WW CXLVI: Portal GAME OVER - Test8

[Marc Vaughan]

Originally Posted by Ragone

Aka The only way to win is not to play(vote)

Thats pretty much along the lines of what I'm thinking presently ...

Either:
(1) We've been amazingly bad and beaten all kinds of statistics by missing every single wolf in the pack.
(2) There are no wolves and not playing is the way to 'win'.

Now if '1' is true then we're at the toasty stage of developments anyway I'd have thought - if as has been conjectured there are 5 wolves I'd say we have next to no chance at this stage ..... opinions?

[Marc Vaughan]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Anyway, if we did this, we'd be absolutely banking on there being no wolves. I'm not sure about that. On the other hand, if all of us were for the idea in theory, it could work -- as long as enough people are around at deadline to deal with possible last-minute wolf votes.

Lets face it if we don't vote then while we might not vote out a wolf ... at least we know we won't be killing a villager, which we've proven very good at on past nights

[Marc Vaughan]

I'd prefer a no vote tbh - but thats off the table from the looks of things already ... so:

Vote GLaDOS

[Ragone]

Originally Posted by Barkeep49

"Here let me just throw out a list of people as wolves without giving any reasons," Narcizo decided in post 1385.

You know i'm really beginning to wonder...

[Marc Vaughan]

Originally Posted by Ragone

You know i'm really beginning to wonder...

I have had thoughts about Narcizo - his eyebrows look decidely Wolfy in the right light ..... plus he does seem to throw accusations about incredibly freely.

However I thnk at this stage of things most of us are a tad concerned and with no one coming forward indicating abilities which could help us we're really left continually shooting blind.

The only 'abilities' we've seen so far are apparently a Seer who's only act was to die quietly after voting a few times for someone who turned out to be innocent*.

The only other ability known are simply ones which don't actually constructively help us - ie. having multiple votes is all well and good, but without information to make those votes constructive its the difference betwen handing a toddler a hand gun or a sub-machine gun .... neither are good options

Hence at this stage I'm erring on the size of Narcizo just being a confused villager rather than a wolf, don't give anyone a gun and lets see if we can avoid the deaths.

*Personal note - you could have a seer in a game with no wolves, it'd further confuse people and encourage the thought that there was danger ..

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Marc Vaughan

Now if '1' is true then we're at the toasty stage of developments anyway I'd have thought - if as has been conjectured there are 5 wolves I'd say we have next to no chance at this stage ..... opinions?

This has me coming around. If there are wolves, we've pretty much lost, right? Even if it's a small chance, maybe our best bet is still to hope there's none, because if we're at 6-5, that's a crazy uphill battle.

[Barkeep49]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

This has me coming around. If there are wolves, we've pretty much lost, right? Even if it's a small chance, maybe our best bet is still to hope there's none, because if we're at 6-5, that's a crazy uphill battle.

See I was starting to come to the opposite view. By dumb luck alone we should stand a really good chance of hitting a wolf so maybe we should just, you know, vote for someone.

[Marc Vaughan]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

This has me coming around. If there are wolves, we've pretty much lost, right? Even if it's a small chance, maybe our best bet is still to hope there's none, because if we're at 6-5, that's a crazy uphill battle.

Yeah at 6-5 with no information available we basically have no chance imho; not just that but of the people culled no one has been shown to have a role apart from the 'Seer'.

That to me sounds dodgy at some point people would have spoken out about their roles or at least I'd have hoped they'd have had some useful information provided by them

Or to put it another way - I don't play Werewolf games, but from what I've seen previously you generally have:

* From the sounds of things 4-5 Wolves
* Various villagers with skills, I'm guessing at least 3-4 roles within a group?

That means that there would be 7-9 people within the game with defined roles which would be revealed on their deaths - so far we've had ONE person shown as having a role when he was culled .... that either means:

(1) We're setting some sort of record for probability here by missing all the roled players (good or evil) when voting ... thats pretty impressive.
(2) All our 'good' roled players are so paranoid that they're not talking at all about their roles - heck if I had one I'd 'out' it myself at this point just to show that they exist and indicate that at least some 'norms' of a Werewolf game are in play.
(3) The roles available to the good players (remember there are 2-3 active still most likely presuming a standard game) are so ineffectual that they've failed to garner any information at all on the wolves or even information that might contribute towards them guiding discussions towards a wolf subtly (ie. we seem to be pretty darn good at culling villagers).

So I'm aware what are the 'normal' roles available for villagers in a game - obviously people have mentioned a 'seer' and a 'body guard' ... what else is normally around?

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Barkeep49

See I was starting to come to the opposite view. By dumb luck alone we should stand a really good chance of hitting a wolf so maybe we should just, you know, vote for someone.

But if there's 5 wolves, that means that all 6 villagers need to vote for a wolf. Not just that, they need to vote for the same wolf -- otherwise the wolves can vote together and drive the vote. Dumb luck won't help us there.

[Passacaglia]

MV -- there's also a duke, which was Zinto. Unless he obtained a "duke cube" by pushing the button. The duke is generally a villager who has the ability once per game to change the outcome of a vote, and make it so that whoever he wants is the winner of the vote.

[Passacaglia]

Although, FWIW, the duke has been a wolf, too. *glares at BK for his Angels and Demons game*

[Marc Vaughan]

Originally Posted by Barkeep49

See I was starting to come to the opposite view. By dumb luck alone we should stand a really good chance of hitting a wolf so maybe we should just, you know, vote for someone.

That doesn't make any sense really - if we're shooting blind and its 6-5 villagers to wolves .. then presuming the wolves know each other and can communicate secretly (can they normally in these games?) we're toast ...

Simply put the chance of all 6 villagers managing to ascertain who to vote for and pile onto a wolf is unlikely, however all five wolves can easily subtly bias a vote to ensure that a villager is sacrificed if theres any sort of split in villager voting at all.

Then tomorrow night its the same again but even easier for the wolves, then subsequent nights they actually out number the villagers and its game over.

At present to me we either:

* Decide not to vote as a 'pack' (ie. everyone does it)
or
* we decide everyone votes on a single person (ie. everyone does it)

If we decide along these lines then we have a 50-50 (roughly) chance of hitting a wolf if they exist ... and if anyone splits from the pack then we presume they've got a long bushy tail.

Thats the ONLY chance we have at all with the game - its a slim one at best.

I don't mind which approach is taken - ie. no voting or pack voting on a single person, but we need to decide and go with it as a group imho ... otherwise GlaDOS or the (possibly non-existant) wolves win by default ...

[Marc Vaughan]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

MV -- there's also a duke, which was Zinto. Unless he obtained a "duke cube" by pushing the button. The duke is generally a villager who has the ability once per game to change the outcome of a vote, and make it so that whoever he wants is the winner of the vote.

That goes in with my 'no wolves' theory of making us stab each other - its another ability which is really no help at all .... ie. yes it can change the vote, but with no information about the 'bad people' its really just changing the direction of a bullet from one potential innocent to another potential innocent ...

[Passacaglia]

I'm about to go grab lunch, but I'll lend some support to this idea.

UNVOTE PACKERFANATIC

[Barkeep49]

I'm up for either of Mark's options but after reading his and Pass's analysis I like my vote on GLaDOS just fine.

[bhlloy]

Generally I have to say I agree with MV's analysis in here. As far as I can see we've been villager-villager the whole damn time. Either we are incredibly unlucky, the wolves are playing a masterful game or there's some other mechanic at work here. I'd lean towards the third. And I'd also like to see the BG reveal if he's out there. Usually it wouldn't make sense to do that but in this situation, it would help us figure out what the frick is going on and if we can't do that, we've probably lost in the next couple days anyway.

If we do have wolves, the bloc I was alluding to yesterday would be along the lines of ragone - tyke - McKerney. The third could also be kwhit and like you guys I'm starting to feel pretty bad about Narc also. But if we do have wolves I'm pretty confident about the first two. Seems like they are working well to direct the village in a particular way a few of the days we've had serious choices to make.

[PackerFanatic]

Good golly. Now I am really lost.

[PackerFanatic]

I like this idea this best.

VOTE GLADOS

[PackerFanatic]

Sheer dumb luck tells me we should have hit SOMETHING by now.

[bhlloy]

Originally Posted by PackerFanatic

Sheer dumb luck tells me we should have hit SOMETHING by now.

Yeah I cant get my head around this either. Ironically the only scenario I can come up with for us not to is that I'm a wolf, because I've changed three lynch results (although we now know that britrock-Julio was villager vs villager)

But I'm vanilla, just like I suppose everyone else is. And even as a wolf there is no way i would play like that. So go figure

[KWhit]

I think that's a horrible idea. If the idea is to kill Glados there is still time to do that. The clock has almost run out for us ONLY if there are wolves in the game. If the win condition is just "vote for Glados" there's still time to do that later. Let's vote for a vilager and see if we get one.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

Yeah I cant get my head around this either. Ironically the only scenario I can come up with for us not to is that I'm a wolf, because I've changed three lynch results (although we now know that britrock-Julio was villager vs villager)

But I'm vanilla, just like I suppose everyone else is. And even as a wolf there is no way i would play like that. So go figure

So you're saying that you're on top of your own suspect list?

[Marc Vaughan]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

Yeah I cant get my head around this either. Ironically the only scenario I can come up with for us not to is that I'm a wolf, because I've changed three lynch results (although we now know that britrock-Julio was villager vs villager)

LOL - I've been thinking over 'Narcs' spontaneous accusations earlier and have come up with a similar line regarding me.

I reckon Narc is innocent based on the fact he accused me.

Putting it simply I'm not a WW junkie so am less biased by past-experiences of what should happen, as such I've thrown around unusual ideas (ie. there are no wolves) which probably don't get proposed in a game normally (?).

This would be a great tact for a wolf to take imho - as such I can see why Narc accused me and indeed by doing so he's showing a good reason to take me down and that he is trying to be constructive and help 'win' (ie. he's a villager).

If he was a wolf he'd be looking to preserve me at all costs, as a villager who's on the wrong track I'd be invaluable to keeping the game going.

PS - This does actually play into my 'we're all villagers' theory nicely as well.

[Marc Vaughan]

Originally Posted by KWhit

I think that's a horrible idea. If the idea is to kill Glados there is still time to do that. The clock has almost run out for us ONLY if there are wolves in the game. If the win condition is just "vote for Glados" there's still time to do that later. Let's vote for a vilager and see if we get one.

Presuming we have to take GlaDOS out - we don't know the requirements for doing so, ie. how many votes are required for a 'win' in that scenario?

I'd say most people are heading that way - lets give it a go it'll give us information:

* If we do it and we don't win and someone dies then perhaps this time we'll get some information which shows something which will help us ascertain whats going on (plus at that point I'd be inclined to believe this is a standard WW game) - but at the very least we won't have lynched a villager (ie. at worst it'd be 5-5 against the wolves and still not a loss technically yet whereas if we vote on a person and someone dies then we have basically lost if we hit a villager as then it'd be 4-5 in favour of the wolves).
* If we do it and don't win but no one dies then we can't be sure there are no wolves - but at least we haven't lost anything.
* If we do it and we win - well we feel very clever and eat cake

[Passacaglia]

5-5 is technically a win for the wolves, in standard WW at least.

But I think what KWhit is getting at is -- why do it now, with 11 players? Why not just wait until there's 5 players, or 3 -- if we get down to 5, and there's no wolves lynched, and the wolves haven't won, that would mean there's only 2 wolves? That seems unlikely, and at that point, we can vote Glados.

And if the argument is simply that we're afraid to lynch a villager, then we lose. Lynching is our only way to kill wolves -- if we don't take it, we have no hope.

[bhlloy]

Last thought for a while

I really think its one of two things here. Either we're not in a regular WW game and we have to figure out some way to win "outside" of the normal WW and the written rules. This seems too abstract for me but CF did hint at this at the start

Or b) we're dealing with some expert wolves who are playing us like kippers. If that is the case there's only one person in this game who I think could pull it off and that's Narc. Someone who is starting to arouse a little suspicion based on how he has played. I think if this is the case it's pretty simple to go back and identify the other wolves. I don't really see a case for PF other than he got saved once (and that was me, and I know I didn't do it for that reason)

So those seem to be my choices at this point. Vote glados on the hope this is some abstract non-WW test of how smart we all are, or hope this is a regular WW game and try and hit a wolf.

[bhlloy]

If Narc does show up to be a wolf, Marc V has shot straight to the top of my wolf cub list with that defense, BTW. Classic defence by proxy play

[bhlloy]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

5-5 is technically a win for the wolves, in standard WW at least.

But I think what KWhit is getting at is -- why do it now, with 11 players? Why not just wait until there's 5 players, or 3 -- if we get down to 5, and there's no wolves lynched, and the wolves haven't won, that would mean there's only 2 wolves? That seems unlikely, and at that point, we can vote Glados.

And if the argument is simply that we're afraid to lynch a villager, then we lose. Lynching is our only way to kill wolves -- if we don't take it, we have no hope.

Huh, this actually makes a ton of sense

[Marc Vaughan]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

And if the argument is simply that we're afraid to lynch a villager, then we lose. Lynching is our only way to kill wolves -- if we don't take it, we have no hope.

As I said I don't mind either way - the fact I'm open to a GlaDOS vote means I don't think there are wolves; the 'problem' is that we don't have ANY information on who's innocent and not if there are wolves.

I presume in a normal game someone by now would have revealed themselves and their powers and their actions (finding wolves, preventing a death or whatever) would have backed them up and they'd be known to be 'safe' ... then they could have chosen the victim if we picked one.

As it stands we each only know that we ourselves are innocent - thus if we are going to 'block vote' (which is the only option if there are wolves) how do we decide who chooses the target ...

I'd suggest NOT ME, as I don't have a bloody clue and am inclined to believe there are no wolves .... but for those who believe there are, how do we decide who chooses the victim?

(I'm happy to be the victim if that helps - but I'm a vanilla villager so its not going to help at all in the long run either way)

[bhlloy]

So based on that stuff, I'm going to put this out there an hope for some traction

Vote Narcizo

[Marc Vaughan]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

If Narc does show up to be a wolf, Marc V has shot straight to the top of my wolf cub list with that defense, BTW. Classic defence by proxy play

You're welcome

Seeing as I wasn't really on anyones list apart from Narc's and he seemed more on the defensive than anything I realised when I posted it that might be the reaction - but tbh at this stage I don't really mind and am just trying to give out all the information I can think of regarding peoples actions; even if it puts my head on the block - as I mentioned in my post above if people want to cull me thats cool .... but ultimately its not going to help anyone to take down another villager.

[Passacaglia]

I'm down.

VOTE NARCIZO

[Marc Vaughan]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

I'm down.

VOTE NARCIZO

Ok presuming we all pile onto Narc which appears to be the preferred course of action for yourself and bhlloy ...

If he's a wolf, great then we know we're in a near standard game - hurrah, everyone collapse in puddles of nervous sweat etc.

If we don't though - what have we gained exactly? - we still don't know what style of game we're playing or anything else.

I'll vote for Narcizo is someone can give me ONE concrete piece of evidence which indicates there are wolves amongst us - come on we know if this is a standard WW game (ie. has wolfy people in it) then there should be people with powers here, at this stage of proceedings we've likely lost anyway what would revealing information/powers/colour of underwear really matter now?

(at this point my in-movie character would likely breakdown in tears saying "I just want to know whats going on" )

[Narcizo]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

Or b) we're dealing with some expert wolves who are playing us like kippers. If that is the case there's only one person in this game who I think could pull it off and that's Narc. Someone who is starting to arouse a little suspicion based on how he has played. I think if this is the case it's pretty simple to go back and identify the other wolves. I don't really see a case for PF other than he got saved once (and that was me, and I know I didn't do it for that reason)

You know I'm flattered and everything but I can think of three left in the game who are better wolves than I am. In fact with a decent slice of luck pretty much anyone can plough through the field - there are games in the past where the village have ripped themselves apart.

My timezone means I have to push things - it's often my undoing as a villager because if I get it wrong then everyone is going to suspect me. So I admit that I was wrong about Darth Vilus and wrong about Britrock. No arguments I deserve to be doubted on the back of that.

I'm not fantastically bothered if I'm lynched. And if either Pass or Bhlloy are villagers and they keep their vote where they are then we probably will lose. I doubt the village is in a position to win anyway, unless there's less than 4 wolves - which isn't an impossibility if there have been conversions. Or, like I said before, this is something like the Star War game with only 2 active wolves and 3 latent wolves. Who knows maybe we have already lynched latent wolves.

Personally I'm suspicious of anyone wanting to vote Glados today.

[Narcizo]

Originally Posted by Marc Vaughan

You're welcome

Seeing as I wasn't really on anyones list apart from Narc's and he seemed more on the defensive than anything

I wasn't being defensive - why would I be defensive. I'd say I was being more fatalistic than anything. Mixed with a dose of anger at myself for having been unable to hit a wolf all game long. But if there's four or five wolves then they're obviously going to be able to build up momentum against someone. How do you combat that if there's six-seven villagers?

[Narcizo]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

In fact, I'm calling your bluff here -- I have a hunch that now that I've done this, you'll end up unvoting him (unless it's a runaway, in which you'll leave it on and take all the credit).

VOTE PACKERFANATIC

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

I'm about to go grab lunch, but I'll lend some support to this idea.

UNVOTE PACKERFANATIC

[Marc Vaughan]

Still waiting for a piece of concrete evidence .....

(watches tumbleweed)

[Narcizo]

Well personally I think the run on Packer yesterday is about as concrete as you're likely to get in werewolf without a seer but that might just be me.

[Narcizo]

And by Packer I, of course, mean Britrock. Because their names are very similar.

[Marc Vaughan]

Any idea how many tests there are? - victory conditions didn't indicate anything about Wolves - just that we have to survive all the tests ...

Surely by voting GlaDOS and not killing someone we improve our odds of that as there is one test per day? ... thus killing fewer people means more chance of victory.

At worst case we lose one person per random death at night that way.

[Marc Vaughan]

Originally Posted by Narcizo

Well personally I think the run on Packer yesterday is about as concrete as you're likely to get in werewolf without a seer but that might just be me.

No crime no foul there for me - I put that down to people not wanting a close vote after the oddity the time before with the hidden additional voting.

As such shifting votes to ensure that didn't happen again is fairly normal/sensible imho.

[Narcizo]

I've got to go soon. Bhlloy says I'm the great mastermind wolf. If that's the case why did I start the say accusing at least half of the remaining players of being wolves. Doesn't seem like the best strategy to employ under the circumstances. What bothers me most is that we were close to getting Packer twice - and yesterday I was a Post Quick Reply away from switching my vote to him. I'm going to be furious with myself if he's a wolf and we let him get off the hook not once, but twice.

Look at the voters on Packer on day four. There's 10 voters on Autumn of which we know 2 that are villagers. There's 7 on Packer and 4 of those are villagers. Don't you think that sort of disparity suggests that the wolves were piling onto Autumn? Why would they do that unless they were trying to save Packer.

I'm off to bed now. Hope the game is still going tomorrow but I suspect it won't be. Sorry if I haven't made a better case but it's hard to find the motivation at this stage of the game considering the odds against the village at this stage.

[bhlloy]

I will say the one defense Narc has is that he's not around to pull the strings enough close to deadline. So that's probably one big hole in my theory

Somebody help me out here. Anyone have a good name to go with for today?

[Ragone]

Could someone tally upp the votes.. I'm at work otherwise id do it at this point.

[tyketime]

I'm leaving office soon. I'll do it when I get home if someone else doesn't beat me to it.

[Simbo Klice]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

I will say the one defense Narc has is that he's not around to pull the strings enough close to deadline. So that's probably one big hole in my theory

Somebody help me out here. Anyone have a good name to go with for today?

I wish I did. Passa or Packer would be my top two, and if Narcizo's as good as people have been saying he is... Someone's been pulling the wool over our eyes.

[GoldenEagle]

[Ragone]

Ok reading through the thread as best as i can on a phone at work.. I think bhlloy is right.. we need reveals.

I believe either narcizo or packers to be the bodyguard. Narcizo seems to be evaluating everyone trying to figure out who to vote and protect at the same time. Packers appears to be trying to keep enough heat on himself to cover himself in that role and keep himself out of the wolves crosshairs.. So i could see both being in that role.

Since Narcizo is asleep, i'd really like to hear from packers on this.

[Ragone]

And since i'm asking for a reveal, its only fair to say i'm an villager with no powers. if i had a power i'd hope it would allow me to lynch crimsonfox.

[KWhit]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

5-5 is technically a win for the wolves, in standard WW at least.

But I think what KWhit is getting at is -- why do it now, with 11 players? Why not just wait until there's 5 players, or 3 -- if we get down to 5, and there's no wolves lynched, and the wolves haven't won, that would mean there's only 2 wolves? That seems unlikely, and at that point, we can vote Glados.

And if the argument is simply that we're afraid to lynch a villager, then we lose. Lynching is our only way to kill wolves -- if we don't take it, we have no hope.

Yes, that is what I was quickly trying to say today in between meetings from my phone. Thanks for doing a better job at explaining my position.