Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan T
As for the conversation about who is more likely a wolf, the quiet players or the loud and out front players, I find many different people's comments confusing a bit to me and perhaps even to the point of having some agenda behind them.
Its a very easy point of reference that is true in every game.
Its very unusual for all of the wolves to be loud or all of them to be quiet. Most often you have 1 or a couple of louder, out front wolves helping drive conversation in certain directions. You also usually have 1 or a couple of wolves who hide in the shadows and avoid attention. This means you can't say people who are quiet are wolves, or people who are loud or out front are wolves.
Villagers who are quiet = don't contribute much, and if lynched less likely to be lynching people who will help you win.
Wolves who are quiet = if you lynch them, it helps remove someone who could do alot of harm behind the scenes without drawing much suspicion.
Villagers who are noisy = Usually draw alot of attention on themselves, often end up costing the village time in lynching good villagers who just were overeager. Usually later in the game will be active and involved in conversation.
Wolves who are noisy = Lynching them usually helps you put together some pieces as they often say alot during the game, and you can go off of what they say (or perhaps dont say) to determine your next steps.
So, thats the reasoning behind my conversation earlier with Narcizo about who we think are the quieter wolves are. I'll probably go for someone whom I don't find contributing much right now today with my arrest, however by no means do I think that means someone making a bold in your face play isn't a wolf. Also I don't necessarily feel post count = quiet or not either. Some people talk alot but say very little.
|
I agree that there are normally quiet and active wolves but I think this is more down to randomness than some sort of masterplan by the wolves. I would imagine that wolves all try and mimic their villager game to avoid looking
suspiciously active or quiet. So if ITC suddenly started a game with a flurry of posts then I'd be very suspicious of him. This makes him look damned if he does and damned if he doesn't now - but I would suggest he gradually starts to participate more.
However, I still think the policy of weeding out the quiet players early on is a sound one, even if there are going to be some active wolves. While someone being active or quiet is no guarantee of their allegiance I don't think there's any doubt that active villager players generally further the cause of the village more than quiet ones. There is also more opportunity that an active wolf will slip up and post something incriminating. (admittedly there is also the danger of that from an active villager - I thought I'd incriminated myself by talking too much in the Big City game). As a villager I would always rather have a game where everyone is talking than one where nothing is being said, particularly early on. (Then again, I like there to be lots of talk for me to build up elaborate conspiracy theories around
)
If this makes me look like I'm pushing too hard in one direction or having an agenda then so be it. My conviction is that going after quiet players at the start is correct play and I don't see any reason not to repeat that conviction. I do have an agenda - getting people to post more.
Totally agree about the dangers of blindly using the post counter to determine "contribution" though.