WW XCIV Group Therapy - Game Over!

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

How does CR's theory even put himself in the clear, anyway? He theorizes one wolf in one group of four, another group in another group of 4, and two more left out there? So we've got wolves in all the groups he's made.

It points a finger at a group of 8 people, him not being part of that group.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Lathum

It points a finger at a group of 8 people, him not being part of that group.

Barely. He posits that 2 of a group of 8 are wolves, while 2 of a group of 12 are wolves? I don't think that's enough to convince anyone to restrict themselves to the group of 8.

[Telle]

Originally Posted by Autumn

Well, I think your reason wasn't much more than picking out of a hat, frankly, though yes you did offer a rationale. My worry is that there may be a deeper reason for you targeting Abe, not that you didn't give a reason at all. Clearly no one except the wolves have a real reason at this point.

And I could say the same about you. Or most anybody right now. It's Day 1.. we don't have much to go on yet.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Telle

And I could say the same about you. Or most anybody right now. It's Day 1.. we don't have much to go on yet.

But we do have something to go on with Abe. He's posted that he trusts Barkeep49 a lot. To me, that's saying that his role (which we're not supposed to reveal) is similar to his, meaning they're both villagers. I think that's what Autumn is getting at when he says that Abe specifically is a poor choice.

[Autumn]

Except I didn't vote for Abe.

I really am not wanting to harp on this, but you seem to be missing my point.

[Barkeep49]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

I'll run some math on the first part of Chief's pet theory: "Two people at random are likely to be villager/villager"

In a vacuum, if you assume 4 wolves + 1 sympathizer, then there are 16 "good" and 5 "bad" votes at this point.

16/21 * 15/20 = 240/420 = 57.1%
OK, this part does hold up although it is not much of a margin. If there are 6 "bad" votes then it doesn't hold up (exactly 50%).

The initial thing that tweaked me on this was the idea that we had to be villager/villager. I understand that the wolves like to shape the conversation, which shifts the probability from where it would be in a vacuum. But the wolf assignments are random. There isn't much they can do about "quiet player backlash" if NTN is a wolf, just to give one example. I've been a wolf a number of times on Day 1 where I've been stuck in cross-fires with another wolf and had to work like hell in mid/late day to generate movement away from me and my partners.

Also, the communication patterns of the wolves may make it difficult for them to shake out the votes just so (1 for each of two leaders) this early in the day.

I agree with Lathum that it is somewhat convenient to come up with a Day 1 theory that puts himself in the clear, clears two more players (the guys with votes) and creates discussion around 8 people.

If it in fact turns out that Chief was right then at the end of the game I will tip my cap to him (assuming he is not a wolf with inside info) but this feels a little too neat to me.

Hoops this assumes random distribution. Your own argument supports the idea that wolves are less likely to be "randomly" in a showdown. Especially a wolf/wolf showdown.

[Telle]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

But we do have something to go on with Abe. He's posted that he trusts Barkeep49 a lot. To me, that's saying that his role (which we're not supposed to reveal) is similar to his, meaning they're both villagers. I think that's what Autumn is getting at when he says that Abe specifically is a poor choice.

Oh shit, I forgot about that. I need to start taking better notes. I'm great at keeping track of the vote count.. but it's those little "tid bits" that I lose track of.

Well I've already said that I don't plan on keeping my vote on him. I just have to figure out who to move it to.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Barely. He posits that 2 of a group of 8 are wolves, while 2 of a group of 12 are wolves? I don't think that's enough to convince anyone to restrict themselves to the group of 8.

yeah, but he is specifically calling attention to the group of 8, which in turn deflects attention from the other 12, of which he is a part of. That way, when whoever is lynched it is easy for him to say " I think we need to start with that group to test my theory"

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Lathum

yeah, but he is specifically calling attention to the group of 8, which in turn deflects attention from the other 12, of which he is a part of. That way, when whoever is lynched it is easy for him to say " I think we need to start with that group to test my theory"

I'm not sure how much attention he's really calling to it -- I think you guys are reading more into his comment than me. Anyway, I agree that it's not a great theory -- I guess my reaction was to think about what to do now if we're likely villager/villager than chase wild theories or attack people who chase wild theories. Day 1 doesn't have to be as much of a crapshoot as we're making it out to be today.

[Barkeep49]

Listen, I like having Abe vouch for me, I really do. But I want to point out that if there were some sort of lovers role, I would think they would be barred from making the sort of statement Abe has made. I've given away so little about my role, I just wonder why he feels so comfortable vouching for me. I don't think he's a wolf and lord knows I'm not. It isn't even suspicious to me, it's just unexpected and puzzling because it is so unexpected D1.

[Passacaglia]

So, let's explore the idea that we're villager/villager here. Or maybe even villager/villager/villager. I guess that would mean the people wanting us to consolidate are wolves? That probably includes me, although I think I argued more for consolidation before I knew who would be our targets, rather than after.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Barkeep49

Listen, I like having Abe vouch for me, I really do. But I want to point out that if there were some sort of lovers role, I would think they would be barred from making the sort of statement Abe has made. I've given away so little about my role, I just wonder why he feels so comfortable vouching for me. I don't think he's a wolf and lord knows I'm not. It isn't even suspicious to me, it's just unexpected and puzzling because it is so unexpected D1.

I wasn't thinking of lovers at all -- just that your roles seem to be similar. Since they can't be revealed, but we know that only good guys have them, I think that's definitely something to go on.

[Autumn]

I've lost track of the vote count. Very little movement since it settled at 3-4 targets, and a fair number of votes still to come.

I don't see a particular reason to move until closer to deadline, as I assume we'll see some shifting.

[Passacaglia]

Vote count:

saldana -- 0
PurdueBrad -- 3 The Jackal (329) EagleFan (452) Autumn (455)
Abe Sargent -- 2 Poli (252) Telle (457)
Passacaglia -- 1 lerriuqs (253)
hoopsguy -- 0
lerriuqs -- 0
dubb93 -- 1 saldana (304)
EagleFan -- 4 hoopsguy (328) PurdueBrad (343) Lathum (396) dubb93 (416)
PackerFanatic -- 1 claphamsa (335)
ntndeacon -- 3 PackerFanatic (374) Barkeep49 (420) Abe Sargent (425)
Lathum -- 0
No Lynch -- 0

[Passacaglia]

So based on my consolidation theory, I'm looking at dubb. His vote seems intended to make it a runaway for EF, or at least force others to vote someone else to make it a 2-horse race. I think something he said struck me as weird too, but I forget what it was. Off to look.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

So, let's explore the idea that we're villager/villager here. Or maybe even villager/villager/villager. I guess that would mean the people wanting us to consolidate are wolves? That probably includes me, although I think I argued more for consolidation before I knew who would be our targets, rather than after.

This makes no sense to me, consolidation does nothing but help the village down the road.

[Telle]

As of post 513:

2 - Abe - Poli (252), Telle (457)
1 - Passacaglia - Lerriuqs (253)
1 - dubb - saldana (304)
4 - EagleFan - hoopsguy (328), PurdueBrad (343), Lathum (396), dubb (416)
3 - PurdueBrad - The Jackel (329), EagleFan (452), Autumn (455)
1 - PackerFanatic - claphasma (335)
3 - ntndeacon - PackerFanatic (374), Barkeep (420), Abe (425)

[dubb93]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

So based on my consolidation theory, I'm looking at dubb. His vote seems intended to make it a runaway for EF, or at least force others to vote someone else to make it a 2-horse race. I think something he said struck me as weird too, but I forget what it was. Off to look.

I guess I should have voted no lynch as you did?

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Lathum

This makes no sense to me, consolidation does nothing but help the village down the road.

If it's the wolves pushing for consolidation because they know we're villager/villager, it certainly doesn't help the village.

[Telle]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

If it's the wolves pushing for consolidation because they know we're villager/villager, it certainly doesn't help the village.

Isn't it normal for villagers to push for consolidation as well though? What good did nine candidates earlier do us? When it's spread out it's easy for the wolves to hide votes.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by dubb93

I guess I should have voted no lynch as you did?

Check the vote count, mine isn't on No Lynch anymore. Looking back, I didn't see any post by you that raised eyebrows -- maybe I was thinking of someone else. Regarding the EF vote, though -- doesn't his play today seem a lot like your play in the Athens and Sparta game, when you were a villager?

[dubb93]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

But we do have something to go on with Abe. He's posted that he trusts Barkeep49 a lot. To me, that's saying that his role (which we're not supposed to reveal) is similar to his, meaning they're both villagers. I think that's what Autumn is getting at when he says that Abe specifically is a poor choice.

Originally Posted by The Rules

The Needies (potential for unlisted roles as well as a listed role to not appear in the game)

Am I missing something?

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Telle

Isn't it normal for villagers to push for consolidation as well though? What good did nine candidates earlier do us? When it's spread out it's easy for the wolves to hide votes.

Yes, it is normal -- as I said, I pushed for it myself. But while that's true, if we're going to go off the assumption that we're villager/villager, then we might as well look at what that means, rather than getting all worked up about whether or not 2 of 8 people are wolves.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Yes, it is normal -- as I said, I pushed for it myself. But while that's true, if we're going to go off the assumption that we're villager/villager, then we might as well look at what that means, rather than getting all worked up about whether or not 2 of 8 people are wolves.

Not sure I finished my thought there -- and IMO what it means is that it's more likely that people pushing for consolidation are wolves.

[dubb93]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Check the vote count, mine isn't on No Lynch anymore. Looking back, I didn't see any post by you that raised eyebrows -- maybe I was thinking of someone else. Regarding the EF vote, though -- doesn't his play today seem a lot like your play in the Athens and Sparta game, when you were a villager?

No not at all.

My play was to get a rise out of players(mainly due to it being a small game with a small window of time to make decisions). His has seemed VERY random, changing his vote without getting said rise out of people. Had he pushed the players he voted then yes I would see it.

His excuse was not "I'm trying to push players to get information." His excuse has been:

It's day one in a game where we are in a mental ward. Just having fun with the theme.

I do not think this play is good for the village. Basically he is destroying the voting record for no other reason then b/c this is a mental ward game?

[The Jackal]

I see ntn in the thread, good time for him to chime in since I was just about to switch my vote to him.

[dubb93]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

I wasn't thinking of lovers at all -- just that your roles seem to be similar. Since they can't be revealed, but we know that only good guys have them, I think that's definitely something to go on.

This is the post I meant to quote above in reference of the rules.

[The Jackal]

I'll check back in a little to see what's progressed, but we've got a few hours yet.

[Passacaglia]

How is the voting record destroyed?

You actually don't have to answer that if you don't want to, since I have to go soon.

[ntndeacon]

ok I am catching up. So I have checked in now... (so now you can get off my name ) But until that happens...
Vote Packerfanatic

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Not sure I finished my thought there -- and IMO what it means is that it's more likely that people pushing for consolidation are wolves.

I don't buy that one bit.

I always push for consolidation no matter what.

[Passacaglia]

Anyway, I gotta jet, and might not be back before deadline, so I'm putting in my vote.


VOTE NTNDEACON

[PurdueBrad]

Originally Posted by Telle

I think PurdueBrad just got an unfortunate run on him without much real reason.

I really think this is what happens to me anytime that I get lynched.

[dubb93]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

How is the voting record destroyed?

You actually don't have to answer that if you don't want to, since I have to go soon.

Moving the vote around at random makes it pretty damn easy to hide behind your vote. You may be called on it eventually, but it still makes it pretty damn easy to hide. Look at how far I got in your game by moving my vote as I did. People saw me as insane and we not able to ever get enough votes to vote me, even on the day where we voted 2 out.

[Abe Sargent]

Originally Posted by dubb93

How do we vote out needies if we are too afraid to lynch villagers? How do we get information that leads to the lynching of needies if we are afraid to lynch villagers? I do not think this is a good idea Pass.

Yeah, totally don't agree either.

[PurdueBrad]

I also think that Jackal is just playing his role with the vote movements early and having fun with it. So

unvote EF

vote ntndeacon

My move here is partially self-defense at this point as I would likely have to end up here anyway.

[ntndeacon]

Originally Posted by Autumn

I'm wary of anyone who has a run on them this early, so I'd like to introduce a third person to the mix.

I'm kind of stuck on the ntndeacon issue. I'm all for getting rid of quiet players, if only for a long-term deterrent. However, it's an easy vote for wolves to hide behind, or argue against. I'm thinking something more random is more likely to rile the Needies up.

I wasn't being quiet. Iwas being Absent like Telle said. Now that I got a good night sleep lets see who really needs to leave

[Abe Sargent]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

vowels and wolves are anagrams

I never even realized that.

[Lathum]

I may switch to PB unless he stops typing in lilliputian text

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

So CR, if you're thinking we're likely villager/villager now -- what should we do about it?

Unfortunately, Pass, I don't have any solid theories on anyone at the moment (including the one I already posited, which is really just the barebones of a theory based on some logic and math which is very likely to be untrue).

My point in suggesting we were likely villager-villager was completely based on the numbers and nothing else. I am not questioning anyone's reasons for voting for EF or ntndeacon. Bouncing one's vote around (EF) or being a quiet player (ntn) are reasons I can certainly support for a Day One lynch.

I'm just noting that, whatever the reason, with two candidates at that time getting significant runs, there is some potential to apply the logic of my theory to the situation. Not something I would go on now, but something I'll keep an eye on, at the very least for my own curiosity (as we see this sort of situation in just about every WW game on Day One).

No, short of a more obvious candidate coming up, I don't think we should do anything but vote on our gut and hope we don't have villagers in our sights. What choice do we have? Day One votes suck.

[dubb93]

I'm off for training. Hopefully be back before deadline.

[ntndeacon]

the one strategy thing I can think of is that a wolve will likely vote for a wolf day one just to give themselves a little cover for later.

[Abe Sargent]

Going out with friends in a bit. May not be back later

[hoopsguy]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

so what you're saying hoops is that we should lynch chief rum to find out about the other two who were on the block?

or is that your way of working like hell because you're a wolf and so are one/both of them so we should lynch YOU?

I would rather you lynch Chief than me, duh. But I don't think that I was trying to create that type of choice either.

The first part of the post was wanting to run the numbers because it seems to be somewhat accepted that "villager/villager" is the most likely outcome when picking two people at random. I think the math shows that this is not nearly as conclusive as most may think.

The second part was that I'm trying to figure out the logic in floating a theory like that, and whether it was innocent speculation or founded on some kind of information that he might have. Right now I'm a little more suspicious of Chief than the average villager.

[ntndeacon]

and I know I am quiet, but today that wasn't my problem. I did not see us moving til about 12 as I did not have school today

[Poli]

Oh come on. 5 pages at 50 posts per page to go through?

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Lathum

I like how your "pet theory" vindicates you.

Pass has said much of what I would say, so I won't regurgitate it too much. That said, you are definitely reading far too much into it. It is a very loose theory. I don't think anyone should base a vote on it now, and probably not for a while longer, with a lot more evidence to back it up. I even said in my original post that it wasn't something on which to base a vote.

I have posited that there are four wolves and a sympathizer. I point out that (theoretically), there would be one wolf only in each of those two groups of four. That's two wolves. Stands to reason the other two wolves are in the remainder of the village, which is nine players (ntn and EF are out because my theory is bunk if either is not a villager). Not much advantage to being on either side of the equation.

In fact, there is more benefit if you are in the eight, because if you're not a wolf, and we catch one from your group, stands to reason you are even more cleared as a possible villager, as it's unlikely two wolves would bunch together early on a villager-villager vote battle. Those in the group of nine don't have any such logic to support them not being wolves.

So, no, if you think my theory in some vindicates me, you pretty much about read that as wrong as you could. So kudos to you--not many people could pull that off to so far effect.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by Lathum

It points a finger at a group of 8 people, him not being part of that group.

Did you even read what he wrote? He doesn't say that "All the wolves are in that group". I do enjoy how Lathum is always so quick to dismiss anything that even remotely looks in his direction.

I don't even know if he is playing in character this game as it's pretty much like any other game where someone looks at him and the paranoia begins (usually ending with him being a wolf).

So far we have Lathum accusing me of making excuses for a vote, then clarifying that I was setting up to make an excuse for a vote and now that CR is conveniently trying to keep himself out of the discussion.

He seems to have gone on the attack pretty early for some reason.

Damn, I slid out of character again. I was hoping to stay in character all of day one to enjoy it (since day one votes are meaningless ON DAY ONE).


Now who stole my meds!?!?!?!?!?

[Poli]

Originally Posted by claphamsa

are you on crack?

I was in rare form last night. I'd be happy to revisit it if you'd like. I can break out the dictionary any time.

[Poli]

Originally Posted by Danny

saldana -- 1 dubb93 (244)
PurdueBrad -- 1 EagleFan (251)
Abe Sargent -- 1 Poli (252)
Passacaglia -- 1 lerriuqs (253)
Dubb -- 1 Saldana (304)
lerriuqs -- 1 Passacaglia (284)

Vote count so far

I forgot I had even voted for abe.