"Why is he still alive on Day 4?"

[hoopsguy]

Anyone have any particular thoughts on how to combat this argument? I run into it pretty frequently and personally despise it when I'm a villager since it is something I've got no control over.

As a wolf, how often (if ever) do you take this "logic" into your night kill decisions?

[J23]

I was pretty annoyed when you fought that arguement as being so unfair in the thread, even before I knew you were a wolf.

There are definate advantages you get early in the game that go along with the extra scrutiny of this argument later in the game. I would say you're a lot less at risk to be lynched in the first day or two compared to the average villager, and equally more likely to be lynched by day 4 or 5.

If you want an example of what I'm talking about, look at when Lathum went off the deep end a couple games back and everyone cut him slack simply because he could be too good a villager to risk lynching that early.

[hoopsguy]

But as a villager or wolf, you want to stay in the game. In either spot, you have to do what you can to refute that argument - I'm more asking about effective ways to deflect or diminish that notion.

I completely understand that some people have a higher likelihood of being lynched earlier in games for a variety of reasons. I don't want the discussion to be specific to me because there are many other players who get the same treatment. In the JAG Discussion Forum I saw Narcizo raise this relative to Tyrith a couple of days ago.

[Autumn]

I think it's a real issue for a core group of players. There are people who by default wolves would want to get rid of first. If they get rid of most of them and one is left, it's a pretty telling sign that that one is a wolf, which was a legitimate catch on you guys in this past game. But as a wolf I definitely like to leave some of those guys hanging just to make them suspicious, so it works both ways.

[Autumn]

I think all you can do is suggest that the wolves may be using that to their advantage, which is very possible, or that they're role hunting not villager hunting. It's often a legitimate point though so I don't know how much you can argue it. I personally though don't generally vote anybody just because they're still alive. I do give great villagers slack the first couple days though, as well as feel bad about killing them as a wolf early on, so you guys are doing well by me.

[J23]

I think the only way to refute the argument is to have demonstrated your help to the village. There's a higher expectation of some of the more veteran players than people like me who often seem to get things all wrong

It's an interesting dynamic, and one that I'm sure players on both sides of it don't particularly like at different stages of the game.

[hoopsguy]

As a wolf, I like leaving at least one other player alive for awhile with me to try and mitigate that logic. That came into play with Chief Rum for some time this game, although his time constraints and lack of activity also helped mitigate the need to take him out early.

And every once in awhile I like to leave all the usual suspects alive for a "long" time to see what kind of conversation emerges in the midgame and potentially the endgame.

But knowing that I don't like having that argument used against me (on either side) I try very hard not to apply it to other players. It gets challenging not to think the thought heading into the second week of games, no doubt about it.

[Alan T]

Its been a while since I played, but the way I always used to handle that when it was thrown at me were some of the following comments:

1) Since I am such an obvious choice, surely I would have likely been a seer scan earlier on as well. The seer is obviously not going to come out to clear me as a good guy this early on (and nor do i want them to), but if I was bad, then you would have to assume at some point someone is going to come and out me.

2) Perhaps I'm going strongly after a wolf? That killing me would help validate my claims and thus put too much heat on the wolf that I sniffed out? So keeping me alive takes pressure off of that wolf and instead puts the pressure on me. It then puts much less pressure on the wolf I'm hot on the trail of when the village does the wolves job for them by lynching me.

3) alternatively to #2, perhaps I'm just way off the track. Since I am an older and influential player, I am completely wrong and pointing people at the wrong place. So keeping me alive is helping the wolves because I am way off base. Since me being wrong doesn't make me a wolf by any means and just makes it more likely that I'll get lynched so the wolves don't have to night kill me.

4) Since I am so vocal and out there, the wolves assume I'm just a vanilla villager, and they are more interested in finding the seer/bodyguard/whatever role instead of taking me out just now..


5) The wolves might be trying to target people who they think the bodyguard wouldn't be protecting. Since I'm a well known player and often an early game target, they don't want to take the chance on going for me and getting blocked...


I'm sure there were others I used at one point or another.. these are just the ones I remember

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

Anyone have any particular thoughts on how to combat this argument? I run into it pretty frequently and personally despise it when I'm a villager since it is something I've got no control over.

As a wolf, how often (if ever) do you take this "logic" into your night kill decisions?

Everyone believes you no matter what you are and no matter what you say. You are just one of those people. THat argument seems to be the only way to combat your charismatic charm.

STOP SEDUCING PEOPLE!

[Autumn]

Hubba hubba

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by Autumn

I think it's a real issue for a core group of players. There are people who by default wolves would want to get rid of first. If they get rid of most of them and one is left, it's a pretty telling sign that that one is a wolf, which was a legitimate catch on you guys in this past game. But as a wolf I definitely like to leave some of those guys hanging just to make them suspicious, so it works both ways.

I have always thought the argument of taking out the same list of people early is bogus when each and every person I"ve played with has been wrong as often as right. I did like the fact that JAG and Narcizo were given props this game, even though taking out them means the game is instantly more dull.

I would love to see a game where every single person playing at least dedicates some time each day to it, even an hour and really interacts and delves and questions and everyone has fun and is really active. This game is like work when no one is active /people go under the radar as villagers. And when everyone's active then it makes it easier for the village to pick off quiet wolves and forces them to be active too and try sneaky things.
Makes the experience overall more fun.

[Abe Sargent]

When I;m a wolf, I leave hoops or Lathum in play for a while, just to see this argument spring up. It's funny. I don't buy it, but its funny.

[Abe Sargent]

Plus, on the first couple of days, who is the bodyguard guarding? I think you increase your chance of getting blocked if you go for the top three best villagers out there.

[Autumn]

Yes, as a wolf I definitely avoid anyone I think might be a default guard. I like to go obscure at first.

[Abe Sargent]

I'd like to point out that in my entire history of playing wolves, I've never had my choice for the Night Kill blocked, save when going after a revealed seer and you know that will happen. Otherwise, never randomly blocked. I want to keep that streak going baby!

[bhlloy]

It's just as frustrating when the lynch candidates in early game are the same newer players every single time. Like somebody says above, it sucks both ways.

[Abe Sargent]

I used to fear Chief Rum more than any other villager when I was a wolf, because he would come in from nowhere and have these posts that would just carve up the game into little pieces. I haven;t seen him do that since I've been back, and who knows if he still does, but that was something that usually led for me to push for a night kill.

[Abe Sargent]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

It's just as frustrating when the lynch candidates in early game are the same newer players every single time. Like somebody says above, it sucks both ways.

My rule is no lynch/night kill on Day One for newer players, or those coming back from a long hiatus. After that, it's open season.

[Autumn]

Originally Posted by Abe Sargent

I used to fear Chief Rum more than any other villager when I was a wolf, because he would come in from nowhere and have these posts that would just carve up the game into little pieces. I haven;t seen him do that since I've been back, and who knows if he still does, but that was something that usually led for me to push for a night kill.

Yes, that's his tactic, he just comes out of the blue half way through the game with these absurdly great posts. I know the wolves this game were torn - he seemed busy and therefore worth keeping around, but they knew his pattern and didn't know if he was going to to show up and blow them out of the water.

[Autumn]

Originally Posted by Abe Sargent

I'd like to point out that in my entire history of playing wolves, I've never had my choice for the Night Kill blocked, save when going after a revealed seer and you know that will happen. Otherwise, never randomly blocked. I want to keep that streak going baby!

Jinxed.

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by Abe Sargent

My rule is no lynch/night kill on Day One for newer players, or those coming back from a long hiatus. After that, it's open season.

This is my rule too, also if I played in the last game, I try to spare the person who was lynched/NK'ed first just so they can actually play the game for a bit. And yeah after that though, I have to go with my gut or what I think I'm seeing in posts and votes.

[Narcizo]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

I completely understand that some people have a higher likelihood of being lynched earlier in games for a variety of reasons. I don't want the discussion to be specific to me because there are many other players who get the same treatment. In the JAG Discussion Forum I saw Narcizo raise this relative to Tyrith a couple of days ago.

To be honest I brought that up semi-jokingly because I thought you had been acting wolfishly. I wouldn't have said it if I didn't think you were a wolf.

I suggest to you that you combat it by not killing the analytical players when you're a wolf. Taking JAG and me out is bound to raise questions as to why you're still alive.

[Narcizo]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

It's just as frustrating when the lynch candidates in early game are the same newer players every single time. Like somebody says above, it sucks both ways.

But again, at the risk of harping on about it, they're at very little risk of being night killed so it's swings and roundabouts.

I don't think newer players are targeted for lynch per se. I remember the first time I got a vote as a player and I was shocked, turned out it was a wolf in the end. It was a long time before I got voted as a villager by a villager though. If you bring interesting, decent thought-out ideas to the table you're not likely to get lynched for the first two days.

[Lathum]

My rule is go balls out for the first person who glances at me. That usualy last until day 3 at which point I begin actually playing the game.

[Thomkal]

You'll note in the JAG discussion forum, I said in my very first post there, "Who do I think are mobsters? from a metagaming point of view-the longer Tyrith and Hoops are still alive, the more likely they are mobsters. Sad that I have to think along those lines, but they are both too experienced, and too good to keep alive I feel over the others" Of course I then said that Hoops was trying to hint he was Rachel Dawes right after that, but I digress.

The point is you two and a few others have well-earned reputations for being good WW players. I mean Tyrith in particular is extremely dangerous as a wolf-as we just found out. I can't just throw that out the door when I play WW, but what I do is not use that as my reason publically for voting for you-I go looking for things in your posts and votes to help back this thought up. You have to remember this is a game, and while people want to be fair and even to all, its not usually possible to be that way, especially when the competitive juices get flowing late in games. It sucks that that's the way it works, but you've got a reputation and it just can't be completely ignored.

Note that a bad reputation also follows you from game to game and also used as a reason to keep certain players alive or killed depending on which side you are playing-low posters are one example of this-its often used as a day 1 excuse for voting for someone like that-my suggestion is you give them time to see if this low posting behavior is going to change this game before blindly voting for them for an out-of-game reason.

And as it was made crystal clear to me in the just finished Dark Knight game, a reputation as a poor player also can influence decisions made by both sides. It'd be nice if everyone could just leave reputation as a private reason to vote/seer view/nightkill/etc and look for real reasons in the game being played.

[Thomkal]

Oh and to answer your original question Hoops-I would just tell them that's a particularly wolfy thing to say, and vote for them.

[Autumn]

I'd love to do another blindfolded game a la Marvel 2, where everyone had dummy accounts, specifically to take us away from this level of gaming. We've evolved to where 75% of the game is linked to who is playing, playing style, playing history. It makes sense. But there's a challenge we're missing in winning without that knowledge.

[dubb93]

More often than not I will not NK someone like Hoops b/c I feel like later on down the line they would be a pretty good lynch target. That is unless they prove themselves too dangerous to the wolves to leave around the village.

[Chubby]

Originally Posted by Autumn

I'd love to do another blindfolded game a la Marvel 2, where everyone had dummy accounts, specifically to take us away from this level of gaming. We've evolved to where 75% of the game is linked to who is playing, playing style, playing history. It makes sense. But there's a challenge we're missing in winning without that knowledge.

heh, just wait til my game

i usually leave lathum in play when I'm a wolf just to see his inevitable meltdown

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

It's just as frustrating when the lynch candidates in early game are the same newer players every single time. Like somebody says above, it sucks both ways.

Can't argue with this. Zinto's name too appears a LOT as does mauboy. It must be the spellings of our names that people find votable or something.

[CrimsonFox]

Hmmm that's it. Mine contains an x, mau's contains a y and zinto has a z . That's it!

[Tyrith]

Originally Posted by Autumn

Yes, that's his tactic, he just comes out of the blue half way through the game with these absurdly great posts. I know the wolves this game were torn - he seemed busy and therefore worth keeping around, but they knew his pattern and didn't know if he was going to to show up and blow them out of the water.

We killed him right after he started signs of being about to do that, just in case.

[hoopsguy]

Originally Posted by CrimsonFox

Hmmm that's it. Mine contains an x, mau's contains a y and zinto has a z . That's it!

Time to change my name to HoopsG. Definitely more street, and without the Y that seems to attract all the attenion.

[Tyrith]

The early game votes are hard, because people want to play with people who are more active, because games are generally more fun/perceived to be more fun when there are more posts, but we can't just force people to post more. The only way have to at all influence behavior is to lynch people, but it doesn't work as a method to change behavior. I just would have a hard time voting for a hoops/Narc/Danny kind of player on day 1 because I enjoy having them around and don't really want to knock them out of a game for no particular reason.

[Tyrith]

Honestly, my general policy is to always be alive on day 4. There are enough good players in these games that I don't think any particular player being alive a few days into the game is terribly indicative of them being a wolf. It's something that's too easy to manipulate to the detriment of the village.

In this particular game, the only person we took out as a clear, this person in particular was a clear threat decision was Narc - and for good reason, since he had an awesome read on hoops at the time and would have been a major problem. But I probably wouldn't make the same move the next time.

Now, as a wolf I'm not going to advocate killing off quiet players early in the game just as a counter tactic, but I don't think the skill differential between most of the people playing is as high as maybe some other people do. I think we have a lot of pretty good players at this point.

[MrBug708]

I don't think I'm a very good werewolf player, but I think I'm a better late game player than an early game player. I guess I just feel bad randomly voting someone off early on

[Autumn]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

I guess I just feel bad randomly voting someone off early on

And yet no one seemed to appreciate The Joker making the decision for you!

[tyketime]

Originally Posted by Autumn

We've evolved to where 75% of the game is linked to who is playing, playing style, playing history. It makes sense. But there's a challenge we're missing in winning without that knowledge.

Coming from a rookie perspective, this is a fairly big hurdle for me to jump over. I've only played a couple of games, but I know much of the effective analysis comes from the more experienced players reading between the lines and taking all of that "history" into account. I then come across like a dweeb with the "yeah - what he said" type of posts which really don't advance the cause of the village. I wrote some about this phenomenon in my games where I think the veterans play at something equivalent to "Level 3" whereas I'm still at "Level 1".

But if you always either drum the experienced players out early (if wolfish) or leave until much later (if villagey), it doesn't leave a lot of room for creativity in that remaining 25%.

[Narcizo]

I hope you hang around and get more of a read on playing style etc tyke. When I came back I didn't really have much of an idea about most of the people here as it had gone a couple of years since I last played here. I think 75% is really pushing things (more like 33%) - but I admit it was hard to read some players. Then again that can be an advantage, coming in with a fresh outlook. And it makes it easier as a wolf to avoid scrutiny.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Tyrith

We killed him right after he started signs of being about to do that, just in case.

lmao... so that's why you killed me.

I sent a PM to Autumn asking why on Earth the wolves chose to kill me at that point.

[Vince, Pt. II]

I miss Werewolf. Hopefully my next job is an office job and I have FOFC access, I'd love to get back into it with you all. I'll never forget the tension in the X-Com game when I was converted early, and was stuck in the damned brig the whole game because the villagers were "protecting" me. Trying so hard to come up with some way to make it work even though I was stuck in there was a blast

EDIT: The Spawn game, not X-Com. Just re-read the thread, what a game that was.