Round 4 (9/21 deadline) Haunt Qualifying

[Radioactive Superstar]

Originally Posted by Abstract Actuary

Week 3 (9/21 haunt deadline) requirements

To be eligible to haunt in week 3 the ghosts must accumulate 60 points. After the haunt there will be 27 students remaining.

You receive 4 points for each student that you sandwich (to be explained later) who has not previously made a "collect me" post this round. If you sandwich someone who has made a "collect me" post this round you get 2 points.

You receive 2 points for each student that you traditionally who has not previously made a "collect me" post this round. If you traditionally someone who has made a "collect me" post this round you get 1 point.

You receive -1 points for each student that you immediately following a "collect me" post.

A "collect me" post is any post that a student makes for the sole purpose of being "collected" and makes that known within the post or just prior to the post.

The first five students that you traditionally this round will become the "sandwich students". In order to sandwich someone you must immediately after a "sandwich student" post made immediately after the sandwich target's post.

Each student may only have one point value associated with him for this round. Once you get a "4 pointer" his points don't reduce if he makes a "collect me" post (though I don't know why he would). Likewise if you someone immediately after a "collect me" post you receive -1 points for that person and that will not change.

Students who are EC members will automatically be worth 1 additional point if they are ed in any way.

These requirements go into effect after the status of the student that you haunt is known, you formally pass, or your deadline passes. Once the students complete their second lynching of the week or decide to pass the period ends and I will announce whether or not you are eligible.

Any "collect me" posts made before your period begins will not be counted.

If another student prompts someone to post in order to "be collected", that is fine. The second student will still be eligible to be a "3 pointer" if he otherwise qualifies. If the sandwich post mentions collecting the previous poster you will get -1 points.

Let me know if you have any questions.

.

[Radioactive Superstar]

Originally Posted by Abstract Actuary

Round starts:

Player 1 posts, you him. You get a traditional boo for player 1 and he becomes a sandwich ghost.

Player 2 posts, you him. You get a traditional boo for player 2 and he becomes a sandwich ghost.

Player 3 posts, you him. You get a traditional boo for player 3 and he becomes a sandwich ghost.

Player 4 posts, you him. You get a traditional boo for player 4 and he becomes a sandwich ghost.

Player 5 posts, you him. You get a traditional boo for player 5 and he becomes a sandwich ghost.

Any sandwich boos before this time will not count.

NOW . . .

Player 6 posts, player 1 posts, you . Player 6 was sandwich booed.

Player 7 posts. you him. You get a traditional boo for player 7.

Player 8 posts, player 6 posts, you . Nothing changes. No new points awarded, because player 6 is not a sandwich ghost.

Player 9 posts, player 5 posts, you . Player 9 was sandwich booed.

Etc.

Any player who posts a "collect me" post is eligible for 1 less point for this round.

All EC players are worth 1 extra point for the round.

If you a "collect me" post, sandwich a "collect me" post, or sandwich where the sandwich post mentions collecting the previous poster then it is worth -1.

SANDWICH POSTERS:

Mel-O-Rama
Openminded
SirVLCIV
Kohl
Big Dawg

CURRENT SCORE -- 52 out of 60 (+8 EC points available)
Mel-O-Rama +2
Openminded +2
SirVLCIV +2
Kohl +2
Big Dawg +2
Tobias Funke +4 (RS, post 3130)
kiwi +4 (PSU2002, post 3136)
MrsFrog +4 (nrm, post 3161)
All Clear +2 (RS)
Linus +4 (PSU2002, post 3186)
11pecans non-fan +1 (RS 3200, asked for collection 3066)
Mary Moon +2 (RS, post 3210)
Skizzmata -1 (RS, post 3219)
CindyLou Who +2 (RS, post 3221)
Will Durant +2 (RS, post 3226)
Pirate Kitty +2 (PSU2002, post 3228)
hotdime +2 (Werewolf, post 3239)
Shakespeare +2 (RS, post 3247)
dlwktb +2 (PSU2002)
Leela +2 (PSU)
GuineaPig +2 (Abstract Actuary)
harvma +2 (PSU)
SOAPhobic +2 (PSU)
Uma Karuna +2 (PSU)

.

[Radioactive Superstar]

If I'm reading this right, the first 5 players we "boo" should be active posters. This will increase our odds of being able to sandwich other players.
Or really, we'll be using our boo and the target player as bread and making a sandwich out of those first five players.

[Abstract Actuary]

Originally Posted by Radioactive Superstar

If I'm reading this right, the first 5 players we "boo" should be active posters. This will increase our odds of being able to sandwich other players.
Or really, we'll be using our boo and the target player as bread and making a sandwich out of those first five players.

[Radioactive Superstar]

I need to think through this but I think there are a lot of extra points sitting on the table here, if we maximized the "boo" opportunities.

We should consider whether or not we want to risk haunt eligibility for the opportunity to get valuable information on who is EC.

What I mean by this is that we could target a score of, say, 57 assuming we boo'd NO EC. If we are eligible to haunt, we will know that our boo-pool included at least 3 EC. If we are not eligible then we will know that there were at least 6 (or 7 or whatever) EC in the other group. If we cherry pick the group and put all of our top suspects into the smaller group (i.e. boo'd or not boo'd) then this information could be FAR more valuable than actually being able to haunt that round.

But I think we need to play with the numbers first. And quickly, since we'll become eligible as soon as we haunt and the status is revealed.

[Radioactive Superstar]

We will need to boo a minimum of 16 people in this round to qualify. That's 2 points for the first five (+10), 4 points for the next 11 (+44), and 6 EC. More realistically, we would need 17 people to qualify and we could intentionally miss some of the 4 pointers or pick up a couple -1's to adjust the score as we desired.

With 17 people boo'd, that leaves 12 other players. Five players will be eliminated before we go next (incl this haunt but not including the execution which might or might not happen before we next haunt). That's 24 players that should be left next time we haunt. Assume those removed players will come from both our boo'd and non-boo'd pool.

The structure will be: x players were boo'd, y players were not boo'd. We get to haunt IFF there were at least z EC among the x boo'd. (i.e. we cannot set it up so that it is at least z out of the y non-boo'd)

With these dynamics, what is the right balance that would make this a workable plan?

Straw-man: 18 players boo'd, 6 players non-boo'd. Scoring is such that we get to boo if there are at least 5 EC in the 18.

[Radioactive Superstar]

Note that one of the dynamics is that we can make the small pool as small as we want to by including lower-point targets (i.e. not sandwiching). So we could set it up to assure that the non-boo'd pool is only 5 people.
If we get to haunt, the target points we accumulate would then tell us that there are no more than z total EC in that group. (good for ID'ing IS's)
If we do not get to haunt, the target points we accumulate would then tell us that there are at least z total EC in that group. (good for ID'ing EC)

[PSU2002]

I agree this could be a good idea, and you seem to have the numbers worked out. However this will have to be monitored closely and we will not really be able to do any extraneous booing for agreeing or disagreeing with what posters are saying.

I am willing to go with this strategy. Just post somewhere exactly what we need to do (what is our target point level, how do we want to go about doing it, etc) skipping a haunt won't be the end of the world if we gain information doing so.

FYI: I ALMOST employed a strategy like this in the first round. I needed any two of the following:

A. 90% of the students
B. 4 of 5 EC1
C. 4 of 5 EC2

note that accomplishing A menat B or C was automatic.

I thought about booing 50% of the students and seeing if I were eligible to haunt. If I were then I would know that there were at least 8 EC in my booed list. i decided at this point in the game though I would be better off having someone to work with to help meet future haunt requirements

[Radioactive Superstar]

Couple more straw-men as an example of different strategies:

Target 2 people to not receive boo's, players we believe are innocent. Target a score such that we can haunt IFF we get ALL of the EC.
If we can haunt (which we'd expect, given our choice of the two), we have 2 guaranteed innocent players.
If we cannot haunt, we have a 50-50 or better shot of hitting an EC next time.
Low risk, low reward, conditional high reward if either of those two players makes it to the endgame. Here we are hoping that we can haunt; if we cannot haunt, then a player we were viewing as very innocent was pulling one over on us.
Adjustments: you can make the 2 equal to 3 or 4. The higher the number, the more likely that an EC is mixed into the group and that we miss our haunt. If we go with this strategy, I'd advocate 2.

Target 8 players in the unboo'd pool, players we think are likely EC. Target score such that we can haunt IFF there are at least 6 EC who were boo'd.
If we can haunt, then there are at least 6 EC in the boo'd group and no more than 3 EC in the non-boo'd group. (assumes no EC hit before next haunt; numbers would need to be adjusted as the rounds go by)
If we cannot haunt, then there are at least 4 EC in the 8 non-boo'd players, making it a rich target area.
Here we'd really be hoping for a non-haunt, though a haunt would tell us that we're not doing a stellar job of targetting the EC.

[PSU2002]

Originally Posted by Radioactive Superstar

Couple more straw-men as an example of different strategies:

Target 2 people to not receive boo's, players we believe are innocent. Target a score such that we can haunt IFF we get ALL of the EC.
If we can haunt (which we'd expect, given our choice of the two), we have 2 guaranteed innocent players.
If we cannot haunt, we have a 50-50 or better shot of hitting an EC next time.
Low risk, low reward, conditional high reward if either of those two players makes it to the endgame. Here we are hoping that we can haunt; if we cannot haunt, then a player we were viewing as very innocent was pulling one over on us.
Adjustments: you can make the 2 equal to 3 or 4. The higher the number, the more likely that an EC is mixed into the group and that we miss our haunt. If we go with this strategy, I'd advocate 2.

Target 8 players in the unboo'd pool, players we think are likely EC. Target score such that we can haunt IFF there are at least 6 EC who were boo'd.
If we can haunt, then there are at least 6 EC in the boo'd group and no more than 3 EC in the non-boo'd group. (assumes no EC hit before next haunt; numbers would need to be adjusted as the rounds go by)
If we cannot haunt, then there are at least 4 EC in the 8 non-boo'd players, making it a rich target area.
Here we'd really be hoping for a non-haunt, though a haunt would tell us that we're not doing a stellar job of targetting the EC.

I like the first strategy listed here. It is the lowest risk in my oppinion. THe math still needs worked out as to our target score. The hard part will be tracking our progress and making sure all participating ghosts

A) get the strategy and
B) stick to it.

A rogue ghost could really screw this up, which is why I now realize if we are going to employ a strategy like this we need to do it now and not after we have 15 ghosts in here (which would be bad anyway seeing as how that would leave almost as many EC as IS if all the EC survive to that point.