[Galayn Lord]

Anyways...i have loads of work to do will check in often though.

[Kalse]

Galayn Lord, on 17 March 2010 - 08:53 AM, said:

Wait wait....

I just had a thought.

The VC for the Watch are:

Day watch Destroy the night watch
Night Watch destroy the day watch

Maybe the Watches have to do the killing THEMSELVES to for fill the conditions?
Maybe a lynch does not count untill after the inquisition is all gone?...as of now a lynch is essentially a kill by the inquisition!!

Can PS confirm?...

That would be the most ridiculous thing ever, as basically any lynch on the opposing side would then disrupt a watches chance at victory, in which case, we'd be best advised with running trains on anyone remotely suspicious/ because we hate their avatar.

This post has been edited by Kalse: 17 March 2010 - 09:12 AM

[Kalse]

Galayn Lord, on 17 March 2010 - 09:03 AM, said:

Kalse, on 17 March 2010 - 08:42 AM, said:

To team inno, the very best stance is to keep the waters muddied, making sure the sides can't read one another or get a grip. We win when at day 10 there are still members of both watches alive. Hence, it seems to be that the best way to do this, is make sure they remain hidden amongst the crowd, also giving the Inquisition a chance to hide, too. Any of them stepping out to play or direct others, are probably watch members.

Sad but true, Inno equates inactivity to me, for now, as the best way to victory.

yup like i said innos are faction fodder...

Just on the bold part, not only do they need both watch factions alive on day 10 to win, they also have to have both sides balanced aswell.
So day 10 comes and one watch faction has 5 and the other 3 they have to get the sides balanced to get the victory. So it would seem the game wont necessarily end on day ten, could be long after too?



edit - bad punctuation fucked up sentence, plus typos

It depends on how you define balanced... I suggested balanced in numbers, but I also figured it could mean nothing more than both watches not having achieved their conditions. I may have misread, but saw nowhere that P-S corrected this.

[Galayn Lord]

Kalse, on 17 March 2010 - 09:11 AM, said:

Galayn Lord, on 17 March 2010 - 08:53 AM, said:

Wait wait....

I just had a thought.

The VC for the Watch are:

Day watch Destroy the night watch
Night Watch destroy the day watch

Maybe the Watches have to do the killing THEMSELVES to for fill the conditions?
Maybe a lynch does not count untill after the inquisition is all gone?...as of now a lynch is essentially a kill by the inquisition!!

Can PS confirm?...

That would be the most ridiculous thing ever, as basically any lynch on the opposing side would then disrupt a watches chance at victory, in which case, we'd be best advised with running trains on anyone remotely suspicious/ because we hate their avatar.

Suppose you are right.

[Galayn Lord]

Kalse, on 17 March 2010 - 09:16 AM, said:

Galayn Lord, on 17 March 2010 - 09:03 AM, said:

Kalse, on 17 March 2010 - 08:42 AM, said:

To team inno, the very best stance is to keep the waters muddied, making sure the sides can't read one another or get a grip. We win when at day 10 there are still members of both watches alive. Hence, it seems to be that the best way to do this, is make sure they remain hidden amongst the crowd, also giving the Inquisition a chance to hide, too. Any of them stepping out to play or direct others, are probably watch members.

Sad but true, Inno equates inactivity to me, for now, as the best way to victory.

yup like i said innos are faction fodder...

Just on the bold part, not only do they need both watch factions alive on day 10 to win, they also have to have both sides balanced aswell.
So day 10 comes and one watch faction has 5 and the other 3 they have to get the sides balanced to get the victory. So it would seem the game wont necessarily end on day ten, could be long after too?



edit - bad punctuation fucked up sentence, plus typos

It depends on how you define balanced... I suggested balanced in numbers, but I also figured it could mean nothing more than both watches not having achieved their conditions. I may have misread, but saw nowhere that P-S corrected this.

well if one watch achieves their VC...they win... so thats a given.
Maintaining balance must mean something other than simply not letting the other side win surely.

[Galayn Lord]

General King, on 15 March 2010 - 06:59 PM, said:

VC

Inquisition survive for ten days and maintain the balance.

That reads to me AND maintain the balance.
Surviving for 10 days would already mean not letting a Watch win...why then add the "balance" bit.

Its either numerical values or some other thing we have no idea of... So ill stick the numerical till something better comes up





edit - changed "as" to "add"

This post has been edited by Galayn Lord: 17 March 2010 - 09:23 AM

[Kalse]

Galayn Lord, on 17 March 2010 - 09:22 AM, said:

General King, on 15 March 2010 - 06:59 PM, said:

VC

Inquisition survive for ten days and maintain the balance.

That reads to me AND maintain the balance.
Surviving for 10 days would already mean not letting a Watch win...why then as the "balance" bit.

Its either numerical values or some other thing we have no idea of... So ill stick the numerical till something better comes up

Nope, not necessarily. The Inquisition can also die without any of the watches winning. All the bolded says is that if the Inquisition is eliminated anywhere between day 1-10 means they lose, not that a watch wins. Of course, if a watch wins before 10 days are over, Inq loses, alive or dead.

However, the time limit of 10 days in itself is so long that I can hardly think we'll play on for much longer after that. 10 days - with a weekend break, is two weeks!

[Alkend]

Galayn Lord, on 17 March 2010 - 08:50 AM, said:

alright im back and caught up.

It seems to me the best bet for now would be to carry on as if the watch are the main scum. But the Inquisition can and should be treated as scum as well, as i will explain further down.
For now never the less...Keeping the inquisition around are, by the looks of things, our best hope of victory.

Our initial VC is that ALL factions must be killed off... But with the info we have, it seems that it is impossible for us to kill off both NW and DW at the same time.
One will die first giving automatic victory to the other...
But there must be a reason why PS said initially we win by killing off all the factions...correct?... with no mention of if the inquisition wins we win too?

You might want to read the opening post again.

General King, on 15 March 2010 - 06:59 PM, said:

VC

Inquisition survive for ten days and maintain the balance.

Day Watch destroy the Night Watch

Night Watch destroy the Day Watch.

RI all other factions destroyed or Inquisition wins.

We do win if the Inquisition wins. So we definitely don't want to treat them as scum!

[Galayn Lord]

Kalse, on 17 March 2010 - 09:28 AM, said:

Nope, not necessarily. The Inquisition can also die without any of the watches winning. All the bolded says is that if the Inquisition is eliminated anywhere between day 1-10 means they lose, not that a watch wins. Of course, if a watch wins before 10 days are over, Inq loses, alive or dead.

yes...necessarily!!
AGAIN...why then does PS insert the BALANCE bit?
Because if it was simply to last 10 Days... that essentially means that they would have to prevented any Watches from winning ASWELL AS surviving (which obvious)
The balance part need not be inserted.

They are HERE TO KEEP THE BALANCE...does that mean to simply not let the watches win?...well then all RI's are also here to keep balance.
No I think i am right here...the inquisition have a two part Victory condition.

It would be so much easier if PS could just confirm this i dont see why not...meh

[Alkend]

GL, it is also possible that 'balance' means "not separated by more than x, let's say 3, surviving members". So if one team doesn't lose anyone, recruits 2 members, and one of the opposing team's member's dies, they win. 'Balance' is a very broad term to use. XD

EDIT: For grammar.

This post has been edited by Alkend: 17 March 2010 - 09:43 AM

[Kalse]

Alkend, on 17 March 2010 - 09:42 AM, said:

GL, it is also possible that 'balance' means "not separated by more than x, let's say 3, surviving members". So if one team doesn't lose anyone, recruits 2 members, and one of the opposing team's member's dies, they win. 'Balance' is a very broad term to use. XD

EDIT: For grammar.

THIS.

THIS

THIS

This post has been edited by Kalse: 17 March 2010 - 09:44 AM

[Galayn Lord]

Alkend, on 17 March 2010 - 09:37 AM, said:

We do win if the Inquisition wins. So we definitely don't want to treat them as scum!

what i meant is that it doesn't matter if we do end up targeting them by mistake.

If we see people acting as a pair we dont have to worry about them being Inquisition...because they control the bloody lynch outcome.

Maybe wrong choice of words but yea...we can ESSENTIALLY treat them as scum. But we dont need to right now.
One of our conditions is ALSO to kill ALL factions...in fact that was our only condition till PS realized the logic error in our conditions.

But for now i agree i dont see any other option but to help the inquisition.

[Galayn Lord]

Kalse, on 17 March 2010 - 09:43 AM, said:

Alkend, on 17 March 2010 - 09:42 AM, said:

GL, it is also possible that 'balance' means "not separated by more than x, let's say 3, surviving members". So if one team doesn't lose anyone, recruits 2 members, and one of the opposing team's member's dies, they win. 'Balance' is a very broad term to use. XD

EDIT: For grammar.

THIS.

THIS

THIS

Ofcourse thats possible Alkend...

Kalse, it looked to me like you were just excluding the whole balance thing entirely...THAT is what i was trying to get through to you.

[Alkend]

Galayn Lord, on 17 March 2010 - 09:44 AM, said:

Alkend, on 17 March 2010 - 09:37 AM, said:

We do win if the Inquisition wins. So we definitely don't want to treat them as scum!

what i meant is that it doesn't matter if we do end up targeting them by mistake.

If we see people acting as a pair we dont have to worry about them being Inquisition...because they control the bloody lynch outcome.

Maybe wrong choice of words but yea...we can ESSENTIALLY treat them as scum. But we dont need to right now.
One of our conditions is ALSO to kill ALL factions...in fact that was our only condition till PS realized the logic error in our conditions.

But for now i agree i dont see any other option but to help the inquisition.

The inquisition may control the lynch outcome, but we're not sure to what extent. See earlier where I speculated that they may not be able to prevent their own lynch. Not disagreeing with you on the practice of lynching people freely due to the supposed control the inquisition has, though. Just pointing out that it might not be complete.

[Kalse]

Galayn Lord, on 17 March 2010 - 09:47 AM, said:

Kalse, on 17 March 2010 - 09:43 AM, said:

Alkend, on 17 March 2010 - 09:42 AM, said:

GL, it is also possible that 'balance' means "not separated by more than x, let's say 3, surviving members". So if one team doesn't lose anyone, recruits 2 members, and one of the opposing team's member's dies, they win. 'Balance' is a very broad term to use. XD

EDIT: For grammar.

THIS.

THIS

THIS

Ofcourse thats possible Alkend...

Kalse, it looked to me like you were just excluding the whole balance thing entirely...THAT is what i was trying to get through to you.

fair enough - I was not entirely discounting it, just not applying the narrow sense of player numbers having to be the same for both watches.

[Serc]

Kalse, on 17 March 2010 - 08:42 AM, said:

Serc, on 17 March 2010 - 06:27 AM, said:

Voting night doesnt seem like a great idea to me. With plus-minus 8 RI and two recruiters, I doubt there will be a single RI left past day 6, basically you're saying you'd rather sit around and wait to be recruited than play as an RI. With no idea what's going on at night we have to be proactive during the day. I think the best bet at this point is to look for recruiters and try get one early. Hopefully the inquisition will see the value in this and let the lynch go through, since the quickest way for the inquisition to win would be to take both recruiters out early. I know the chances of hitting two recruiters early on is slim, but let's at least have an established game-plan here - it might make it easier to spot someone who has been recruited if they start to deviate from it.

Except that the Inquisition needs to keep both sides (day and night) around to keep the balance, or so I read the VCs.
So, why would they want to remove the prime balancing tool to overcome setbacks/ lucky pot shots? It is much more beneficial to take out the vigs/killers and so ensure that the Inquisitor(s) survive the game, ensuring also RI victory.

One more thing about the advantage of cutting days short and sitting things out:
It is the day & night watch that must play and profit from active play as they need to sort out who is with whom and who they must take out. Maybe they have night actions to that effect, maybe they don't - who knows.

To team inno, the very best stance is to keep the waters muddied, making sure the sides can't read one another or get a grip. We win when at day 10 there are still members of both watches alive. Hence, it seems to be that the best way to do this, is make sure they remain hidden amongst the crowd, also giving the Inquisition a chance to hide, too. Any of them stepping out to play or direct others, are probably watch members.

Sad but true, Inno equates inactivity to me, for now, as the best way to victory.

Checking in quick, I have to disagree with this line of reasoning. Yes, at this point the RI's best chance of winning is siding with the inquisition. For the inquisition, not having anyone do anything works out fine, but as an RI it's a terrible idea. If we're not actively trying to cripple the watches by removing the recruiters, by the time day 10 comes round, there will be no more RIs left and only the inquisition wins. I really dont see how 8 people wont be recruited after 18 recruitment attempts. Assuming a recruitment per night, but I'm going with WCS here. Maybe, just maybe there might be an RI who was missed, but I'm not going to bet on being that guy.

So the only way the RIs might win by doing nothing is if the Watches manage to NK each other's recruiters, without NKing any of the inquisition. Assuming the watches have an NK. It seems likely given the lynch mechanics, but we're far from informed here. Maybe the inquisition don't get told the faction of the person up for the lynch and they have to guess. Maybe they get a find as an NA or are only told the starting lineup. Maybe they aren't allowed to stop a lynch on themselves. We really cant tell at this point, it's bad play to base our gameplay on the assumption that they are all-powerful.

If the watches do have an NK, or even an NK every second night, that's 8 possible kills, maybe more. High enough that maybe they'll hit a couple of people in the other watch, but the chances of the inquisition getting killed before day 10 are also pretty high. Plus the number of RI who might get knocked out in the crossfire. So we need to take the watches out, else we're setting ourselves up for a loss in one way or the other. Hopefully the inquisition will realise they need to let lynches go through, unless the lynch is on a member of the faction that is likely to have less numbers, else the chances of them surviving are pretty slim.

So while i'm an RI, I'm going to play as such, but to assume that the other factions will engineer a scenario in which victory just drops into my lap is foolhardy in the extreme. The way to win as an RI at the moment is to do everything possible to stay RI, and that definitely wont happen if we just sit back.

[Galayn Lord]

Alkend, on 17 March 2010 - 09:53 AM, said:

Galayn Lord, on 17 March 2010 - 09:44 AM, said:

Alkend, on 17 March 2010 - 09:37 AM, said:

We do win if the Inquisition wins. So we definitely don't want to treat them as scum!

what i meant is that it doesn't matter if we do end up targeting them by mistake.

If we see people acting as a pair we dont have to worry about them being Inquisition...because they control the bloody lynch outcome.

Maybe wrong choice of words but yea...we can ESSENTIALLY treat them as scum. But we dont need to right now.
One of our conditions is ALSO to kill ALL factions...in fact that was our only condition till PS realized the logic error in our conditions.

But for now i agree i dont see any other option but to help the inquisition.

The inquisition may control the lynch outcome, but we're not sure to what extent. See earlier where I speculated that they may not be able to prevent their own lynch. Not disagreeing with you on the practice of lynching people freely due to the supposed control the inquisition has, though. Just pointing out that it might not be complete.

well shit...the OP says they are in control of lynch outcomes...Im gonna have to just go with that till i get info that shows otherwise.
I start speculating like that and ill start hemorrhaging from the ears

Do we get CF?
If we do lynch one we will then know they are not in control of all lynches.
Its a possibility...of course.

[Galayn Lord]

does not say anywhere i can find about CF....but i will assume it MUST be a CF game.
being a merc/cult type game and all

[Alkend]

Anyway, I'm out for the night, see you fellas tomorrow.

[Galayn Lord]

Alkend, on 17 March 2010 - 10:04 AM, said:

Anyway, I'm out for the night, see you fellas tomorrow.

well...that was short and sweet