-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Many thanks, HappyCats, for a great game!
I'd appreciate any critiques on analysis and playstyle. Personally, this felt like one of my best games, but even then it may not match up to community standards.
I'd appreciate any critiques on analysis and playstyle. Personally, this felt like one of my best games, but even then it may not match up to community standards.
Aside from that silly idea you had about how the wolves would distrubt their votes, which you can see now was false.
You played really well! Picking out that Dex didn't want to talk about MC could have easily got unnoticed, but your bringing was critical in getting 2 wolves lynched.
And Happycats, you did a wonderful job GMing and I really enjoyed the game.
Now update the first page...
Now update the first page...
Congrats to the winners and thanks to GM. I guess the only negative was how most special role players were more quiet than others. Anyways, good that the crovax was noticed, always amusing to see those and in this game we had 2 wolf slipping.
It was actually true for Day 1, though not for Day 2 or 3 where Torn followed his packmates very closely. Very interesting to see and very different from games I've played as a wolf!
I don't think Dex' switching of MC to Cody was a slip; I think it rather was a stupidity. Because as was mentioned today as defence (by Torn I think) Dex could easily just have cut out the last part with MC; It was even the last part of the post so wouldn't have been that suspicious. Changing somebody for somebody else on the other hand...
Also did the wolves have a standing order to hunt everybody who were crucial in killing a wolf? Because it looked that way.
Meh. I didn't have time to be active enough in the early game to work my usual wolf magic in the late game. Oh well. Nice job, village.
I actually don't think I've found anyone in the forum who understands my method on this, which suggests a deficiency in explanation. I spent 5-6 pages arguing with al-Aziz over its validity in one Big.
It has been most gloriously updated. I'll add links to each update and actually write the Day 4 update a bit later.
GG to all, and a nice GMing performance from HappyCats. I'm sure I could have won was I not hunted. 
Day 1 was random, day 2 we picked Rovsea because he hadn't been voted at all, which made us sort of suspect he could be a friend, and the rest of the time was picking cleared players who might possibly be friends. Nothing too out of the ordinary there.
I mean if all your trying to say is "on day 1 wolves trend not to vote for the same people" I agree that is true.
You seemed to have said something like "it's impossible for a villager to get more than 1 day one vote without one of the voters being a wolf", which is plainly false.
I was saying something closer to the first statement. The second is laughably silly.
In reality, the method is more about treating Day 1 vote groups as random subsets of the total player group and applying the total statistical ratios to the subset. Method is related to the Monty Hall problem.