Werewolf XXXVI: Resident Evil (S.T.A.R.S. Wins! Post #1424)

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Tyrith

Yeah, referring to what hoops was saying, I don't think the chief would be so brazen as to start pulling stunts like that immediately. He's going to be too valuable to our long term plans to take the chance it massively backfires. Furthermore, I would like to think that the people in these games are honest about their real lives and about when they aren't going to be around -- gaming to that degree seems over our unwritten line, personally. So I'm inclined to think the vote doesn't mean anything.

I pretty much already said how I feel the chief likely would be most benefitial to work. You and Hoops can go back and read that, but what I said basically agrees that the chief's biggest usage probably comes from his death as long as he can live several days. The chief likely is probably trying to -not- draw attention to himself.

I think alot of Cronin's points this morning have been forced and using faulty logic to get from point A to point B. I'm not quite sure what to make of that, but I think it would be rather hasty to jump on him to vote day 1 for just trying to come up with some thoughts. At least he is contributing, and good or bad it gives us things to look back on and find later if he is contradicting himself or not.

[Glengoyne]

Allright. I'm finding it hard to get much out of this other than a suspicion that Sndvls and Alan might be on the same side. Which means they know about each other, so they can't be STARS. Or since it would be pretty silly for bad guys align themselves this early..so that means that at least one of them is probably allright.

Just thinking outloud, proving that I've learned nothing from my experiences in this game to date.

I'll be checking in from time to time throughout the day, as this is shaping up as a rough day. Perhaps I'll host a WW game someday. The theme would be Sarbanes Oxley "Some of you are clearly out of compliance!"

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Tyrith

The problem with this is that it only works if other people are going to think along your same lines. A lot of day ones involve people just throwing things out there, and we can rest assured they aren't all going to be the police chief or a non-good guy. Are we just going to start killing people for independent thoughts on day one?

I agree that I could be completely wrong. I'm just saying that as I thought about my role (regular stars) and the rules of the game, I realized that there was no way I was going to vote first. If any other stars had a similiar thought, I'd like to hear it.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

If you really think so, then vote for me. I know for sure the police chief won't vote for me.

I don't have a breakdown, just a theory - one I hinted at last night. Normally I like to get a vote out there right away, but this game I waited to see who moved first.

I already stated that I doubt i would vote for you unless some compelling reason comes forth. Disagreeing with your reasoning on day 1 isnt necessarily a compelling reason to me.

I just disagree with you is all, and still think you are using faulty logic. Hoops (who you voted for) did not move first, Lathum did. yet you used that opportunity as an excuse to pile onto hoops and push him closer to being a day 1 run off candidate rather than put a vote on an original person whom has no votes.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

Allright. I'm finding it hard to get much out of this other than a suspicion that Sndvls and Alan might be on the same side. Which means they know about each other, so they can't be STARS. Or since it would be pretty silly for bad guys align themselves this early..so that means that at least one of them is probably allright.

Just thinking outloud, proving that I've learned nothing from my experiences in this game to date.

I'll be checking in from time to time throughout the day, as this is shaping up as a rough day. Perhaps I'll host a WW game someday. The theme would be Sarbanes Oxley "Some of you are clearly out of compliance!"

I dunno, my usual assumption when someone comes out and posts what Sndvls does is that Sndvls is -NOT- on my team and is just trying to buddy up with me to make me not look at him closer. If they think Im a good guy, then they must be a good guy too right???

Doesn't always happen like that in Werewolf. Of course I pretty much am a very suspicious person in these games and have a very hard time ever trusting anyone. For me its always a case of what have you done for me lately.

[Tyrith]

Cronin, I'm inclined to believe you're just pushing some well-intentioned by bad ideas. For now. As last game showed, things like that do tend to get people killed on day 1, so it makes me think you aren't a bad guy. I'm with alan's voting idea for now.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Alan T

I pretty much already said how I feel the chief likely would be most benefitial to work. You and Hoops can go back and read that, but what I said basically agrees that the chief's biggest usage probably comes from his death as long as he can live several days. The chief likely is probably trying to -not- draw attention to himself.

I think alot of Cronin's points this morning have been forced and using faulty logic to get from point A to point B. I'm not quite sure what to make of that, but I think it would be rather hasty to jump on him to vote day 1 for just trying to come up with some thoughts. At least he is contributing, and good or bad it gives us things to look back on and find later if he is contradicting himself or not.

Where were you in Lathum's game, where Blade got the bandwagon on me for "coming up with some thoughts?"



I'm open to whatever other ideas people have, but I would like to hear what people thought when they found out they were regular Stars.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by spleen1015

I'm going to believe in hoops this game because of odds. He was a wolf last game and that game was pretty big. This game is also pretty big, so him being a wolf is pretty slim.

With two camps of wolves, or at least a camp of wolves and a camp of zombie sympathisers, I don't think the odds necessarilly bear that out.

[Tyrith]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

Where were you in Lathum's game, where Blade got the bandwagon on me for "coming up with some thoughts?"



I'm open to whatever other ideas people have, but I would like to hear what people thought when they found out they were regular Stars.

Hey, you started a voting trip on me just for trying to get something done day one :P

[st.cronin]

dola

I'm open to voting for Lathum, as well.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

Where were you in Lathum's game, where Blade got the bandwagon on me for "coming up with some thoughts?"



I'm open to whatever other ideas people have, but I would like to hear what people thought when they found out they were regular Stars.

Well All I can say is I have been there before. I very rarely am a night kill by bad guys because usually the good guys find some reason to want to lynch me in the first few days. I talk alot in WW games, throw out alot of ideas (some of them better than others) and I want to encourage others to contribute with meaningful conversation.

If you are on my team or not, I do not know. You are however contributing to this discussion which for me is enough to want me to allow you a pass on day 1 until we have more information.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Tyrith

Hey, you started a voting trip on me just for trying to get something done day one :P

Yes, and then I changed my vote, and backed you to the bitter end. If only others had listened to me.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

With two camps of wolves, or at least a camp of wolves and a camp of zombie sympathisers, I don't think the odds necessarilly bear that out.

You are either behind about 15 posts or just repeating what I said!

Oh and if you ever run a game based on Sarbanes Oxley, I'll vote to lynch you every day regardless if Im allowed to or not.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

dola

I'm open to voting for Lathum, as well.

I would probably vote for you before I voted for Lathum. Right now on Day 1 however I would rather avoid voting for you, Lathum or Hoops.

[st.cronin]

I'll be back later, in time to change my vote if necessary. I'm curious to see how this plays out.

[Tyrith]

All hail the SEC!

[Tyrith]

All hail the SEC!

[Tyrith]

Dola, bastard message board.

[hoopsguy]

I agree with everyone who has said that being good/bad in a previous game has no bearing upon the current one.

If I was going to cast a vote for someone at this point it would be Lathum 1st, then Cronin 2nd. Both of those people have cast votes on me so I know that they are not the Police Chief. If you take that role away and add it to the Umbrella/Zombies I would expect that I have a 50% chance of hitting a bad guy using this as my only voting criteria.

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I'm open to whatever other ideas people have, but I would like to hear what people thought when they found out they were regular Stars.

I sometimes think you give people too much credit for planning before the game starts.

[hoopsguy]

Again, I posted something that isn't quite a complete thought.

If we go back to the 11-5-3 ratio then random selection indicated 8/19 chance of hitting a bad guy. No one will vote for themselves, but members of stars have an 8/18 chance of hitting a bad guy. Now if you know someone is not the Police Chief, your odds have improved to 8/17. That is what I meant above with the 50% chance of getting a good vote in based on removing the Police Chief.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

I agree with everyone who has said that being good/bad in a previous game has no bearing upon the current one.

If I was going to cast a vote for someone at this point it would be Lathum 1st, then Cronin 2nd. Both of those people have cast votes on me so I know that they are not the Police Chief. If you take that role away and add it to the Umbrella/Zombies I would expect that I have a 50% chance of hitting a bad guy using this as my only voting criteria.

If you are being truthful and are Stars, then lathum would not be the chief
If Lathum is not the chief and we assume there are 10-11 Stars players, it means That was 9-10% of the possible Stars roles. If a normal player has a 53-58% chance of being a stars, and everything up to this point about Lathum is true, it would still give him a 47-53% chance of being stars.

Now that sounds like a pretty decent reason for -you- to vote them if you so choose, but then the remainder of us have to take alot on faith to join in on that 5-6% voting advantage. I am not entirely sure that I want to condemn a contributing player on day 1 based on the faith of one person who has a ~55% chance of being good's statement that player B has a 53% chance of being bad.

I think there are just waaay too many ifs in your statement to jump for on day 1. Now this type of data is what we want to keep track of over the course of 2-3 days and it becomes something meaningful.

[path12]

Originally Posted by Tyrith

Are we just going to start killing people for independent thoughts on day one?

Start? That's kind of the norm lately, unfortunately. Seems to me that most day one showdowns are usually just due to reading too much into initial thoughts, and are usually good/good.

That said, with three teams I think we actually have a better chance than normal of getting a bad guy in a runoff today.

[Mr. Wednesday]

Originally Posted by Tyrith

Actually, screw all that. Lathum said he was gonna be gone all day. This is too overt to be a wolf move like that. Now I have other kinds of alarms going off. It's too early for all this.

It's day 1, usually a misunderstanding leads to a bandwagon onto a good guy. :-/

[Tyrith]

Originally Posted by path12

Start? That's kind of the norm lately, unfortunately. Seems to me that most day one showdowns are usually just due to reading too much into initial thoughts, and are usually good/good.

That said, with three teams I think we actually have a better chance than normal of getting a bad guy in a runoff today.

Yeah. I'm suspicious of cronin right now, but I'm going to give him a chance to earn some trust back. If we're going to force people to put their opinions out there we have to start by letting the people that do speak live unless we have a really good reason to kill them.

[Mr. Wednesday]

Originally Posted by spleen1015

I'm going to believe in hoops this game because of odds. He was a wolf last game and that game was pretty big. This game is also pretty big, so him being a wolf is pretty slim.

Statistical fallacy... roles in the games are independent events.

[Mr. Wednesday]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

My own point of view is that as regular stars, the last thing I want to do is cast a random vote on somebody. The only way for the day 1 vote to make sense is to lay back and let the umbrella/zombie/chief pick suspects - then day 2, we go through that info to see what we see.

As regular STARS, the only one out of that lot who is going to pick someone worth voting for is the chief. Umbrella will be figuring that anyone who isn't them works well, zombies the same, meaning that aside from the chief, the baddies are most likely to pick STARS. It's to the STARS favor to drive the voting so that there's a better chance of picking up a zombie or Umbrella.

[hoopsguy]

Gang is all here - but I'm out for about 90 minutes as work calls.

I would encourage people to find two other candidates to run off, with me not being in the mix. If that is not how it works, then I'll have a more exciting Day 1 than I wanted to have and hopefully some good information will emerge for later in the game.

[Alan T]

I think all this pushing for some of the more contributing, experienced players is a bit baffling to me. I already stated the profile of the type of player I likely will vote for, and gave the name of who it likely will be.

As of right now, only two people haven't checked in since roles. Saldana and Bulletsponge. I think pretty highly of Saldana's analysis usually when I have been on the wrong team before, so in hoping he is on my team this time, I wont be voting for him on day 1 at least (with the hopes he's just busy today and will be here more in the future to help).

Just to get things going in what i feel is a better direction, I'll go with what my thought has been all along.

Vote Bulletsponge

Now with that said, I think the advantages to this vote is:

- Bullet is one of the newer players in the game
- Bullet usually is fun to play with but I think I want someone who later in the game is more likely to be digging through posts trying to trap someone on the other team.

The disadvantages to this vote:

-Typically an inactive player seems to have better odds of being good (most often but not always, players who are with cool roles or wolves will be active from the start)
- There is still a ~53% chance that he is good

Its a day 1 vote, but this vote is anything but random. There are my reasons for the vote, and they aren't just because so and so looked at me wrong in WW game 14!

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Alan T

I think all this pushing for some of the more contributing, experienced players is a bit baffling to me. I already stated the profile of the type of player I likely will vote for, and gave the name of who it likely will be.

As of right now, only two people haven't checked in since roles. Saldana and Bulletsponge. I think pretty highly of Saldana's analysis usually when I have been on the wrong team before, so in hoping he is on my team this time, I wont be voting for him on day 1 at least (with the hopes he's just busy today and will be here more in the future to help).

Just to get things going in what i feel is a better direction, I'll go with what my thought has been all along.

Vote Bulletsponge

Now with that said, I think the advantages to this vote is:

- Bullet is one of the newer players in the game
- Bullet usually is fun to play with but I think I want someone who later in the game is more likely to be digging through posts trying to trap someone on the other team.

The disadvantages to this vote:

-Typically an inactive player seems to have better odds of being good (most often but not always, players who are with cool roles or wolves will be active from the start)
- There is still a ~53% chance that he is good

Its a day 1 vote, but this vote is anything but random. There are my reasons for the vote, and they aren't just because so and so looked at me wrong in WW game 14!

Since I stink at the internet, let me try that again.
Vote Bulletsponge

[BrianD]

It is interesting how the most active players tend to be the most in danger at the beginning of a game. Normally this comes down to A votes for B because A doesn't know what else to do, B votes for A because B is good so A must be bad...bandwagons commence. One of these games I hope to have a bad role so I can enjoy the chaos rather than be frustrated by it.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by BrianD

It is interesting how the most active players tend to be the most in danger at the beginning of a game. Normally this comes down to A votes for B because A doesn't know what else to do, B votes for A because B is good so A must be bad...bandwagons commence. One of these games I hope to have a bad role so I can enjoy the chaos rather than be frustrated by it.

People only fall into the chaos if they allow themselves to. Like I responded to Hoops, him voting for Lathum might make sense for him mathematically at this point, however for the remainder of the players its a below 50% play and thus no better than your start off odds of voting for anyone. So anyone jumping on the well player B voted for Player A and I believe him more are just fooling themselves.

Only 3 ways to really handle today's vote:

1) Pure randomness - doesn't really help anything at all other than making sure you have a vote out there

2) Trying to achieve some goal for the day (obviously Zombies or umbrella people will vote for people not in their group, but everyone in all three groups can vote for people who they don't think they would help their cause on day 5-6-7)

3) Revenge reasoning for being voted for earlier in the day. Hoops gave a good example of why it might be logical for -him- alone to do that, but I am not sure what it accomplishes for the entire team.

[path12]

Random thought -- with three factions, two of whom know all their members, it will be as interesting to see who people don't mention as much as who they do....

[ntndeacon]

Since we seem to get a villager more often than not in these games I am gonna just pop in a vote on someone at random. I have no real reason to vote for them, but I am afraid we are in a good vs good vote off. So I
Vote Fouts

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by Alan T

People only fall into the chaos if they allow themselves to.

Doesn't this cover about 90% of werewolf history?

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by ntndeacon

Since we seem to get a villager more often than not in these games I am gonna just pop in a vote on someone at random. I have no real reason to vote for them, but I am afraid we are in a good vs good vote off. So I
Vote Fouts

Out of curiosity who are we in a good vs good vote off between?

[Alan T]

Well.. guess I was too slow to ask ntndeacon that.

That vote doesn't make much sense to me either. Well not as much the vote as the comment with it. I currently have the vote as:

(2) Hoopsguy - Lathum (112), st.cronin (125)
(1) St.cronin - Fouts (120)
(1) Bulletsponge - Alan (180)
(1) Fouts - Ntndeacon (184)

So I'm pretty puzzled at who the good vs good run off ntndeacon referenced is between right now.

[KWhit]

Originally Posted by BrianD

It is interesting how the most active players tend to be the most in danger at the beginning of a game. Normally this comes down to A votes for B because A doesn't know what else to do, B votes for A because B is good so A must be bad...bandwagons commence. One of these games I hope to have a bad role so I can enjoy the chaos rather than be frustrated by it.

This is very possibly a totally innocent comment, but I always find it suspicious when someone highlights their innocence in this way. Probably means nothing, but I want to get a vote out there and right now I have nothing else to go on. I will likely move this vote if something interesting presents itself.

A couple of other thoughts:

• I don't think Lathum is the Police Chief. That seems like too overt a play to make on day one. I also think it's kind of unlikely that he is a bad guy as they usually don't want to make the first vote.
• I don't believe we should vote for Hoops without a decent reason. He's always active in these games and provides good analysis.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by KWhit

This is very possibly a totally innocent comment, but I always find it suspicious when someone highlights their innocence in this way. Probably means nothing, but I want to get a vote out there and right now I have nothing else to go on. I will likely move this vote if something interesting presents itself.

A couple of other thoughts:

• I don't think Lathum is the Police Chief. That seems like too overt a play to make on day one. I also think it's kind of unlikely that he is a bad guy as they usually don't want to make the first vote.
• I don't believe we should vote for Hoops without a decent reason. He's always active in these games and provides good analysis.

Kwhit, if you were meaning to vote, I think you missed it. (I can't talk because I flubbed my vote post earlier myself)

[KWhit]

Originally Posted by Alan T

Kwhit, if you were meaning to vote, I think you missed it. (I can't talk because I flubbed my vote post earlier myself)

Hehe. Oops.

Yeah, so umm...

Vote BrianD.

[LoneStarGirl]

After reading some of your early analysis I dont believe I am smart enough for this game. Also, it seems we have there experts here that are going to blow some of us newer folk away. I am going back to the first page to reread the rules, but right now I have no grasp of who to vote for besides NOT voting for Lathum, hoops, alant or st. cronin

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by LoneStarGirl

After reading some of your early analysis I dont believe I am smart enough for this game. Also, it seems we have there experts here that are going to blow some of us newer folk away. I am going back to the first page to reread the rules, but right now I have no grasp of who to vote for besides NOT voting for Lathum, hoops, alant or st. cronin

I've been posting alot today, but I'm just trying to see if an experiment works this game. Don't take my constant posting to mean that I know anything more than anyone else. Your gut instinct might be just as right as mine, or even more right than mine. All I've been trying to push for today is for people to not fall into the normal day 1 trap of a lynch between two vocal good guys.

Instead, we might end up in a different day 1 lynch of a different good guy!

But seriously, I'm just calling people out on thoughts that are posted that don't seem to make full sense to me and just trying to admittedly push the vote away from some of the more solid players on day 1. (or even possibly day 2)

[LoneStarGirl]

Okay, right now I am having trouble understanding Nemesis and Infector. Are those two people that are already out there? OR are they created later? And the zombies get 100% chance if they try to kill somebody together. What is the sense of not trying to kill people together then? What are the advantages for one zombie going at it alone?

[LoneStarGirl]

Okay, so i am reading down and I see that Ozwell can change you into a Nemesis.... my fault.

So as a member of STARS I am pretty much again the zombies and Umbrella?

[Tyrith]

Yeah, I'm with alan, my main thing right now is making sure we don't kill people that are putting out ideas just because we might disagree with some of their conjecture. Kill them after they do it repeatedly.

The infector exists, but one of the Umbrella guys has to kidnap someone to turn them into Nemesis.

Just thought of another reason for why umbrella should create nemesis, related to "taking care of all of STARS" - by kidnapping a STARS member and turning them into nemesis they are getting a night kill against their goal of having to get rid of all the STARS members.

[hoopsguy]

LSG, you have been plenty smart in the games I have watched you play. Maybe not as wordy as some of us, but your instincts on who to vote for have been very good. Even in the Saw game, the instincts were good but you just were not able to sell the idea enough at the end.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by LoneStarGirl

Okay, right now I am having trouble understanding Nemesis and Infector. Are those two people that are already out there? OR are they created later? And the zombies get 100% chance if they try to kill somebody together. What is the sense of not trying to kill people together then? What are the advantages for one zombie going at it alone?

From the rules, the nemesis is not currently in the game. He is brought to the game by Ozwell Spencer (Umbrella) kidnapping a player and turning him into the nemesis. It's been debated so far whether or not umbrella would even want the nemesis around at all.

The infector is a type of zombie who in addition to participating in the night kills also has the ability to infect someone starting night 3. If the player is vaccinated however, the infector loses all ability to do future infection. Infecting someone is this game's version of a conversion.

There are a couple of reasons that come to my mind on why the zombies would or wouldn't do the 2 zombie kills for 100% chance:

1) Bigger chance of being discovered
2) Bodyguard block has bigger chance of preventing them from any action that night

On the positive side for them, it gives them a sure kill by teaming up. I've already done the math in my head to figure out what likely is the better percentage for them, but i don't feel like sharing that in this thread.

[hoopsguy]

I'm also very amused by Tyrith having 14 posts under his name, when he will probably have 2x that many on Day 1 of this game

OK, back to trying to figure out today.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by LoneStarGirl

Okay, so i am reading down and I see that Ozwell can change you into a Nemesis.... my fault.

So as a member of STARS I am pretty much again the zombies and Umbrella?

Basically thats right. Stars win if all the zombies are killed (regardless if umbrella is around or not). However its probably in the Stars interest to just kill umbrella members too as they are actively trying to kill the Stars.

Winning conditions are:

Zombies kill everyone (to get to a 1:1 ratio of zombies vs everyone else)
Umbrella kill stars
Stars kill zombies.

[Tyrith]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

I'm also very amused by Tyrith having 14 posts under his name, when he will probably have 2x that many on Day 1 of this game

OK, back to trying to figure out today.

I already have 20 posts in the thread...yeah, moving to our own board kicking my post count in the face.