I didn't say adding a single extra, I said if we keep on adding extras. At absolute most I think we should only have four and I think that's stretching it a bit. Also I have to be honest Gambit the way your going about this is seeming more and more odd to me.

 

To a certain extent, it is important. I'm sure there are several people who are uncomfortable with each one of the candidates thus listed. As far as the current crop go, (after myself) I'd probably only vote for Fenraellis, possibly Lungs or Vesvius if I was pushed. The others, I find that I don't have enough of a read on to be sure, or they seem proactive and... well, interested enough that they would be early targets for nightkills. I already pointed that out with Kai, and I increasingly think that if Sesc or Lungs were to get Lord Commander, they would get similar treatment.

Though, admittedly, that's a line of reasoning that would eliminate some of our stronger players, I do think it's important to keep in mind that there are a limited number of nightkills, and the more we diffuse NK targets, the longer we keep strong players alive to provide input and strategies for town. At the same time, the LC's one kill survival would be wasted in the hands of a lurker or a newbie who was only functioning as a conduit for the Rangers' checks.

 

More people to answer the question set. @Kai, @Sesc, @Ves.

 

Seeing that most people are of the opinion that being Lord Commander will make scum kill you early, it doesn't make sense that you would not want to vote for someone who seems like a high profile player, that scum would want to kill as fast as possible. On the contrary it gives them protection and gives more opportunity to help town. This of course is only if the high profile player is a black brother.

Reasons for scum to kill LC are:
1)Town looses that nights ranger check
2)Scum get the chance to put their own in the seat, but that puts them in danger from other scum faction who could want the same.

I don't see any other reason. Just killing LC doesn't make sense, because there will be new one in old ones place.

 

guljons: That's why I'm against voting for KaiDASH as LC. On the other hand, if we give LC to a relatively less dangerous but still moderately competent player, then scum has a problem as to which person to kill, because there are a host of players who they'd want to see dead asap.

 

1. Early game, the Wildlings. They have the most usable kill abilities, so are more easily able to get rid of our important roles just by luck. Mid Game, the Red King's Court. By that point, they should have gathered enough info to be scary. End Game, White Walker. If he's made it that far, chances are that most of the roles that can kill him are dead and he has enough info to use Reanimate.

2. The Red King's Court. It's irrational, but I was in one HoT game where they completly fubar'd everything with a well timed conversion.

3. Yes. That's all I can say.

4. As I seem to be coming off as slightly scummy to a lot of people, a while.

 

Hmm, a lot going on here. To be honest I'm not entirely clear how Fenraelis ended up a candidate. He's a good player, sure, but it's not like he's been super-prominent in this game so far.

It looks like Sesc doesn't have the votes behind him to get LC, so I'll abandon that. Vesvius has gone quiet and again, people seem disinclined to vote for him.

For me, this is now a two horse race: Lungs vs. Kai.

My suspicions of Lungs have lessened somewhat and I was about to vote for him, but I was struck by a sudden fear that he's the White Walker. That would be bad. So based on that irrational fear, nad on the knowledge that he is a very competent player...

Lord Commander Nomination: KaiDASH

 

Well, yes you do have the choice. Do you make the scum choose who to take out or do you give a likely target, who you think would be good in the role, a protection.

Now that I'm thinking, it would take scum more moves to take out the good player and the moderately good LC then just taking out the good LC. It comes back to how valuable the player is to town.

But now that the nominations are mostly out of the way, it would be good to get some discussion between the candidates, because we have what, 5 of them? Some will have drop out soon or this could take forever.

 

I personally think we should have everybody vote for their favorite candidate first so we see who supports whom. Then the people voting for the less popular candidates would have to shift their votes to one of the most popular ones and we would get a majority.

 

Or we could have less easily explotable system and just use whoever wins the most votes out of a much smaller pool. Any scum with two brain cells to rub together would just have one maybe two people try and get their scum friend the spot while the rest of them argue against it or just vote for utterly random people so we gain next to nothing on whos working with who.

 

I'm not exactly following how a smaller pool is less exploitable. Seems to me like a smaller pool is more likely to have a higher percentage of scum in it, but I'm always open to changing my mind if I am suitably convinced.

 

That makes no sense. A smaller pool means less people overall are in it, and with town outnumbering scum but a good margin it means we're much more likely to pick town than scum.

---------- Post automerged at 07:04 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:03 PM ----------

by a good margin*

 

^This

When you let everyone pick whoever they please it is laughably easy for scum to cover their tracks and spread themselves over multiple candidates to make sure people don't connect them together. However if we keep it at a small 2-3 candidate pool then their options are severely limited. If they want their scum friend to get the position then very nearly all of them are going to have to vote for him and we'll see a pattern start to emerge. The only other option for them is to just let it go and let a town role have the position to avoid suspicions. If we were to keep it small then we win pretty much no matter what.

 

I like Gila's idea. A rolling ballot with the least voted candidate being eliminated. But that would take too long.

I think we should keep the candidate pool small, if only to prevent time wasting and boredom.

I'm going to start the voting:

Lord Commander Vote: Moridin

As I said before, he's the only candidate who I feel is competant enough to lead us welll, and not sneaky enough to totally decieve us.

 

I can sort of follow your reasoning, but part of it still doesn't make sense to me. How are scum more likely to be forced to get behind the scum candidate if there are just say 2 candidates out of which one is scum than if there are 4 out of which one is scum? We still need a majority to elect somebody so no matter how many candidates there are, scum have to eventually get behind their own candidate if they want to get him/her elected unless majority of town vote for them and in that case it was lost already.

My thinking comes mainly from the premise that we can't really tell if any of the candidates is scum this early in the game, but there is a decent chance at least one of them is. If we have just two candidates and one of them is scum, then more town votes will pile on the scum candidate from the get go too because people for some reason or another dislike the town candidate and it will be easier for the scum to get the votes they need.

 

Because there are literally no other options for them with a tiny pool to choose from. With a tiny pool all of the candidates would need a great deal more votes to win as opposed to spreading it out. While they might have one or two people vote for the other guy to shake off a bit of suspicion the vast majority of the scum team is going to need to be pushing their guy very hard to get him in. If he does get in then we know exactly who to look at when we find out, if they back off then we get a townie in the seat.

I hope that made sense, I haven't slept in a very long time >.<.

 

It's a majority vote, which from my understanding means that even if there are 20 candidates one still needs to get over 50% of the votes to get elected. Plurality vote is the one where the one with the most votes wins even if they had 2 and everybody else had 1.

 

I know what it is, I just feel its too easy to exploit.

 

I understood that you said that with small pools all the candidates need more votes to win than with a large pool, which kinda gave me the impression that you didn't, sorry. Anyway I'm still not sure I see where the exploit is, but I guess we can agree to disagree on this. If you want to eliminate the pool of candidates, do you have any suggestions as to how this should be done without voting to see who has a chance to win? Asking people to step down probably wouldn't be a good idea as no town candidate should do that, because they don't know if the other candidates are town or not.