Select Page
Poker Forum
Over 1,291,000 Posts!
Poker ForumWerewolf Village

Varchertine's Werewolf Game Thread

Page 3 of 46 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 225 of 3385
  1. #151
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    he must but he cant because he knows he's not a wolf and the probability that his buddy is the wolf is too low
    Well whatever, that's for later. But if everyone is flat out unwilling to vote for their buddy, then a 3 vs 1 endgame is de facto win for the wolves. Which could easily be why you're against the idea of buddies voting for one another.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  2. #152
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    FYP
    forgive me for making rational arguments.

    consider the previous game, with a final day of me gabe luco jkds. if there was just one wolf and me n gabe were linked. i would need a damn good reason to vote for him because the other option would be to get a freebie in jkds and luco dying at the same time. from my perspective, i either get to kill gabe alone or jkds/luco together

    granted it can be possible to have good enough reads where we think that the probability fo gabe being wolf is higher than the probability of it being either luco or jkds, but if this was representative of ww, it would mean that ww is inherently imba against the village. the fact that we believe that having just one kill choice on 3v1 is good enough for the village to win a fair amount of time, it means that two kill options in the same spot is incredibly awesome
  3. #153
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Well whatever, that's for later. But if everyone is flat out unwilling to vote for their buddy, then a 3 vs 1 endgame is de facto win for the wolves. Which could easily be why you're against the idea of buddies voting for one another.
    it would be a coinflip actually. and i doubt anybody will actually decide to vote for their not-buddy by default even though it is statistically correct most of the time

    i agree with rilla that the best strategy is also the worst strategy
  4. #154
    I'm coming around to the idea of Wuf being a wolf.

    Maybe Monstr too.
    Playing big pots at small stakes.
  5. #155
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10,322
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    @ wuf: who do you read best in this game, and what is your read on them?
  6. #156
    BankItDrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    8,291
    Location
    Losing Prop Bets
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    it's just a giant complication that provides no value. when we lynch players, we are lynching 100% what we know. there is no reason why we should keep ourselves in the dark about who the other half that we're lynching is
    This is the best reason to reveal: When we vote, we know who we're voting for.

    I too, have seen zero reason to not reveal and wait for a while.

    wuf is very villagery imo, ong slipping.
  7. #157
    A coinflip? You mean it's 50-50 in terms of pure odds who got to 2 votes first. The village will be left debating if the wolf skillfully ensured he didn't get to 2 votes first, if the wolf even more skillfully ensured he did get to 2 first so he looks the most villagery, or if he superbly ensured the two wagons are both villagers. What actually should happen is every villager assesses his partner, while the wolf pretends to, and hopefully the wolf will fuck up, or the villagers will be too strong.

    I feel like we should lynch wuf, simply because he'll be a liability at endgame if he's refusing to even consider voting for hoopy.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  8. #158
    wuf is very villagery imo, ong slipping.
    Thank fuck for that.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  9. #159
    BankItDrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    8,291
    Location
    Losing Prop Bets
    We are voting pairs of players.

    I nominate that we bold the pair and not just 1/2.

    This will help bring clarity to the village in that we won't need to try and figure out who else may die.
  10. #160
    I nominate that we bold the pair and not just 1/2.
    How are you going to vote for me then drew? You gonna guess who my partner is?
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  11. #161
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    A coinflip? You mean it's 50-50 in terms of pure odds who got to 2 votes first. The village will be left debating if the wolf skillfully ensured he didn't get to 2 votes first, if the wolf even more skillfully ensured he did get to 2 first so he looks the most villagery, or if he superbly ensured the two wagons are both villagers. What actually should happen is every villager assesses his partner, while the wolf pretends to, and hopefully the wolf will fuck up, or the villagers will be too strong.

    I feel like we should lynch wuf, simply because he'll be a liability at endgame if he's refusing to even consider voting for hoopy.
    nobody is going to bold their partners. if they do they're fucking stupid.

    every lynch is two players. every. lynch. is. two. players. if you vote for your partner, you have self-lynched. rilla's post was correct

    maybe in a 3v1 scenario the game could be blown so wide open that the wolf is so obvious that it is no longer a mistake to self-lynch
  12. #162
    BankItDrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    8,291
    Location
    Losing Prop Bets
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    How are you going to vote for me then drew? You gonna guess who my partner is?
    I seriously can't believe you think my strategy is not +EV for the village.

    Reveal partners. When voting, we know who is receiving votes.
  13. #163
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    @ wuf: who do you read best in this game, and what is your read on them?
    it always changes and the only sort of reliable d1 reads are really superficial ones
  14. #164
    Why do you suppose self lynching is specifically ok in this game? Because it might be necessary.

    I might vote for my partner. If I have enough reason to think he's a wolf, then so be it. I'd happily die if I took down a wolf.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  15. #165
    BankItDrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    8,291
    Location
    Losing Prop Bets
    rescind luco

    I'm not going to vote for someone when I don't know their lover. Otherwise, ong would get it.
  16. #166
    BankItDrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    8,291
    Location
    Losing Prop Bets
    Voting for your lover makes sense sometimes.

    It's super rare though... basically only if they make an error on par with my N1 chat with JKDS recently.
  17. #167
    I'm not going to vote for someone when I don't know their lover. Otherwise, ong would get it.
    You're actively trying to make not claiming pro-wolf. If I'm a wolf, well why the hell would I tell you who my partner is, knowing you'll vote for me if you consider that person disposable? What you're doing here is trying to make my stubborness look wolfy.

    lynch drew
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  18. #168
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    this

    i see zero value in keeping partners hidden. every lynch includes automatic death of the partner. let's be real, none of us are gonna vote to lynch our partners. this is really just a game of "which two players do we want to die". even in a 3v1 situation, it is always correct to not vote your partner since you know that 50% of the deaths in the lynch are village

    it's me n teh hoopster
    I strongly disagree with this. Revealing partners gives wolves information that they didn't have.

    Also, with 4 wolves and 14 villas, it is absolutely pro-villa to lynch your partner if you're convinced they're a wolf. The villas can afford to trade 1 for 1 with the wolves, while this would be devastating to the wolves.
    I may grow old, but I refuse to grow up.
  19. #169
    Poor mojo.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  20. #170
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Why do you suppose self lynching is specifically ok in this game? Because it might be necessary.
    if that is true then it means that either this game is hyper imba against the village or normal games are hyper in favor towards the village

    I might vote for my partner. If I have enough reason to think he's a wolf, then so be it. I'd happily die if I took down a wolf.
    reasonably we should almost never have enough reason to think this, especially in early and midgame

    this game is like the monty hall problem. you would need some abnormally good intel to have enough odds on your side to make voting for your own pair to be correct

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Hall_problem
  21. #171
    BankItDrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    8,291
    Location
    Losing Prop Bets
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    You're actively trying to make not claiming pro-wolf. If I'm a wolf, well why the hell would I tell you who my partner is, knowing you'll vote for me if you consider that person disposable? What you're doing here is trying to make my stubborness look wolfy.

    lynch drew
    your stubbornness is wolfy!

    Please explain to me the following:

    Why is revealing not +EV for the village?
  22. #172
    BankItDrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    8,291
    Location
    Losing Prop Bets
    Quote Originally Posted by lilrascal View Post
    Revealing partners gives wolves information that they didn't have.
    This is 100% true. But here's the thing: Revealing partners provides information to both the wolves and the village. The difference is that the information gained by the village is worth waaaaaaay more.
  23. #173
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    nobody is going to bold their partners. if they do they're fucking stupid.

    every lynch is two players. every. lynch. is. two. players. if you vote for your partner, you have self-lynched. rilla's post was correct

    maybe in a 3v1 scenario the game could be blown so wide open that the wolf is so obvious that it is no longer a mistake to self-lynch
    If I think my partner is a wolf, I will vote for them. If you don't do that as a villa, you're not playing for your wincon and not being pro villa.

    Quote Originally Posted by BankItDrew View Post
    I seriously can't believe you think my strategy is not +EV for the village.

    Reveal partners. When voting, we know who is receiving votes.
    I don't think revealing is pro-villa. It's the one piece of information that the wolves don't have.
    I may grow old, but I refuse to grow up.
  24. #174
    Quote Originally Posted by lilrascal View Post
    I strongly disagree with this. Revealing partners gives wolves information that they didn't have.
    revealing partners gives the village information we dont have. much more value in that than what the wolves get out of knowing. let's say we think gabe is a villager and we lynch bigred because he never does anything, but they're linked. then we say "oh shit how dumb was that, we didnt want gabe to die"


    this game is different than normal in that the partners make the statistically correct choice far more easy to see. granted i dont think we're going to stick to this 100%, but we've got to be kidding ourselves if we think we're gonna vote for our partners any time soon. nobody is going to opt to kill just one possible wolf instead of two possible wolves

    like it or not, the correct way to lynch is to kill the two players we want dead, not just the one player then have the other die as a surprise
  25. #175
    Wolves have obv revealed their fuckbuddys in den. But they don't know the rest. Wouldn't it benefit them if they could take out the strongest pair first? In lieu of Special hunting, all they have to strat about is rank order of lynching. Why would we give them that knowledge?
  26. #176
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10,322
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    lynch wuf not changing.

    Wuf, you're not hunting. Not only that, but you're stubbornly attached to a spurious assumption that multiple people have pointed out that you simply must abandon. Your failure to openly abandon this notion that your partner is unlynchable is the most dangerous thing that has presented itself to the village today.
  27. #177
    BankItDrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    8,291
    Location
    Losing Prop Bets
    Quote Originally Posted by lilrascal View Post
    I don't think revealing is pro-villa. It's the one piece of information that the wolves don't have.
    Keeping information in limbo where no one knows the information, is not +EV for anyone. The question is who is it more valuable to?

    The answer is the village because:

    When wolves vote, they make essentially 2 votes. Wolves know the role of both players (V or W).
    When villagers vote, they make essentially 2 votes. Villagers know the role of one of the two players.
  28. #178
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10,322
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by Keybored View Post
    Wolves have obv revealed their fuckbuddys in den. But they don't know the rest. Wouldn't it benefit them if they could take out the strongest pair first? In lieu of Special hunting, all they have to strat about is rank order of lynching. Why would we give them that knowledge?
    Take out how? by their inability to nom them?

    They still have to convince the rest of the village.
  29. #179
    BankItDrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    8,291
    Location
    Losing Prop Bets
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    like it or not, the correct way to lynch is to kill the two players we want dead, not just the one player then have the other die as a surprise
    How is it that so few players are aware of this extremely important part of the game?
  30. #180
    BankItDrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    8,291
    Location
    Losing Prop Bets
    MMM, I'm disappointed in you.
  31. #181
    Quote Originally Posted by lilrascal View Post
    If I think my partner is a wolf, I will vote for them. If you don't do that as a villa, you're not playing for your wincon and not being pro villa.
    obviously. the problem is that the margin of error in "what we think" is always so super high. people give me shit for sucking, but the truth is that every good read is wrong most of the time. a significant odds change is almost always more than enough to keep the balls off of any of those "good reads" that are mostly wrong

    obviously it's possible for a read to be so strong that it makes killing half as many potential wolves the correct move. but it's like shooting yourself so the bullet can pass through you to kill a potential bad guy behind you instead of trying to hit the two potential baddies in front of you hiding in the bushes

    am i suggesting nobody bold their buddy? no. i said we need to be real and acknowledge that nobody's gonna vote their buddy except in extreme circumstances. we also need to be logical and realize that we're lynching two players each round, not one
  32. #182
    Quote Originally Posted by BankItDrew View Post
    This is 100% true. But here's the thing: Revealing partners provides information to both the wolves and the village. The difference is that the information gained by the village is worth waaaaaaay more.
    I don't see where it helps the villas. At least not yet.

    Assuming all wolves are partnered with a villa, then with 18 live players we have 4 w/v partners and 5 v/v partners.

    I'm trying to work thru the odds here for whether or not it is pro villa to know the partners.

    Let's assume all partnerships are known. If I'm a villa, then it's better for me to vote for my partner than a random villager since I'm likely to hit a wolf 4 out of 9 times. But that only works if everyone follows that, which others have already stated that they won't vote for their partner (wuf in particular).

    Still need to think on this more to think of the other angles.
    I may grow old, but I refuse to grow up.
  33. #183
    BooG690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    5,090
    Location
    I am Queens Blvd.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    i see zero value in keeping partners hidden. every lynch includes automatic death of the partner. let's be real, none of us are gonna vote to lynch our partners. this is really just a game of "which two players do we want to die". even in a 3v1 situation, it is always correct to not vote your partner since you know that 50% of the deaths in the lynch are village


    it's me n teh hoopster
    That's not the point. The point is that there is ZERO value in revealing our partners (there is YET to be one rational argument for doing so and, again, we're giving the wolves perfect information on a silver platter). So what you, BID and Rilla are doing is most likely -EV for the village. It's definitely not a positive and stop pretending it is. Why are we revealing without having a logical discussion given it? Those who've revealed so far haven't even thought it through.


    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    i have seen zero reasons why it's a good idea to not reveal. if we waste time trying to figure out if there is any edge to keeping it secret (which would be super tiny if it exists), we'd just be turning that edge into a liability


    i dont want people to think that it's wolfy when i don't bold hoopy, because i never will. i dont want to misread the intentions of other players when they never vote their partners too. life if gator and keith were partners but nobody knows it and i see gator acting weirdly about keith, im probably going to call it wolfy. but if i knew they were partners i wouldnt
    So what would you have lost from revealing at a point where people suspected wolfiness where you didn't bold hoopy. You created a scenario that didn't exist and that would have been easily solvable: you could have just revealed AT THAT POINT. Hoopy would have corroborated. Nothing would have been lost.


    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    revealing partners gives the village information we dont have. much more value in that than what the wolves get out of knowing. let's say we think gabe is a villager and we lynch bigred because he never does anything, but they're linked. then we say "oh shit how dumb was that, we didnt want gabe to die"
    And here you are again creating a sense of urgency THAT DOESN'T EXIST. Let's just reveal as we lynch. There is NOTHING LOST FROM DOING SO.


    Wuf, Rilla and BID need to start thinking through this reveal stuff and stop making it seem that anyone who thinks otherwise is suspect. There's a wolf in there somewhere, especially in those revealing without their partners approval.
    That's how winners play; we convince the other guy he's making all the right moves.
  34. #184
    Wuf, I'm going to assume for a minute you're a villager. Well, you're in a better position than anyone to for a read on hoopy, especially since you soulread his ass last game. You have an obligation as a villager to be honest about your opinion of hoopy, even if you think he's a wolf. If you're more concerned about self preservation, then that indicates that your obligations lie elsewhere.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  35. #185
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    lynch wuf not changing.

    Wuf, you're not hunting. Not only that, but you're stubbornly attached to a spurious assumption that multiple people have pointed out that you simply must abandon. Your failure to openly abandon this notion that your partner is unlynchable is the most dangerous thing that has presented itself to the village today.
    read every d1 game ive played in the last 3 years

    we've even argued on the very subject, where i defend the belief that the kinds of reads that are important in early game are different than late game


    i never said my partner is unlynchable. i said the statistics dictate that every player should be expected to not bold their partners. this is absolutely correct. it is only if a read is so incredibly strong (abnormally strong) that it becomes statistically correct for a player to lynch his partner


    obviously we're not going to stick to this 100%. dont get down my throat for pointing out the most obvious thing there is. i was quite surprised to come back from class to see most players hadnt already come to this conclusion.
  36. #186
    Quote Originally Posted by Keybored View Post
    Wolves have obv revealed their fuckbuddys in den. But they don't know the rest. Wouldn't it benefit them if they could take out the strongest pair first? In lieu of Special hunting, all they have to strat about is rank order of lynching. Why would we give them that knowledge?
    This is a good point and something I haven't considered. The wolves are obviously not going to try and lynch their partners, and target any of the others and any lynch of a villager driven by the wolves will be a 2 villa lynch.

    I think every villa needs to look strongly at their partner to get a read on them. Assuming all of the partnerships are w/v, then every lynch of a wolf takes out a villa.

    If you're partner is wolfy, then they need to go. It's the only way for the villas to win.
    I may grow old, but I refuse to grow up.
  37. #187
    BooG690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    5,090
    Location
    I am Queens Blvd.
    Quote Originally Posted by BankItDrew View Post
    Keeping information in limbo where no one knows the information, is not +EV for anyone. The question is who is it more valuable to?

    The answer is the village because:

    When wolves vote, they make essentially 2 votes. Wolves know the role of both players (V or W).
    When villagers vote, they make essentially 2 votes. Villagers know the role of one of the two players.
    Having WHOLE perfect information is greater than the sum of its parts (which is what we'd be getting since knowing links tells us nothing as to who can be trusted).
    That's how winners play; we convince the other guy he's making all the right moves.
  38. #188
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    Take out how? by their inability to nom them?

    They still have to convince the rest of the village.
    Without night action, the only thing Wolves can do is push us to lynch the V-V pairs. And they're obv gonna prioritize their targets. We must not let them take out the MVPs.
  39. #189
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Wuf, I'm going to assume for a minute you're a villager. Well, you're in a better position than anyone to for a read on hoopy, especially since you soulread his ass last game. You have an obligation as a villager to be honest about your opinion of hoopy, even if you think he's a wolf. If you're more concerned about self preservation, then that indicates that your obligations lie elsewhere.
    i get that. i havent argued for self-preservation. i have pointed out the statistics. if a villager votes for his partner, he KNOWS he is voting for a villager in himself. he knows that if that lynch happens, 50% of the results are definite villager death. but he doesn't know this if he votes for a non-partner. from the perspective of a villager, the amount of villagers lynched when he votes for his partner is higher than the amount when he doesn't

    im not sure why this is so controversial
  40. #190
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    read every d1 game ive played in the last 3 years

    we've even argued on the very subject, where i defend the belief that the kinds of reads that are important in early game are different than late game


    i never said my partner is unlynchable. i said the statistics dictate that every player should be expected to not bold their partners. this is absolutely correct. it is only if a read is so incredibly strong (abnormally strong) that it becomes statistically correct for a player to lynch his partner


    obviously we're not going to stick to this 100%. dont get down my throat for pointing out the most obvious thing there is. i was quite surprised to come back from class to see most players hadnt already come to this conclusion.
    In the bolded from your post. These so-called statistics are wrong as I pointed out earlier. If you're a villa, you're more likely to vote for a wolf (4 out of 9 times) assuming all partnerships are w/v.
    I may grow old, but I refuse to grow up.
  41. #191
    Quote Originally Posted by BooG690 View Post
    That's not the point. The point is that there is ZERO value in revealing our partners (there is YET to be one rational argument for doing so and, again, we're giving the wolves perfect information on a silver platter).
    do we know who we're lynching in normal games? yes. why would we think it's correct to not know who we're lynching in this game?

    if the idea that we should keep partners hidden is correct, then i think it necessarily means normal games are entirely a crapshoot because it means in those games we would have made just as good of lynch decisions if we didnt know who we were lynching
  42. #192
    BankItDrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    8,291
    Location
    Losing Prop Bets
    Quote Originally Posted by BooG690 View Post
    Wuf, Rilla and BID need to start thinking through this reveal stuff and stop making it seem that anyone who thinks otherwise is suspect.
    I currently do not believe this because most of the players who have not revealed are villagers.
  43. #193
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10,322
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    It's complicated, and I'm not 100% on my stance, but I'm leaning reveal.

    Wolves already have way more information than us.

    The question is:
    Is it more valuable to the village to prevent the wolves from getting 100% information
    Or is it more valuable to the village to prevent itself from having 0% information.


    In most games the wolves already start with 100% information, aside from PRs.
    In this game, the PR component is essentially removed to a "trust me, I'm his partner and I think he's bad."


    It's a thin line, and I don't see it as a huge mistake to give the information to everyone.
    (but I'm already outed, so what do I have to lose, right?)
  44. #194
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    im not sure why this is so controversial
    It's controversial because it's really convenient for the wolves if their villager buddies are unwilling to name them as serious wolf suspects.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  45. #195
    I'm trying to think thru the possible partnership combinations and what is most likely with 18 players (4 wolves, 14 villas).

    (1) 4 w/v partnerships and 5 v/v partnerships.

    (2) 1 w/w partnership, 2 w/v partnerships, 6 v/v partnerships.

    (3) 2 w/w partnerships, 7 v/v partnerships.

    I don't see (3) as a possibility unless the game is a total troll by the mod, which I don't buy.

    I'm leaning more to (1) from a game balance standpoint.

    Also, (2) doesn't make as much sense from a game standpoint since the w/w partnership is redundant with wolfchat.
    I may grow old, but I refuse to grow up.
  46. #196
    I advise against further partner reveals until a solid case is made that it absolutely benefits the village. Cuz it clearly benefits the W's.

    Any other discussion about it is smokescreen.
  47. #197
    BankItDrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    8,291
    Location
    Losing Prop Bets
    Quote Originally Posted by Keybored View Post
    I advise against further partner reveals until a solid case is made that it absolutely benefits the village.
    Please read the thread again.
  48. #198
    BankItDrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    8,291
    Location
    Losing Prop Bets
    Quote Originally Posted by lilrascal View Post

    (1) 4 w/v partnerships and 5 v/v partnerships.

    (2) 1 w/w partnership, 2 w/v partnerships, 6 v/v partnerships.

    (3) 2 w/w partnerships, 7 v/v partnerships.

    I don't see (3) as a possibility unless the game is a total troll by the mod, which I don't buy.

    I'm leaning more to (1) from a game balance standpoint.

    Also, (2) doesn't make as much sense from a game standpoint since the w/w partnership is redundant with wolfchat.
    I agree with this.
  49. #199
    BooG690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    5,090
    Location
    I am Queens Blvd.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    if the idea that we should keep partners hidden is correct, then i think it necessarily means normal games are entirely a crapshoot because it means in those games we would have made just as good of lynch decisions if we didnt know who we were lynching
    Do you read shit over before you post or do you just click the button? You think that playing with hidden partners is equal to playing in a regular game and lynching with your eyes closed? Stop trying to make it seem that us lynching without a partner reveal means we don't know who we're lynching. We'd know who we'd be lynching, we just don't know the baggage that comes with lynching them (although, revealing prior to getting lynched would alleviate this problem). Also, does knowing the baggage REALLY change the decision on who to lynch? It should really only change a potential wolf bandwagon. If you strongly suspect a player of being a wolf, the baggage is a moot point.
    That's how winners play; we convince the other guy he's making all the right moves.
  50. #200
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10,322
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    im not sure why this is so controversial
    This is why you need to by lynched.

    You'd rather say that you don't understand than actually try to understand.

    Wolfy.
  51. #201
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    8,697
    Location
    soaking up ethanol, moving on up
    yeah, i'm pretty happy with my vote on wuf
    i reckon he's finally rolled wolf

    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    i see zero value in keeping partners hidden.
    zero? sounds like wolves have agreed in the den that they'd prefer to have perfect information.

    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    even in a 3v1 situation, it is always correct to not vote your partner since you know that 50% of the deaths in the lynch are village
    i call bullshit. Wuf normally claims some savant-like ability to make clutch reads in endgame spots, yet here he's claiming that this type of read is inappropriate in this game? something doesn't gel right here. he's setting up for lynching the other team. What he doesn't seem to consider is that the end-game is always going to be two couples, so by his logic it's simply the first couple to have both log in to cement the lynch.

    Quote Originally Posted by baudib View Post
    I'm coming around to the idea of Wuf being a wolf.
    come join the lynch party

    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    it always changes and the only sort of reliable d1 reads are really superficial ones
    ^ this re the question on who he reads best. It's unlike wuf to be talking about day 1 reads being superficial rather than simply going nuts and day 1 soul-reading

    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    revealing partners gives the village information we dont have. much more value in that than what the wolves get out of knowing. let's say we think gabe is a villager and we lynch bigred because he never does anything, but they're linked. then we say "oh shit how dumb was that, we didnt want gabe to die"
    there are times where outing partners might make sense, e.g. in the scenario where a player is close to lynch then outing as +1 could result in an information gold-mine for the village based on reactions etc. We lose this opportunity if we all out our partners early. villa-villa pairings are the only piece of the jigsaw that the wolves are lacking... of course you're keen to get this information out there, cos you're wolf. Probably with 'rilla.
  52. #202
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    It's complicated, and I'm not 100% on my stance, but I'm leaning reveal.

    Wolves already have way more information than us.

    The question is:
    Is it more valuable to the village to prevent the wolves from getting 100% information
    Or is it more valuable to the village to prevent itself from having 0% information.


    In most games the wolves already start with 100% information, aside from PRs.
    In this game, the PR component is essentially removed to a "trust me, I'm his partner and I think he's bad."


    It's a thin line, and I don't see it as a huge mistake to give the information to everyone.
    (but I'm already outed, so what do I have to lose, right?)
    With regards to the bolded, you have the game to lose as a villa if this isn't a pro-villa strategy. I'm not yet convinced that revealing is pro-villa.

    How will the village use that information in voting? I can see the wolves using it more to protect a wolf by saving a strong villa partner.

    This game is not going to be one by a single strong villa if they're partnered with a wolf. This game is going to take the whole village to win.
    I may grow old, but I refuse to grow up.
  53. #203
    Quote Originally Posted by BooG690 View Post
    Do you read shit over before you post or do you just click the button? You think that playing with hidden partners is equal to playing in a regular game and lynching with your eyes closed? Stop trying to make it seem that us lynching without a partner reveal means we don't know who we're lynching. We'd know who we'd be lynching, we just don't know the baggage that comes with lynching them (although, revealing prior to getting lynched would alleviate this problem). Also, does knowing the baggage REALLY change the decision on who to lynch? It should really only change a potential wolf bandwagon. If you strongly suspect a player of being a wolf, the baggage is a moot point.
    Yup, Yup.
  54. #204
    Quote Originally Posted by lilrascal View Post
    I'm trying to think thru the possible partnership combinations and what is most likely with 18 players (4 wolves, 14 villas).

    (1) 4 w/v partnerships and 5 v/v partnerships.

    (2) 1 w/w partnership, 2 w/v partnerships, 6 v/v partnerships.

    (3) 2 w/w partnerships, 7 v/v partnerships.

    I don't see (3) as a possibility unless the game is a total troll by the mod, which I don't buy.

    I'm leaning more to (1) from a game balance standpoint.

    Also, (2) doesn't make as much sense from a game standpoint since the w/w partnership is redundant with wolfchat.
    I would imagine it was done randomly, so there would be a probability of each setup. That's the assumption I am under.

    (3) is particularly unlikely, but far from a zero event.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  55. #205
    Quote Originally Posted by Keybored View Post
    I advise against further partner reveals until a solid case is made that it absolutely benefits the village. Cuz it clearly benefits the W's.

    Any other discussion about it is smokescreen.
    Quote Originally Posted by BankItDrew View Post
    Please read the thread again.
    I've read the thread and I haven't seen a good argument that makes it pro villa to reveal.

    If you think it is pro-villa, please tell me how knowing who your partner is will help me as a villa. I don't see it.
    I may grow old, but I refuse to grow up.
  56. #206
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    It's controversial because it's really convenient for the wolves if their villager buddies are unwilling to name them as serious wolf suspects.
    that's not the controversy. the controversy is you guys refusing to acknowledge basic statistics
  57. #207
    Quote Originally Posted by Keybored View Post
    I advise against further partner reveals until a solid case is made that it absolutely benefits the village. Cuz it clearly benefits the W's.

    Any other discussion about it is smokescreen.
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I would imagine it was done randomly, so there would be a probability of each setup. That's the assumption I am under.

    (3) is particularly unlikely, but far from a zero event.
    I doubt that it was done randomly. As a mod, you try and achieve balance in a game. Leaving the partnerships to chance doesn't lead toward a balanced game.
    I may grow old, but I refuse to grow up.
  58. #208
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10,322
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Just to be clear:

    There are 4 wolves and 12 villagers in this 16 player game.

    ***
    Recent arguments have me firmly in the no reveal unless you're on the block category.

    When I said I think it's not a huge mistake, I mean that given how much debate there has been and no consensus conclusion, I think that IF it's -EV for the village it's not vastly -EV.
  59. #209
    BankItDrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    8,291
    Location
    Losing Prop Bets
    Quote Originally Posted by BooG690 View Post
    If you strongly suspect a player of being a wolf, the baggage is a moot point.
    Nah... we need to think differently about our voting this game. We need to assign values to pairs.

    For example:

    If Lover A is paired with Lover B... You assign A with 70% chance wolf and B with 30% Wolf = 50% Average

    If Lover C is paired with Lover D... You assign C with 80% chance wolf and D with 0% Wolf (cleared for whatever reason) = 40% Average

    Although C>A, we should be lynching the A+B pair instead because the perceived value is higher.
  60. #210
    BankItDrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    8,291
    Location
    Losing Prop Bets
    Quote Originally Posted by lilrascal View Post
    If you think it is pro-villa, please tell me how knowing who your partner is will help me as a villa. I don't see it.
    Check my most recent post in the AB vs CD examples.
  61. #211
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    8,697
    Location
    soaking up ethanol, moving on up
    Quote Originally Posted by baudib View Post
    I think I have 4 villagers so far. I have 2 other wolf candidates, and as much fun as it would be to lynch Wuf Day 1, I can't help to think at least 1 wolf jumped all over him.
    interesting.... noted.
    who are the villagers and wolves baudib?
  62. #212
    Quote Originally Posted by lilrascal View Post
    I doubt that it was done randomly. As a mod, you try and achieve balance in a game. Leaving the partnerships to chance doesn't lead toward a balanced game.
    There's different ways of assessing the balance. If all the wolves are partnered, then they must protect each other at all costs, but they can avoid having to play villager in two threads, which I would imagine is a demanding task. If I were a wolf, I think I'd prefer to be buddied to a fellow wolf.

    Doing it all completely randomly can easily be balanced, over a large sample. As a mod, you're doing well to get a win ratio in the sweet spot of 45:55, that's the aim when balancing a game. I would expect that each of those three possibilities are all individually at least in the 40:60 zone.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  63. #213
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    8,697
    Location
    soaking up ethanol, moving on up
    Quote Originally Posted by BankItDrew View Post
    Nah... we need to think differently about our voting this game. We need to assign values to pairs.

    For example:

    If Lover A is paired with Lover B... You assign A with 70% chance wolf and B with 30% Wolf = 50% Average

    If Lover C is paired with Lover D... You assign C with 80% chance wolf and D with 0% Wolf (cleared for whatever reason) = 40% Average

    Although C>A, we should be lynching the A+B pair instead because the perceived value is higher.
    ja, i'm pretty sure drew is a villager - no offence drew, but i simply can't imagine you coming out with this post as a wolf
  64. #214
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10,322
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    that's not the controversy. the controversy is you guys refusing to acknowledge basic statistics
    Your statistics assume the final 4 are random variables about which there is no background information.

    Your assumptions are flawed, and your results are erroneous.

    Now drop this hand-waving charade of distracting from hunting, and start hunting.
    All this talk is not helping the village find any wolves or even other villagers.

    Stop turning the conversation to mundane topics about which wolves can speak honestly.
  65. #215
    BankItDrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    8,291
    Location
    Losing Prop Bets
    Quote Originally Posted by daven View Post
    ja, i'm pretty sure drew is a villager - no offence drew, but i simply can't imagine you coming out with this post as a wolf
    I'm not sure why I would be offended. This is off topic though and isn't helping.
  66. #216
    It's my birthday now. In fact, I was born exactly 36 years ago, to the hour.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  67. #217
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10,322
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    It's my birthday now. In fact, I was born exactly 36 years ago, to the hour.
  68. #218
    BankItDrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    8,291
    Location
    Losing Prop Bets
    It's clear that those who favor revealing have revealed and those who do not favor revealing will not reveal. I don't see any value in trying to convince one side or the other any further.

    lynch luco
  69. #219
    I can't even remember who I'm voting for, maybe drew again.

    I'm coming round to the idea of drew being a villager. This is too much spazz for him to be a wolf, he'd have wound his neck in long ago.

    lynch wuf

    I have serious concerns about his motives. I think the whole "don't vote your buddy" concept is an appeal to fear. I believe his motivation is self preservation.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  70. #220
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10,322
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    @BID: what's your case against Luco?
  71. #221
    Quote Originally Posted by BankItDrew View Post
    Nah... we need to think differently about our voting this game. We need to assign values to pairs.

    For example:

    If Lover A is paired with Lover B... You assign A with 70% chance wolf and B with 30% Wolf = 50% Average

    If Lover C is paired with Lover D... You assign C with 80% chance wolf and D with 0% Wolf (cleared for whatever reason) = 40% Average

    Although C>A, we should be lynching the A+B pair instead because the perceived value is higher.
    I can't argue with the math, but ww math doesn't work that way imo, at least I don't see it working like that in this game.

    I think this approach is likely to lead to a wolf win. Following this strategy, the wolves would try and clear a player that one of them is partnered with and ride to victory on the back of a clear villa.

    The ONLY way the village can win is to have at least one v/v team as the last team standing.
    I may grow old, but I refuse to grow up.
  72. #222
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    It's my birthday now. In fact, I was born exactly 36 years ago, to the hour.
    Happy Birthday!!!
    I may grow old, but I refuse to grow up.
  73. #223
    BankItDrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    8,291
    Location
    Losing Prop Bets
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    @BID: what's your case against Luco?
    He seemed to not want to even discuss the idea of a reveal. Instead, giving responses along the lines of "nah. I'm good." "no thanks."

    I know, it's weak, but it's currently the best I've got.
  74. #224
    BankItDrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    8,291
    Location
    Losing Prop Bets
    Quote Originally Posted by lilrascal View Post
    The ONLY way the village can win is to have at least one v/v team as the last team standing.
    Yup, this is true.

    I suppose the best way to clear a pair of villagers is to ensure that they are both on wolf wagons... possibly both on multiple wolf wagons.

    This leads me to another question:

    Is it in the villages best interest to have pairs double vote for the same player?

    Just throwing it out there. I haven't given it any thought.
  75. #225
    Let me fix this post:

    Quote Originally Posted by lilrascal View Post
    I'm trying to think thru the possible partnership combinations and what is most likely with 18 players (4 wolves, 14 villas).

    (1) 4 w/v partnerships and 5 v/v partnerships.

    (2) 1 w/w partnership, 2 w/v partnerships, 6 v/v partnerships.

    (3) 2 w/w partnerships, 7 v/v partnerships.

    I don't see (3) as a possibility unless the game is a total troll by the mod, which I don't buy.

    I'm leaning more to (1) from a game balance standpoint.

    Also, (2) doesn't make as much sense from a game standpoint since the w/w partnership is redundant with wolfchat.
    I assumed the OP had the correct number of living players/roles, which is wrong when you count them instead of read what the mod said.

    Quote Originally Posted by JKDS View Post
    Intro deleted from OP

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Living
    a500lbgorilla
    LilRascal
    Keybored
    Ongbonga
    Gabe
    BID
    Wufwugy
    Rong
    Luco
    Boog
    Hoppy
    Baudib
    Monstrman
    Bigred
    MMM
    Daven

    The Exploded
    Randy Gillette (NPC)
    Janelle Gillette (NPC)[B]

    Living Roles
    14 ISIS
    4 KGB


    Ending deleted from OP
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    Just to be clear:

    There are 4 wolves and 12 villagers in this 16 player game.

    ***
    Recent arguments have me firmly in the no reveal unless you're on the block category.

    When I said I think it's not a huge mistake, I mean that given how much debate there has been and no consensus conclusion, I think that IF it's -EV for the village it's not vastly -EV.
    Relooking at combinations with 16 players (4 wolves, 12 villas).

    (1) 4 w/v partnerships and 4 v/v partnerships.

    (2) 1 w/w partnership, 2 w/v partnerships, 5 v/v partnerships.

    (3) 2 w/w partnerships, 4 v/v partnerships.

    I still don't see (3) as a possibility unless the game is a total troll by the mod.

    (1) seems less likely with 16 players than 18 players from a game balance standpoint.

    (2) may actually be more likely from a balance standpoint because with (1) the wolves have some influence with half the teams and just 1 mislynch makes the game very pro wolf.
    I may grow old, but I refuse to grow up.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •