Still, it remains a problem to discern pack behavior, especially when it happens that one of the wolves was killed early.
-
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.
So is my idea totally insane or just marginally insane?
It sort of worked for this game, but I really can't tell for sure. This game showed me that the whole wolf selling out another wolf thing may not actually work very well, due to the 3 person Circle of Justice.
Analysis remains hard. But that may just be because we only have 2 wolves to begin with.
I'm not sure if I like the randomness of what people link up with what other people, though.
Maybe we should have the one person that would have been send these names be able to ask for scan results on exactly two names, once, instead. Almost the same effect, but now one player choose two other players, instead of the GM deciding. With a small chance of that person picking both wolves out of the crowd on day 2
So is my idea totally insane or just marginally insane?
I think it a rather fascinating variation. It is the only variation of Lite that I have ever seen that could actually add something to the game without changing too much. It changes the dynamic considerably, while still maintaining the best parts of Werewolf Lite. I would encourage you to try it again in the future.
As for the game, anyone who purposefully non-votes should be autokilled. I find that to be against the spirit of the game. Not that I blame EURO for doing what he needed to do, but that should be made clear in the rules.
So is my idea totally insane or just marginally insane?
To me this version only allows the JL people or the wolves to stay alive in the end. The rest is just meat. The games turns into some random hunts VS random lynches, and whatever side hits the other one the most (JL vs wolves) will win, and the rest of the people are here to provide randomness.
See the huge mistake Adamus made, claiming Reis had Pmed him and Randy (while the day just before Reis killed Randy) slipped almost unnoticed. And EURO even unvoted rather than voted Adamus and thus killed ese, while it was rather clear Adamus was the wolf.
That's just my opinion. Too random, not much to do. Roles are set from the beginning and won't evolve, therefore there's not much to do.
Sorry I disappeared at the end. (The way the time zones work I'm always at school when everyone is active)
I was pretty happy when I saw that neither I or EURO had voted so there was no chance that the wolf would win (Because of my JL). It was a good game though, Adamus played it well, I really didn't expect him to be it.
I was pretty happy when I saw that neither I or EURO had voted so there was no chance that the wolf would win (Because of my JL). It was a good game though, Adamus played it well, I really didn't expect him to be it.
Last edited:
I agree completely. I would have autokilled hdk when he purposefully did not vote in an earlier game (but he was lynched anyway), but his non-vote was tactical. Precisely because non-votes can be tactical, I think GMs need to be tough on them.
For the game: As wolves we had no seer to hunt, so certainly the first night was a complete random hunt (I don't like hunting good players because they are a threat, I might hunt them later for other reasons though). And I wondered whether the village would be confused because of two groups apparently working together, but that was nullified here, because there was only one group for the most part of the game.
That was a stupid move on drxav's part. He thought I was a villager but wanted to protect against a 3-way tie. Thus killing me.
He should have just voted himself instead, I think
Adamus didn't look very suspicious, but his voting pattern betrayed him. He was voting alternate candidates to Rysz several times. My analysis pointed that out, too, but too few people acted on it. (eg: Reis and me only, and even I wasn't too sure of it.)
PM to Adamus in the last hour of the first day or something:
Unfortunately he couldn't get himself to vote me, but then again, I think that vote might have done him anyway. He should have done so earlier, when it was really a vote-changing vote and not a semi-bandwagon.Rysz said:
Yeh i thought it would make me look pretty dodgy if i jumped on you so directly but as you were clearly dead i thought the best way to get through this intact was to indirectly kill you also looking naive in doing so, no harm no foul. Would of got away with it to if it weren't for those pesky kids.
Would it really have mattered if Adamus had voted Rysz earlier? We still got to the point where Adamus was pretty much done for, with two known villagers and another unknown to be tied with. It's not like the JL wouldn't have tied them anyway...
My point is that if the village had gotten it's act together sooner he'd have died a lot sooner because of it.
In other words: That he lasted this long was, in a sense, lucky.
He could of course have capitalized on that luck by hunting Euro instead of reis, but he didn't.
If he had done so it would have been guy as sole remnant of the JL together with reis and esemus against him. Great odds for him to still win the game, in other words.
That was a stupid move on drxav's part. He thought I was a villager but wanted to protect against a 3-way tie. Thus killing me.
He should have just voted himself instead, I think
It was a totally thought out vote... in the 2 minutes time span I had to think about it. My point was and still is that you have to eliminate as much people as possible to reduce the odds of the wolf surviving. It was better for us to die together than just me.
If I had died alone, Reis would've been hunted. And you end up in the final turn with 3 randoms and 2 JL. No tie possible, a very good deal of chance for the wolf to escape and win.
Adamus said:
You do realize that, while weird, EUROO7 isn't an idiot, right?
Nobody aware of what was going on would have hunted reis. I understand if you had sent that hunt order early in the day and didn't have the chance to change it, but in that case it's a mistake, and EUROO7 doesn't make mistakes.
Guy89 said:
... It's OK though, because you had me as a stand in
I agree with you that purposeful non-voters are almost always a detriment to the game, but I think EUROO7's vote switch was a situation which proves why it is important to have the ability to no-vote, at least in games that allow TIEs.
People who no-vote for no other reason than "because we don't have any solid 100 percent leads" are idiots who should be lynched immediately. I don't know if we need any rule changes to prevent the few times it ever comes up around here. I guess there are occasions it can be game ruining and it never hurts to cover everything you can in the rules.
In my mind the rough draft of the rule would go something like: "in order to cast a no-vote, you must be able to prove that your desired lynch choice would be rendered impossible by the act of casting a vote, no matter who you pick. You may make this appeal to the GM on the day after your purposeful no-vote"... "a no-vote will only count as active if the player specifically states in the thread, before the deadline, that they are purposefully not voting, otherwise it will be considered inactivity and dealt with accordingly".
Of course I'm assuming that we're allowing TIEs with this. If we don't allow TIEs then we should never allow no-votes. I wouldn't cry if we removed either, but I do enjoy both for the possibilities they entail.
Except that it -wasn't- the final turn in that case. 5 players, 1 wolf. At the deadline it would have gone down to 3, and the game continued.
It would have bought people another day, where I was as close to cleared as we could get.
Moreover, with me realising Adamus actually -didn't- vote Rysz there was a good chance I'd have gone after him.
People should vote the person they think is the most suspicious. Full stop.
In that vein, I have no idea why Reis voted me.
My point is that if the village had gotten it's act together sooner he'd have died a lot sooner because of it.
In other words: That he lasted this long was, in a sense, lucky.
He could of course have capitalized on that luck by hunting Euro instead of reis, but he didn't.
If he had done so it would have been guy as sole remnant of the JL together with reis and esemus against him. Great odds for him to still win the game, in other words.
From his POV, I looked like I could be in a JL with some people, and attempting to cover it up in a deep layer of suspicion. Fortunately, I'm not so easy to read. Unfortunately, that resulted in my own death. And fortunately again, the village got a win because 2 of the 3 in the JL lived in the end. So, I did help the village after all, although I would much rather do it alive than dead...
Oh, I know. It wasn't -that- illogical a hunt. That wasn't a mistake per sé, it was just the wrong choice given the benefit of hindsight
And to an extend I encouraged that hunt, because I knew there was a bit of conversation in the conversations I posted that made drxav think for a while you might be in the Justice Circle. Meaning it might encourage the wolves to hunt you, one of two people I was sure was -not- in the JL circle
I've remarked wolves tend to not vote here and there, just enough to disrupt any vote analysis. That's just a very poor display of incompetence as a wolf and should be punished. Wolves are supposed to be the most active players since they have the most exciting role. I propose immediate lynching of non-voting wolves.
At first I was like "what the heck", but now I'm like "oh well, Reis".