Werewolf LXXII: Now There's the Truth of It! (Game Thread)

[Nogrod]

First I thought I would just ignore that false-start, but now reading your comments and thinking of it again, I'm beginning to think it might be actually quite good to hear from everyone there why was it they posted.

Also, there is a major difference I think between Form who started and Mira, Nerwen & Eönwë who followed.

But let's not speculate on the possible reasons before they have a chance to answer themselves. If there is lycantrophy involved I wouldn't like to give a wolf an argument...

Originally Posted by Nienna

We need to look at everyone including the people who are quiet or who haven't even posted at all.

What I said... if we have fex. four quiet people who don't take part in the discussion we just need to differentiate between them as not to affect a no-lynch! How to do that?

So please post people!

Originally Posted by Nienna

There is going to be a lot of confusion at Day's end even with the cautions against it. It is inevitable.

Exactly. That's why I said everyone should read the thread and know the situation before voting. This is indeed a different game and the whole dynamic is different.

So please read people!

[Nogrod]

Okay. We're going to have some fun here as Lommy & Greenie are at my place, but I will come back when they go to sleep.


Just a few thoughts on people on the fly.

If I had to vote now, I'd probably vote for Brinn, Nienna and Nerwen for their reasonable points. Inzil might take my last vote.

With Lottie I'm a bit insecure. She has been very active and provided things to think about - so therefore I'd wish to see her continue the game. But it just struck me that if she is a wolf (and was thus perfectly aware of the fact that the people posting there were mistaken) it would have been relatively good idea for her to make a public note of it! I don't know, I'm pretty good at getting her wrong as well.

But happily it's still early on the Day and hopefully more people will join the discussion so that it would be easier to form opinions on you.


Btw. concerning the votes. It would be quite reasonable for everyone to use all their votes toDay so that the possibility of there remaining four people without votes would be smaller. And of course those voting late should take care nothing like that happens...

I'll be back in a few hours.

[satansaloser2005]

I don't care either way but for both Alona's sanity (bless her!) and that of all you lot you could probably highlight your votes. Just sayin'.



Oh, and nice parody, Lottie!

[Pitchwife]

What, no 10 pages yet? And very little banter, actually. There's still hope...
Concerning the question of pre-Day posting, I was a little confused myself by this:

Originally Posted by sally on Admin thread

Also, I won't be here for DL 'cause I have church, but I'll put up the narration straightaway when I get back so as soon as it hits 3 a.m. GMT (in eight hours) feel free to chat it up or do whatever. Enjoy!

(Underlining mine)
"Chat it up" must have referred to the wolves' PMing, but at the time it looked to me like we were starting with a Day phase. There have been precedents, and considering who's modding this, I think there's precious little we can take for granted.
Of course it's entirely possible that there's a wolf among the pre-Day posters, but the pre-Day posting per se is no evidence of lupinity. On the other hand, grabbing a straw like that and blowing it up into a suspicion could be exactly that. (Wait, how do you blow up a straw? I need to be more careful with my metaphors...) On the gripping hand* (mutants of the world unite!), the discussion had to be started somehow...
More to follow.

*Nerwen, ever read The Mote in God's Eye?

[the phantom]

I think it's laughable that you all have put your names down for a "Most Popular Downer" competition. If you were truly impressive and notable, the very idea of competing for approval from the masses would cause you to become physically ill.

Ah, but perhaps I'm being too hasty in writing you off immediately. Everyone must start somewhere... I suppose it's possible that there is one of you who does have what it takes but simply has not gained the necessary wisdom and attitude to be one of the elite. If you truly believe you are destined for great things, you had better pay attention during this little adventure. You can learn much.

I'll check in on you all later, but for now, I'll leave with you four points.

1) Very bad form coming in early like that, Form. One of the most important traits of a great Downer is timing. There is a time for seriousness, a time for flirting, a time for joking, as well as the often ignored time for silence. There are instances when posting before/after a deadline is actually the right thing to do in the grand scheme of things, but not at the very start.

2) And then there's Mira, Nerwen, and Steve. You three are guilty of speaking out of turn as well, but your mistake is worse than Form's, as you not only displayed bad timing, but herd mentality as well. The great do not follow!

3) And to Loslote- don't be an insufferable rule-kissing nag. While it may have been wrong for the others to speak when they did, it is an even worse crime to assume laws and rules are always right and should always be followed strictly. Those who are overly eager to chide others for rule-breaking usually have that sort of mindset- the absolute wrong mindset for achieving greatness. You should be looking for opportunities to take advantage of rule-breaking yourself rather than policing others.

4) Barely even one page of posting and half the day gone... Pitiful! I could have posted that much all by myself.

[Eönwë]

OK, well firstly, since it has been called into question:

1. Sally said:
   

   Originally Posted by satansaloser2005

   The first round of eliminations will commence at 3 a.m. GMT tomorrow. Best of luck to all!

2. I saw two veteran and one quite experienced WW players post on the thread.
3. I have heard of the existence of Day 0s, but have never played a game with any.
4. I assumed that since those three had posted, and it only said "first round of elimination", mentioning nothing if posting, that it was Day 0.

[Formendacil]

Heh--look at that! Eönwë just called me a veteran!

That's probably your problem right there--WWIII is about to start, and you're looking at what the veteran of WWII is doing. He's old and senile and should be paid no heed.

So... yeah... me-posting-early. I'm afraid I have no crafty plan to reveal... indeed, no uncrafty plan either. Just about every game I've played (but not every game, I think) started on a Night phase, and I would have assumed the same here. However, the fact of the matter is that I simply wasn't thinking--a couple of people mentioned in chatting that "hey, look, the WW game has started" and I went straight into thinking "oh, I should go post before bedtime."

And I did...

Of course, I could throw in the metagame reasonings beyond that why I'd be distracted: I'm playing to appease Sally, in the middle of a rather busy time in life, full of vocational angst (as the Bostonmooters all ought to guess), and papers, and... well, it's been a while since I've played. It's not a question of what I was thinking, but rather than I wasn't thinking.

Of course, this has really no bearing on whether or not I'm a wolf or not... I could be just as forgetful and scatterbrained, really, as a wolf forgetting about Night 1 as an Ordo forgetting about Night 1.






Oh... I mean... uh... if I have to treat of this like a celebrity: "I deny the whole thing, but I'm checking into rehab, anyway. Buy my movies and albums."

[Eönwë]

Firstly, the main difference between this and other games is that instead of voting who we want to go, we're voting who we want to say. This means that instead of having to not seem guilty as in the usual game, you actually have to try to seem useful and get people's confidence.

This means that it will be harder for wolves to hide as submarines, because if they don't post convincingly, they won't get any of the precious votes to keep them alive. So probably we'll see more activity from everyone, as everyone needs to try to justify their place. This is in theory, but in reality it seems that we have less than two pages so far, with under a quarter of the day left.

On the other hand, this new way of playing means that there will be less of a difference between the way that ordos and wolves post, because everyone will be thinking the way a wolf does, and so will try to get the confidence of the village as much as possible. It also means that people will be less likely to do crazy posts that leave everyone confused, because less people will be likely to vote for that sort of person past Day 1. In other words, being confusing and unhelpful is probably much more risky in this game, meaning that ordos will act more like wolves try to, and the wolves will probably try harder to look useful.

My opening thoughts for now... sadly no third point yet so I can't join the Three-Handed-Mutant Society.


edit: x-ed wi' Form

[Pitchwife]

Ah, the Heckler has spoken! I was beginning to wonder when we would hear from him...

Just noticed something - in the narration, last Night was referred to as Night 0, which implies that toDay is Day 0, not Day 1. Any ideas what that means?

About strategy - Nog has made some good points about spreading the votes etc., but I'd like to note that the regular approach of keeping the people who're active and contributing is a little more problematic in this game than usual. It's one thing to not quite lynch them yet, but it's quite another to run the risk that an active and reasonable-looking wolf may be elected to the Simony (or whatever it should be properly called), giving them power to mess with our votes on the next Day. Unfortunately, I don't yet see how to minimize that risk. Suggestions?

(x-ed with Stevonwë, who also comments on the Day 0 thing)

EDIT: also x-ed with Form and another Stevonwë)

[satansaloser2005]

Originally Posted by Pitchwife

Ah, the Heckler has spoken! I was beginning to wonder when we would hear from him...

Just noticed something - in the narration, last Night was referred to as Night 0, which implies that toDay is Day 0, not Day 1. Any ideas what that means

It means the moddess is silly and likes to start at 0 rather than 1, that's all. ToDay is Day 1.



And yes, the Phantom has spoken. ^_^

[Nienna]

Originally Posted by Pitchwife

About strategy - Nog has made some good points about spreading the votes etc., but I'd like to note that the regular approach of keeping the people who're active and contributing is a little more problematic in this game than usual. It's one thing to not quite lynch them yet, but it's quite another to run the risk that an active and reasonable-looking wolf may be elected to the Simony (or whatever it should be properly called), giving them power to mess with our votes on the next Day. Unfortunately, I don't yet see how to minimize that risk. Suggestions?

Electing a wolf as Simon won't be good but I also don't think it would be tragic... at least not at this stage of the game. We need to use our votes to pick someone who would be reasonable as Simon but we also need to make sure we use our votes to lynch someone. That is how we will get rid of wolves. That is how we will win.

[Pitchwife]

Originally Posted by satansaloser2005

It means the moddess is silly and likes to start at 0 rather than 1, that's all. ToDay is Day 1.

I'm disappointed.
In fact, this game has been unnervingly sane up to now. You do realize you've got a reputation to live up to, don't you?

Speaking of sanity...

Originally Posted by Eönwë

On the other hand, this new way of playing means that there will be less of a difference between the way that ordos and wolves post, because everyone will be thinking the way a wolf does, and so will try to get the confidence of the village as much as possible. It also means that people will be less likely to do crazy posts that leave everyone confused, because less people will be likely to vote for that sort of person past Day 1. In other words, being confusing and unhelpful is probably much more risky in this game, meaning that ordos will act more like wolves try to, and the wolves will probably try harder to look useful.

So maybe we should actually vote for the crazy and confusing people?

[wilwarin538]

Here and reading....

[Eönwë]

Originally Posted by Pitchwife

So maybe we should actually vote for the crazy and confusing people?

Well, as an ordo you have less to lose if you die than if you are a wolf, so maybe, unless it's a very confident wolf. Of course, the person you are voting might just be crazy and confusing anyway, so I don't really think that'll work.

Originally Posted by Nienna

Electing a wolf as Simon won't be good but I also don't think it would be tragic... at least not at this stage of the game.

True... early on two votes can easily be overruled, but the further the game goes, the more power the Simon will have.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

With Lottie I'm a bit insecure. She has been very active and provided things to think about - so therefore I'd wish to see her continue the game. But it just struck me that if she is a wolf (and was thus perfectly aware of the fact that the people posting there were mistaken) it would have been relatively good idea for her to make a public note of it! I don't know, I'm pretty good at getting her wrong as well.

That's something to be considered, at least. Coming across as the straight arrow who has to wrangle the outlaws back into line could be seen as good public relations for a wolf.
On the other hand, I too have a track record of reading Lottie incorrectly, so I hesitate to focus on that too much at the moment.

Originally Posted by Nienna

Electing a wolf as Simon won't be good but I also don't think it would be tragic... at least not at this stage of the game. We need to use our votes to pick someone who would be reasonable as Simon but we also need to make sure we use our votes to lynch someone. That is how we will get rid of wolves. That is how we will win.

Those last two sentences look strange to me. Rather forced, and a subtle 'I'm no wolf' between the lines.

[wilwarin538]

Ok, so the Night posters totally mixed me up yesterday when I saw people posting, cause I had it written in my day planner that yesterday was a Night phase (yes, I keep track of WW stuff in my dayplanner ). I was going to post until I saw that Lottie pointed out that it was still Night time. My point? That I don't find Mira, Eonwe and Nerwen's actions suspicious because I was quite close to doing the same thing. They probably saw someone had posted and just thought it was ok. Form, I really don't think would do someone like that as a wolf just to make himself look good, that just doesn't seem plausible to me. So basically I'm not really focusing on that whole situation from this point on.

I agree with the submarine thing, someone could very well be innocent but if they don't stand out in anyone's mind then they won't get votes, and then they're done for. So talk people! We could very easily lynch someone who we don't necessarily find suspicious but we just haven't noticed, and that's kinda scary. So we really have to go into this a bit differently then usual. We usually focus on who we find suspicious, but now we have to focus on who we all like. It's so backwards and consusing, I just love it!

Gotta run for a bit, but I'll be back soon!

x'ed with inzil

[Isabellkya]

I don't think that the people whom posted during the Night is that huuge of a deal, and will lead to some divine revelation of wolfship.

It looks like it was a general mistaken error, and I agree with those whom have said - I doubt someone would knowingly post during the Night, just to make themselves look better.


Would it be skirting and or bending the rules, if we had a bigway tie for toDay, and thus no one would go to the noose?

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by wilwarin538

I agree with the submarine thing, someone could very well be innocent but if they don't stand out in anyone's mind then they won't get votes, and then they're done for.

And that's the ingenuinity of this game! If this works (remains to be seen), I'll be suggesting we make this kind of games more often as now it seems that one really needs to post to stay on with the game.


But just an idea then.

Now Sally seemed to request we highlight our votes of confidence.

So how about we come up with a marking of our own to indicate whom everyone of us would like to lynch? I think it would be a good idea if everyone also told the others whom they would like to see lynched already on this Day - and hopefully also why. In that way we could lessen the erratic nature of the last hour choices a little bit more?

Especially if we have people who can only turn out at the last moments of the Day they would have it easier just scrolling the thread and see why some people would like to see some others lynched (if people write long posts and their points are just in the middle of them unmarked a fast skimmer might just miss them).

If someone doesn't get that highlight-rule they might go for the traditional bolding with two pluses, so we should have to come up with some other solution for our unofficial lynch-votes.

How about we marked them like this?

Originally Posted by being an example

-- Nogrod

or

lynch Nogrod

Both would be clear, visible and still no one could mess it up with a vote of confidence (with two pluses & highlighting)?

What do you think?

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Isabellkya

Would it be skirting and or bending the rules, if we had a bigway tie for toDay, and thus no one would go to the noose?

The wolves love every lynch where no one dies as that leaves the decision over who dies to them.

Every lynch that doesn't happen means zero wolves killed. Every Night-kill (succesful or not) means zero wolves killed.

We can err of course and oftentimes we do, but lynching is our only weapon against the wolves (except hunters, but they're for kind of "one time use" only ).

[Eönwë]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

So how about we come up with a marking of our own to indicate whom everyone of us would like to lynch? I think it would be a good idea if everyone also told the others whom they would like to see lynched already on this Day - and hopefully also why. In that way we could lessen the erratic nature of the last hour choices a little bit more?

That is quite a good idea, and would be quite practical, but it does seem to go against the whole spirit of this game, because it makes us look at who we want to kill rather than who we want to save, which is the point of this game. Also, it might make some things clearer, but it will also make the mayhem near DL even more chaotic than it would be in this game.

I also think that if we focus on those two sides, then we'll totally forget about the people in the middle, who, if any are wolves, will have a chance to sneak by with one or two votes. If we just focus on those we want to save, it means that those we're not saving need to work harder. If we do decide who we want to lynch it will make the middle people slightly safer.

[Nienna]

I think Nog has an interesting idea. I don't know as it has to be something as [not] "official" as bolding or using -- but it is definitely a good idea for people to bring up who they think should be lynched and why so that we aren't just all scrambling and so that we have a sense of purpose.

In some respects it might be a touch easier as I usually find myself thinking that a few people seem innocent but I can't put my finger on one specific person who looks guilty... at least in the beginning stages. But we'll see.


Edit: Crossed with Steve

[Gwathagor]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

And that's the ingenuinity of this game! If this works (remains to be seen), I'll be suggesting we make this kind of games more often as now it seems that one really needs to post to stay on with the game.

Blast. There goes my usual strategy of saying as little as possible. It will be interesting to see how this affects folks' playing styles, since it behooves us all, to some extent, to TRY to attract attention. Even though I know meta-game reasoning is a bad idea, I'm going to be tempted to compare how players are playing in this game with their ordinary playing styles.

It also occurs to me, on another note, that it will be much easier for the wolves to get someone lynched during the day without attracting attention, and much, much harder to assign blame for a player's lynch to any one or two other players. All the wolves have to do is ignore the intended victim. So - time to reassess how we analyze votes. Who are people trying to keep around? Who are they not mentioning in their posts? Et cetera.

EDIT: Crossed since post #58.

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Eönwë

Firstly, the main difference between this and other games is that instead of voting who we want to go, we're voting who we want to say. This means that instead of having to not seem guilty as in the usual game, you actually have to try to seem useful and get people's confidence.

You're hitting the nail in the head here Eönwë.

I'd like to make just one add-on to that.

I was just a while ago championing this new way of playing as a way to make the submarines post and be active, but with a second thought I can see the downside of this as well.

In order to get people's confidence - or good-will, if you wish - the wolves (and ordos as well) need to be smooth and liked eg. they can't afford suspecting others heavily. And that attitude could kill a game.

We need suspicions to get reactions, we need openly argued suspicions to see where a wolf might try to hide, we need suspicions to get things rolling... even if the official votes will be votes of confidence.

It's Day1 to be sure, but how many suspicions have you registered thus far? How many posts have been posted thus far?

It might be not only because of the timezones or sudden RL-hindrances. The game-mechanics encourage a kind of "be easy", "do not meddle with other people" way of playing so as not to get bad publicity? If it is that, it works into the hands of the wolves.

So let's change that.

[Shastanis Althreduin]

Originally Posted by Isabellkya

I don't think that the people whom posted during the Night is that huuge of a deal, and will lead to some divine revelation of wolfship.

It looks like it was a general mistaken error, and I agree with those whom have said - I doubt someone would knowingly post during the Night, just to make themselves look better.


Would it be skirting and or bending the rules, if we had a bigway tie for toDay, and thus no one would go to the noose?

But that would make Shasta sad. You don't want to make Shasta sad, do you?

[Eönwë]

[Seem to have clicked submit too soon. So, as I was saying:]

If we do have a system of showing who we want to lynch, it draws attention away from those in who aren't in the list and who have only received a few votes of confidence. It means that these people may be able to last for quite a few days with only a few votes and remain undetected. Of course, we'll still have the same problem now, but now no-one who isn't voted is safe and have to work to gain the village's confidence, but if we do the lynch-thing, people that aren't on there will be "safe" and will probably not be looked at as much as those under suspicion.

I think this game should be a chance to try the "you get what you work for" attitude, at least for the first Day. It'll be interesting to see how the capitalist ideology fits in with WW.

[Pitchwife]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

So how about we come up with a marking of our own to indicate whom everyone of us would like to lynch?

What's the point of first applauding the ingenuity of this game, then suggesting to introduce a classical lynch vote through the back door? Who gets no vote is lynched, period. No need for any extra votes or markings (unless you want to confuse poor alona, who's suffered quite enough recently by having her heart eaten and all that).

Going with the point Eönwë made about modified wolvish behaviour in #48, I must say most of you are acting much too reasonable and eager to help for my peace of mind right now (not that I'm a shiny exception myself, I suppose). Obviously you can't all be wolves, but at the moment I'm tempted to vote for one or two of the quieter and weirder people, just in case.

[satansaloser2005]

Originally Posted by Pitchwife

I'm disappointed.
In fact, this game has been unnervingly sane up to now. You do realize you've got a reputation to live up to, don't you?

Speaking of sanity...

So maybe we should actually vote for the crazy and confusing people?

Tell me how I could top my last game and I'll do it. Until then, hush. Nyah.

Originally Posted by Isabellkya

I don't think that the people whom posted during the Night is that huuge of a deal, and will lead to some divine revelation of wolfship.

It looks like it was a general mistaken error, and I agree with those whom have said - I doubt someone would knowingly post during the Night, just to make themselves look better.


Would it be skirting and or bending the rules, if we had a bigway tie for toDay, and thus no one would go to the noose?

It'd be perfectly legal, but I'd be very cross with you if you did it on purpose.

Originally Posted by Shastanis Althreduin

But that would make Shasta sad. You don't want to make Shasta sad, do you?

What he said.

[Isabellkya]

I tend to always look at it numerically. On the first Day, the chances of getting a wolf are slim. It does happen, but it is the exception, not the rule.

On another side. This style can heavily "reward" those that are on the louder side. If you get noticed by a lot of banter, and not so much actual posting - then you might get votes to be saved. But should one whom is banterloud be saved above one whom may be quiet, but no banter? How do you figure in the possible lupine genes into that?


X'd with Miss Moddess, Pitchwife, Eonwe, and Mr. CoMod.

[Eönwë]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

The game-mechanics encourage a kind of "be easy", "do not meddle with other people" way of playing so as not to get bad publicity? If it is that, it works into the hands of the wolves.

Ah, but does it? It forces everyone (including the wolves) to the forefront, and once something happens, people will feel like they have to make a "useful" contribution, and then it will be more easy to find suspicious responses.

Of course, that is not to say we should not talk about our suspicions. Of course that's not the case- suspicions are the most important thing we have. But by focusing on the positive (the people we find innocent), it will force people to talk more and about who they trust (which doesn't happen often, or even ever, in a normal game) and so by a certain point we will have a lot to go on, maybe even more evidence than in a normal game (on the other hand, the spreading out of votes makes it harder to see who they like).

So basically, I think that because the nature of the game is positive, focusing too much on the negative early on will complicate matters further. Later on (Day 3 probably, Day 2 is barely ever productive even normally), we will have a lot more evidence with which to incriminate people, but for now it is probably best to focus on the positive side this early on.

[Pitchwife]

Originally Posted by The Moddess

Tell me how I could top my last game and I'll do it. Until then, hush. Nyah.

You're quite right, sorry. Damn consumer mentality getting the better of me...

[Nogrod]

I was just thinking very highly of you Eönwë but then you posted again and I'm not so sure anymore...

Originally Posted by Eönwë

That is quite a good idea, and would be quite practical, but it does seem to go against the whole spirit of this game, because it makes us look at who we want to kill rather than who we want to save, which is the point of this game.

I just don't see the point of this objection. It looks like you'd wish us not to talk of whom we actually suspect so as to let the wolves skip freely in the shadows? It's the point of the game-mechanics that we vote for confidence, but our goal nevertheless is getting the wolves lynched. Or do you have a different goal?

Also, it might make some things clearer, but it will also make the mayhem near DL even more chaotic than it would be in this game.

How would that be?

I also think that if we focus on those two sides, then we'll totally forget about the people in the middle, who, if any are wolves, will have a chance to sneak by with one or two votes. If we just focus on those we want to save, it means that those we're not saving need to work harder. If we do decide who we want to lynch it will make the middle people slightly safer.

Do you focus on everyone with the same effort everyDay in a normal ww-game? So no one manages to sneak from your view, no "middle-people" ever have it safer in normal games? And does that mean you have "totally forgotten" them in a normal game?

I smell more rhetorics than substance here Eönwë. And that makes me suspicious.

Originally Posted by Gwath

It also occurs to me, on another note, that it will be much easier for the wolves to get someone lynched during the day without attracting attention, and much, much harder to assign blame for a player's lynch to any one or two other players. All the wolves have to do is ignore the intended victim. So - time to reassess how we analyze votes.

That's an important point as well. The reading of the votes is a case to be pondered toMorrow, but the fact that the wolves can actually get people lynched in much easier way this time around as they don't have to actually push for the lynching of anyone. They can just ignore people they are okay being lynched.

That's scary. And that's why we need suspicions, even quasi-votes for lynching.

[Eönwë]

Originally Posted by Isabellkya

But should one whom is banterloud be saved above one whom may be quiet, but no banter? How do you figure in the possible lupine genes into that?

But that's the whole point of this game. It forces people to be louder, whether actually being "useful", or just bantering.

Also, I think my last post had a bit of a "Don't suspect" attitude. By all means, suspect away, just don't overdo it by making a "who-I-want-to-lynch" system.


edit: x-ed with many

[satansaloser2005]

Originally Posted by Pitchwife

You're quite right, sorry. Damn consumer mentality getting the better of me...

Heh. Heart you too dear, heart you too.



This is boring. I wonder if I should just give someone five points and let you discuss why I did it. Hmmmm....


(Not that I'd actually do it, as I'm leaving soon anyway, but it'd certainly amuse me.)

[Nogrod]

It's such a rollercoaster-drive with you Eönwë...

Originally Posted by Eönwë

Of course, that is not to say we should not talk about our suspicions. Of course that's not the case- suspicions are the most important thing we have. But by focusing on the positive (the people we find innocent), it will force people to talk more and about who they trust (which doesn't happen often, or even ever, in a normal game) and so by a certain point we will have a lot to go on, maybe even more evidence than in a normal game (on the other hand, the spreading out of votes makes it harder to see who they like).

This I think I might agree on. I'm not sure focusing solely on the positive side is a good idea, but the "evidence" thus begotten will be different and interesting to read on D2.

I just don't see how can't one perform the two things at the same time: say one trusts X because of this and that, and say that one suspects heavily Y because of this and that?

My problem in the beginning of this conversation was that no one seemed to suspect anyone - and thence getting a wolf would be the most random thing, something we'd wish to avoid.

[the phantom]

Come on, people, show a bit of flare! I can understand discussing mechanics and such, but let's see some fire. Don't just suggest things, or put forth the idea that it may be intelligent to do certain things, but rather put forth a bold plan and state, "We are going to do this!" and state in no uncertain terms that anyone who disagrees with you is wrong.

You may protest on the grounds that displaying such an attitude will trigger a backlash, but that's not a bad thing. That will give you a legit reason to lynch people on the grounds that they are irrational and wrong for arguing. And it's even better if no one adopts your good idea, for then you can sit back and shout "I told you so!" when things go wrong.

Being a star isn't about winning every little point- it's about character and standing out, and sometimes it's about everyone hating you. If you are universally loathed you are in much higher standing than someone who is generally liked during the rare moments he is actually thought of by someone. For the most part, people love individuals who push their emotional buttons, one way or another. In general it is only slightly less fun to hate a team/person/thing than it is to love.

Trust me- if you tick everyone off early, it will help you in the long run (assuming you know the proper time to turn their attitudes in the later stages).

[Nogrod]

Okay. I had a cigarette and managed to formulate my point hopefully in a better way.

A ww-game is a game where we need to lynch the baddies.

To lynch a baddie we need to have an idea who might be a baddie.

In this game the voting-mechanics work in the way that we vote for those we trust. But that doesn't mean that we are not allowed to think who is furry. Or that trying to figure out who is furry would be against the spirit of the game!

Trying to figure out who is furry is still the aim of the game - and the only way we can win.

With the given game-mechanics (votes of confidence rather than votes for lynching) it just means we need to be even more alert both ways as our votes are not lynch votes, but indirectly. And everyone voting, especially those voting in the last hour, should be really on top of things.

One way of achieving that would be that we would not only make the confident-votes but would also make it clear whom we do suspect.

I can't see anyone but a wolf disagreeing with that point.

Talking only of whom we trust would play to the hands of the wolves - and make this game a boring one.

EDIT: X'd with the phantom... and agreeing...

[Eönwë]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

I just don't see the point of this objection. It looks like you'd wish us not to talk of whom we actually suspect so as to let the wolves skip freely in the shadows? It's the point of the game-mechanics that we vote for confidence, but our goal nevertheless is getting the wolves lynched. Or do you have a different goal?

I didn't say don't talk about suspects. Just think about the other side too. That is the point of this game- we don't want it to end up just like any other. Of course, without suspicions you also can't have people that you trust more than those you find suspicious, but "quasi-votes for lynching" (as you call them) on Day 1?

Originally Posted by Nogrod

How would that be?

It's hard enough trying to work out who's ahead on the vote count normally, but in this system it will be many times harder. If quasi-lynch-votes are cast in the last hour it would be quite crazy.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

Do you focus on everyone with the same effort everyDay in a normal ww-game? So no one manages to sneak from your view, no "middle-people" ever have it safer in normal games? And does that mean you have "totally forgotten" them in a normal game?

No, but that's what's special about this game. It makes us put people into the "trust" and "don't trust" categories. We have to focus on what everyone says, and everyone has to speak, because if they don't they are likely to die. If we then have a "want-to-lynch", then it leaves us with a "don't-trust-but-don't-want-to-lynch" category, which is probably the safest place for the wolves to hide. If we don't have one, it gives them less self-confidence if they are on it, and will probably feel like they have to prove themselves.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

And that's why we need suspicions, even quasi-votes for lynching.

Of course we need suspicions. But on Day 1, where there is little chance of making an informed decision anyway, I think we should at least give the current system a try before we start making amendments. Firstly, what sort of arguments can we come up with to lynch someone on Day 1 anyway? Secondly, tomorrow we will be able to see the problems that occurred to today and then improve upon them- we've never even tried this.

Also, I think this game makes an easier Day 1 than normal. Usually, you have to try to come up with some (usually very unsubstantiated) argument about why you want to lynch someone, while here you only have to decide about the people you trust more or "feel good about".

edit: x-ed since last post.

[Nerwen]

Back and reading.

[Nogrod]

I think you Eönwë and Pitch are making a mountain out of a molehill here. I didn't say we change the rules of the game. What I said was that we should not only concentrate on finding people we trust (which the wolves would love) but also trying to find out the wolves.

I can't see what's the problem.

Okay. I'll go back now anyway to try and say something about people before I go to sleep (the DL - 6AM - is horrendous to me once again and I need to vote early). I hope you guys follow the example of making some suspicions out. Being just loud or talking a lot is not the same thing as actually putting oneself into the fray. As said, wolves might wish to be supportive and generally helpful but would hate to raise any retaliations or opposition in general.

[Mirandir]

Originally Posted by the phantom

Trust me- if you tick everyone off early, it will help you in the long run (assuming you know the proper time to turn their attitudes in the later stages).

Says the one who went insane Night 0.

Originally Posted by Nienna

Electing a wolf as Simon won't be good but I also don't think it would be tragic... at least not at this stage of the game. We need to use our votes to pick someone who would be reasonable as Simon but we also need to make sure we use our votes to lynch someone. That is how we will get rid of wolves. That is how we will win.

This is a sound point, at least for the first couple Days. After that the ratio of wolves to innocents in the village would make it disastrous and we'd just be handing them the win.

Those last two sentences worry me though. Something just feels off about them. Dunno if it's anything to actually worry about it not, so will leave it alone for now and see if anything more comes of it.

Originally Posted by Formendacil

Oh... I mean... uh... if I have to treat of this like a celebrity: "I deny the whole thing, but I'm checking into rehab, anyway. Buy my movies and albums."

Heh.

Originally Posted by Pitchwife

So maybe we should actually vote for the crazy and confusing people?

Deal. See ya, Nog.