[Lurker] WW #39: Escape from the Congo.

[novice]

A setup nitpick, this is a bad tiebreak rule:

The player with most lynch votes at the end of the day is lynched and eliminated from the game. Tiebreaks: The first person to reach their vote total will be lynched in the event of a tie.

We've covered this before, and aspiring game hosts should stop copying this ambiguous rule from previous games. The better rule is to discount the last vote that was cast until the tie disappears.

That could be what you intended, Jabbz. But the rule as written could also be interpreted as the first person to reach his vote total even if he "dipped below" that vote count later in the day. Say player A reaches 2/5 votes, then everybody unvotes and player B reaches 2/5 votes, then player A gets 2 new votes and in the finaly tally both A and B have 2 votes. In my opinion player B should hang, but with the rule as written it can also be interpreted as player A hanging.

[Rowain]

So, given I'm discounting Gaz, and cannot credit an Adrien+Shadeun pair because of D1, the only pairs possible are Adrien+Zak and Zak+Shadeun. I'd be putting those at 80:20 probability respectively, by the way.
And yes, yesterday I had harsh things to say about people taking a probabilistic approach. Because it was a 'x works in more pairings'. 'X is in every single feasible pairing I've come up with' is a rather different matter.
Zakalwe

I did say that Shadeun works with everyone and he was the only one who fits that bill. So you had either not payed attention or try hard to not lynch Shadeun.

[Jabbz]

A setup nitpick, this is a bad tiebreak rule:

The player with most lynch votes at the end of the day is lynched and eliminated from the game. Tiebreaks: The first person to reach their vote total will be lynched in the event of a tie.

We've covered this before, and aspiring game hosts should stop copying this ambiguous rule from previous games. The better rule is to discount the last vote that was cast until the tie disappears.

That could be what you intended, Jabbz. But the rule as written could also be interpreted as the first person to reach his vote total even if he "dipped below" that vote count later in the day. Say player A reaches 2/5 votes, then everybody unvotes and player B reaches 2/5 votes, then player A gets 2 new votes and in the finaly tally both A and B have 2 votes. In my opinion player B should hang, but with the rule as written it can also be interpreted as player A hanging.

Valid. What you describe is more what I mean, because certainly if you are at 3 early, then drop to two, and then bounce back to three late in day to match with someone else, I would want to lynch the other. If I get the chance to host again I'll use your description, because it leaves less room for misunderstanding.

[Lewwyn]

I wonder if we'll have a refresh battle at the deadline for the win.

[Rowain]

I wonder why no one attacks Shadeun.

[Jabbz]

Yeah, atm this could come down to last second changes.

[Jabbz]

This leaves Adrien + (Zak/Matt) or Gaz + (Zak/Matt) or, alternative formation, Matt + (Adr/Gaz) or Zak (Adrien/Gaz)

I read this and hear John Oliver saying "So literally, it could be anyone. Just absolutely any combination humanly possible, except ones that include me."

[Jabbz]

Absolutely the most action this game has seen, by far.

[Jabbz]

Very well played Zak. You guys managed to snag three straight mislynches, that's an accomplishment.

[Rowain]

Good job town


and thanks again novice for killing 2 townies that attacked you brother.