's kind of run with it as though it's something more significant than I think it is. What's your thinking behind this, TH?

Why are you curious about that dialogue and not mine with JJJ?

I'd just read that first post and that caught my attention so I went through his conversation, which left me wanting. I didn't even think to go back and read what you had said actually. It was like 2 in the morning.

I've since read yours though, and I don't think I'd have asked you anyway. You've given lots of detail and I agree with your sentiments.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:So I would also like to hear more from DDL on why he was harping on that and whether he found anyone suspicious for Day 0 activity.

Just arguing against something I disagreed with. One thing I like to do the most in mafia games is pointing out people's BS. So if I see BS, I quickly reach for the reply button.

I realize that kind of makes me an hypocrite because I made an even less informed vote, but I'd rather be an hypocrite than not say the things I notice in a game.

And I saw a bunch of random posts that looked somewhat suspicious, but not enough to be worth building a case on someone, or heck, reeading back in the thread to list them all. Sorry.

No need to apologize, just wanted an elaboration. Trying to make conversation and understand where your head is at.

Going back on posts to see if I could find anything useful...

Russtifinko wrote:Agreed, JJJ.

Hey, I REALLY like the idea of the "whoever does ____ first, gets my votes" posts. They prevent people from finding excuses to give votes to baddie teammates. So I'm gonna do one too, and would suggest others do the same (even though it's an itsy bit late for a few).

The first two people to post pictures or emojis of platypi earn my votes.

I found this logic to be kind of forced. Like he just wanted to make a post that looked informed while forfeiting the need to decide a vote for himself.

And organized real time plans involving 20+ players in mafia games never work.

This post of mine is really overreaching though which says a lot about how bad my reads are at this point.

So who wants to talk about this duel mechanic? It seems we would want to nominate the two most suspicious players (in lieu of one) similar to lynching, but is that necessarily the case? What if a player is suspicious but has a role type that is stronger in duels and keeps winning them? What do you all think?

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:So I would also like to hear more from DDL on why he was harping on that and whether he found anyone suspicious for Day 0 activity.

Just arguing against something I disagreed with. One thing I like to do the most in mafia games is pointing out people's BS. So if I see BS, I quickly reach for the reply button.

I realize that kind of makes me an hypocrite because I made an even less informed vote, but I'd rather be an hypocrite than not say the things I notice in a game.

And I saw a bunch of random posts that looked somewhat suspicious, but not enough to be worth building a case on someone, or heck, reeading back in the thread to list them all. Sorry.

No need to apologize, just wanted an elaboration. Trying to make conversation and understand where your head is at.

Nice. And the apology wasn't needed anyway because I actually ended up going reading back the thread.

MovingPictures07 wrote:So who wants to talk about this duel mechanic? It seems we would want to nominate the two most suspicious players (in lieu of one) similar to lynching, but is that necessarily the case? What if a player is suspicious but has a role type that is stronger in duels and keeps winning them? What do you all think?

In the immediate presence I don't think we should worry much about this when making our selections, but it might become more important as the game progresses and we develop a better understanding of players' potential dueling strength.

The two "baddie" factions appear to be the Yellow Turbans and the Nanman. Their dueling prowess is as follows:

Yellow Turbans:
1 leader - d6
2 strategists - d4
(all secrets)

Nanman:
1 leader - d6
4 warriors - d8

Purely from a dueling perspective, the Nanman appear significantly more potent. We'll need to keep that in mind as we proceed. Indeed, it might even be worth considering combining a town read with a baddie read in our voting pattern to try to arrange a winnable duel. That might even amount to people volunteering themselves to enter a duel if there is a consensus suspect present. I hope enough people are able to withhold their votes long enough for those discussions to develop.

The Yellow Turbans don't have the strength in their dice, but all three of them have *secrets* which I am sure are meant to make up the difference somehow.

EBWOP

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:In the immediate present

Hey kids, you know what time is it?

It's time for MATH!

Let's assume the duels are decided by the roll of dice, like the first post said, but not by anything else (such as stats or abilities), which we don't know. Also let's assume that in the event of a tie in the dice, a random player dies.

Alright, so these are the duel odds:

Warrior vs Strategist:

Warrior wins 75% of the time, Strategist wins 25%. In other words, Warrior wins 3 of every 4 duels.

[bLeader vs Strategist:[/b]

Leader wins 66.67% of the time, Strategist wins 33.33%. In other words, Leader wins 2 of every 3 duels.

Warrior vs Leader:

Warrior wins 62.5% of the time, Leader wins 37.5%. In other words, Warrior wins 5 of every 8 duels.

My opinion is that we should just lynch the people we want to see dead the most. But in case of endgame situations, putting a warrior on the battlefield against a strategist just to get the strategist killed sounds like a smart move. I mean, look at those odds. Of course, that's assuming we know who are the warrior and the strategist.

Host:

If you're able to say, what is the result of a tied roll in a duel?

MovingPictures07 wrote:So who wants to talk about this duel mechanic? It seems we would want to nominate the two most suspicious players (in lieu of one) similar to lynching, but is that necessarily the case? What if a player is suspicious but has a role type that is stronger in duels and keeps winning them? What do you all think?

Ah, MP, always wanting to talk mechanics :P I can see where you're coming from; if we were able to identify a strong dueling civ, we could put him or her up against the suspect for a better chance at a death. However, and this is important, the rules for warriors say "most likely to win in a duel." It's not a guarantee, it would seem. On the negative side, that strategy would identify good NK targets for the baddies. And if we try to get two baddies in a duel and succeed, one of them is destined for death

However, the civs have many more warriors than the baddies. So picking one from each list (suspected civs and suspected baddies) for each night might actually be a good call.
Linki: Just as JJJ put a little more eloquently.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Host:

If you're able to say, what is the result of a tied roll in a duel?

Another bout.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:My opinion is that we should just lynch the people we want to see dead the most. But in case of endgame situations, putting a warrior on the battlefield against a strategist just to get the strategist killed sounds like a smart move. I mean, look at those odds. Of course, that's assuming we know who are the warrior and the strategist.

It's difficult to say. I think people would have to volunteer themselves for a duel, but that could also approach the realm of infodumping. It's also a risk to expose those people to night kills. It may be better to just pit suspect against suspect. We'll learn more as we go I'd imagine.

I wasn't really thinking of volunteering. I was thinking more along the lines of "X is probably a warrior. They won 3 duels. Y is probably a strategist because of night action analysis or whatever. We want Y dead. [Votes X]."