Ten Year Anniversary Game: Living Thread

[the phantom]

All this Dead bonus vote stuff aside, I mainly just don't want the Seer or Ranger to die early. The double-dream and double-protect is amazing! Just as the double-kill reduces the population quickly, the double-dreams reduces the lynchable population quickly. We need to keep our eyes on the break-points of various days (e.g. with X number of players left, if the Seer has Y number of dreams under his belt it would be efficient to reveal now).

I'm not sure what to think about the Lovers. Even if they knew who they were, would the WWs even attempt to off them with the Seer and Ranger still alive? Though the back-from-dead could be quite nice later in the game (so an early kill would negate this possibility), I think the Baddies fear the back-from-dead less than a living Seer/Ranger.

Now the Hunter... When I've been a WW I tend to avoid the Hunter like a landmine, because one shoot-from-the-hip Hunter kill can totally bring a solid Baddie squad crashing down. But in this game it's probably worth it to off the Hunter as soon as possible because odds are he'll kill an innocent. If you leave the Hunter alive a couple days the odds are probably worse for the WWs (plus he'll have more to go on), so as far as intentions go, I figure they'll attempt to kill him early or not at all (unless they're quite certain he has an incorrect pick in mind).

Anyway, it's gotten so late that it's changed into early. I need a bit of rest....

[Firefoot]

A couple thoughts before I go quiet again for most of the day. (For the record, even if you don't hear from me for a while, I will be back to vote before the deadline - can definitely be here within a half hour of it.)

I like the idea of deliberately tying the vote today, if possible. A couple thoughts:

1) It seems likely enough that for some reason we don't pull it off (wolves screw it up, accidental cross-posting, someone doesn't vote) - so we should make a deliberate choice of our possible victims.

2) In order to prevent total chaos at the end, what if we orchestrated the vote (these players vote for this person, those players vote for that). Any deviance from this strategy could also be indicative of a non-cooperative WW (or a lover, I guess).

3) What if we aimed for a three (or even four) way tie? That way even if someone doesn't vote as planned and we don't get a three-way tie, we might still get a two-way tie which is all that is actually necessary.

4) As far as victim choice - sort of a shot in the dark anyway - do we go random? Ask for volunteers (at least we don't get a gifted - but then I guess it narrows the wolves' choice for who is gifted, so maybe that's a poor strategy)? Might as well pick Nilp since he's already got a vote?

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

I'm always cool with getting a few more votes.

Anyway, long day, scattered thoughts, many of which has already been commented upon, so I'll say my 'substantive' piece before taking a nap and hoping to wake up at a proper time.

Re the three-party dynamic's effect on gifted reveals:

With competing wolf parties, they will be unsure as to how to deal with a real gifted reveal. For example, both parties might end up wasting their kill on a single target (or less likely, end up not killing the gifted because they expected the other Pack to do so.)

Also, there is little fear of a counterreveal or a false reveal: the revealing Wolf risks giving their Pack a numbers disadvantage against the enemy Pack. And they won't have a way of timing a fake reveal when they gain a numbers advantage over their rivals, because even they won't know if a Wolf not of their Pack has already been killed. (Of course, this information gap could change with the Dead thread activities...)

Re lynch/NIGHT kill analysis:

For obvious reasons, voting analyses (my weapon of choice--or rather, the weapon I use because I have no choice) are quite useless, at least in the opening fog-of-war stage of the game.

So what about NIGHT kill analyses? According my game-theorising*, the Baddies would prioritise killing the Seer, a Wolf from the other Pack, the Ranger, the Lovers, and the Hunter, in that order. Now what do the first two targets have in common? They both possess an above-average knowledge of the alignment of the people in the Village. So posting analysis of the dead could yield information as to why they had been targetted. (Of course, now that I've said it, the Wolves would now probably go after the quiet ones. Hehe. But on a less flippant note, I do realise that making such an analysis public could influence future Wolvish behaviour.)

My scattered thoughts are petering out. I'll be back when my brain cells stop screaming at me.

_____
*As someone who has watched No Game No Life twice (even being an editor for the first two volumes of the novel's English translation), and as someone who has read the Wikipedia article on Nash equilibrium, I believe I am qualified to game-theorise.

[Macalaure]

I had a crazy long post detailing why all those strategies above won't work, but then I realized it was really just an overblown series of quoting and arguing, so I scrapped it. Here's the key points, though.

We have a 25% chance to lynch a wolf toDay (6 in 24)
If we don't, each pack has a 15% chance to kill another wolf at night (3 in 20): P(A)+P(B)-P(A)*P(B)=27.75%.
Even by pure chance, we're actually quite likely to receive some help from the wolves at killing wolves. Not implying, of course, that this means we can be lazy, and definitely not implying that we should tie our votes and not lynch. (In a village of 24, with 6 baddies, and later with an unpredictable extra vote? Impossible to orchestrate. Seriously, people.)

All this trying to arrange an information flow with the dead... elaborate stuff like that never works. Unless a choice is obvious, you always have some people who vote right at the deadline or didn't get a chance to read everything and vote uninformed. Things get messed up, even without revealed or unrevealed baddies in both threads trying to mess with it intentionally.

The dead should give their extra vote to either A: someone they have reason to believe is innocent; or B: someone who has voted for someone they have reason to believe is guilty. This will give us a solid bit of information to go on, actually.

Fake reveals can be a problem. With no immediate knowledge of the role upon death, it's easier to pull off. Anyone remember how nobody believed Nogrod was the seer all game last time? And that was without a contestant (though with cobblers). Then again, would a wolf dare it, knowing that the real beneficiary is the other wolf pack?

Don't have too much faith in the roles that can return from the dead. It can only happen twice at most, and if the timing is off (as it was last time), it can end up much more unhelpful than hoped.

One question for the mod: Will the narrations state which unfortunate soul got killed by which wolf pack? Or was this stated somewhere and I overlooked it? If it is not clear to the village, then the wolves would have extra knowledge and be more adept at killing the other pack than we are. An uncomfortable thought.

Originally Posted by the phantom

I simply post "Tomorrow I will cast a throwaway vote. If So-And-So was the real Seer, give me a bonus vote tomorrow", the Dead check So-And-So's true identity and then either give or don't give me the bonus vote according to what they found.

This I don't get, or maybe I'm missing something. The dead can only find out roles among themselves, and do not see gifteds. They won't know who the real seer is, at least not for certain.


Sorry for being all negative, but all those Day1 strategies... Sweet summer children! No plan survives contact with werewolves.


These points I did like, though, so I'll quote them for truth:

Originally Posted by A Little Green

First, I think this is a crucial point. The wolves can (and probably will) engage in completely genuine wolf-hunting during Day phases, which means that we have to think differently than we would in a normal game; we have wolves who don't know everyone's alignment and who have a good motive to hunt bad guys too. That means they're not by default lying when they say they suspect someone, so a fake-looking case alone is not as strong a sign of wolfishness as it usually is.

Originally Posted by Legate

Really, from my experience, whenever one is playing a Wolf, whatever the circumstances, there is a psychological difference.

This. Of course, when looking for this difference, the risk is always to accidentally kill a gifted, since they operate similarly, but the lovers and the ranger have less reason to be afraid in our setup here (especially after a few days), and the hunter generally does, too. So, while the risk is clearly still there, it is smaller than usual, especially considering the number of baddies.

[Nerwen]

Firefoot (#37) and Boro (#39), you two are referring to phantom's suggestion at #20?
I had the impression it was off the menu, but if not- look, the problem is that, failing the Seer getting a wolf in that time, it requires not only all the gifteds but all the dreamed innocents not to get eaten until Day 3; meanwhile the wolves are getting 2 kills a Night and we have no chance of lynching a wolf. Plus, there's always the possibility of false reveals.

Originally Posted by Firefoot

I like the idea of deliberately tying the vote today, if possible. A couple thoughts:

1) It seems likely enough that for some reason we don't pull it off (wolves screw it up, accidental cross-posting, someone doesn't vote) - so we should make a deliberate choice of our possible victims.

2) In order to prevent total chaos at the end, what if we orchestrated the vote (these players vote for this person, those players vote for that). Any deviance from this strategy could also be indicative of a non-cooperative WW (or a lover, I guess).

So you're not even necessarily expecting this to work, you're just seeing it as a way of possibly flushing a wolf ("or a lover")? Only what would either really have to gain by breaking the tie? The Lovers just want to stay alive, and the wolves have the Night-kill. Besides, my "accidentally-on-purpose" comment on phantom's other plan applies here also- how could you be sure it wasn't just an honest screw-up? (Also, we don't actually want to expose the Lovers...)

4) As far as victim choice - sort of a shot in the dark anyway - do we go random? Ask for volunteers (at least we don't get a gifted - but then I guess it narrows the wolves' choice for who is gifted, so maybe that's a poor strategy)?

Precisely. So why suggest it?

Might as well pick Nilp since he's already got a vote?

Ah, now we come to the other problem: this plan seems to me virtually to ensure that we occupy two or three days with organising pseudo-lynches of randomly-chosen players, instead of, you know, trying to find wolves.

Really doesn't seem the best option to me...

edit:x'd since Nilp at #40.

[Nogrod]

Werewolf is back! And in a headache-producing form...

I think I'm siding with Macalaure's points to begin with. Playing orchestrated draws with voting is more or less doomed to fail especially in the early stages (because people miss votes, they don't get the information etc.).

But I'd also say there seems to be a lot of confidence that the Dead Thread will both know what to do and what would be the best for the village - and to be able to execute that. What Mac already referred to: the last game the Dead Thread was as totally confused as the Living Thread.

I'd see the situation as follows: the Dead Thread plays somewhat a normal WW-game where they know the identities of some and not of some (so it will be a chaotic mess of points and counterpoints made), the Living Thread is playing a game where no-one knows anything about anything (so it will be a chaotic mess of points and counterpoints made with not even fleeting evidence to back anything).

That said, I'm somewhat optimistic with our chances as a village: there are so many factors involved, not the least the rivalry between the two competing Wolfgangs *sic*.

Like Lottie (I think) said: the death of the first wolf certainly is a priority (well trying to lynch the most probable wolf should be our first priority every Day - let's talk about possible intentional draws later in the game) and a game-changer.

It's like in a football (soccer) game where two sides can play 0-0 for a long time in an important match and both be very careful just trying to avoid mistakes - but when one side finally scores a goal the game changes dramatically because just avoiding mistakes won't do to the team that is trailing in numbers: the game opens up and that gives chaces to both sides to really make results.


Nice to have this game back in the menu!

[Nogrod]

Oh one question on what Greenie said and most people seemed to strongly agree on (maybe I'm just in rust for not playing WW for a long time):

Originally Posted by Greenie

First, I think this is a crucial point. The wolves can (and probably will) engage in completely genuine wolf-hunting during Day phases, which means that we have to think differently than we would in a normal game; we have wolves who don't know everyone's alignment and who have a good motive to hunt bad guys too. That means they're not by default lying when they say they suspect someone, so a fake-looking case alone is not as strong a sign of wolfishness as it usually is.

I'm just a bit confused about the last sentence, the conclusion, or the POV of it, that is.

I mean my conclusion from the thoughts above would be that there probably wouldn't be that many fake-looking cases as the wolves don't have to pretend suspecting someone but are actually really suspecting someone for being a baddie - and the more important consequence of that would then be that the best wolf-lynchers shouldn't be regarded as "more probably goodies" just by their "good nose" on lynching baddies (actually it seems other wolves have a slight advance over normal villagers on sniffing the other wolves out).

[the phantom]

Originally Posted by Nog

there seems to be a lot of confidence that the Dead Thread will both know what to do and what would be the best for the village

They'll know what the Living know plus more, so logically they should be able to help, particularly if the Living provide them with a structure in which to do so.

Originally Posted by Nog

the last game the Dead Thread was as totally confused as the Living Thread

Yeah they were. Mwu ha ha ha!

But that was totally different, because the Dead couldn't confirm roles. If they had been able to do so they would've tested Seer-Nog as soon as you went to the Dead thread and suddenly things would've been different.

There is concrete knowledge available to us in this game. We need to try and grab it.

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by the phantom

They'll know what the Living know plus more, so logically they should be able to help, particularly if the Living provide them with a structure in which to do so.

The Dead will know more - and they should help in the best way they can - but I'm a bit more realist on the issue of how successful they will be just sorting out things among themselves - or how happy they would be to follow strict guidelines given by people in the Living Thread they do not know the alignment of...

Originally Posted by tp

There is concrete knowledge available to us in this game. We need to try and grab it.

Certainly - and that will be the Dead Thread who has it (and hopefully at some stages also the Living Thread). Fully agreed.

[Loslote]

I have work today, but I'll be back before deadline. A couple last thoughts:

It doesn't make sense to tie before the Dead thread starts up, since we have a better chance at killing wolves and avoiding Gifteds if we lynch than if we leave it to the Night kills (see my above post).

I am also dubious about giving the Dead thread the power to choose who dies in the lynch - I agree that it would be good to set up a system wherein the Dead can let us know who they checked and what the result was, but I would prefer for that system to not give the Dead the ultimate choice. After all, if all we the voters can do is comply with the voting scheme already set out, we do not get nearly as much information on the voters. Even if we don't know the result of the vote, looking at people's votes with an eye to what they appear to be trying to do, who they want lynched, and who they don't gives us a lot of information that we wouldn't get if we gave that power to the Dead.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by A Little Green

O esteemed Mod, a clarification about the Dead Thread extra vote? So do the dead vote for a living player or double that player's vote? I interpreted it as the former (the Dead Thread vote being simply a ++person-of-their-choice) but the way I understood phantom's theory above, he seems to have interpreted it as the latter (the person chosen by the Dead gets to vote twice). The wording of the rules could mean either.

I suppose they could, but your version would mean that the Dead can participate in the lynch *directly*, which would seem to me to rather miss the point of the whole "death" thing. But I could be wrong.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

But I'd also say there seems to be a lot of confidence that the Dead Thread will both know what to do and what would be the best for the village - and to be able to execute that. What Mac already referred to: the last game the Dead Thread was as totally confused as the Living Thread.

Did the Dead have any way of checking roles that game?
Edit:x'd since Nog at #47.

[Mithalwen]

I may as well state now that I didn't come back to Werewolf to merely be a pawn in anyone's masterplan and I certainly don't want to play if it is a case of "Do what Phantom tells you or it is all your fault". So to be clear, I will vote as I see fit, not as I am told, dead or alive. It is a game, it is meant to be fun. I am not here to be a minion, bullied or bored to sobs.

[Loslote]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Ah, now we come to the other problem: this plan seems to me virtually to ensure that we occupy two or three days with organising pseudo-lynches of randomly-chosen players, instead of, you know, trying to find wolves.

Especially since we as a village have (as I believe Mac said) a 25% chance of catching a wolf, whereas the Night kills have a 15% chance. I'd also like to add that we as a village have a further 21% (5/24) chance of accidentally killing a Gifted, where the Night kills have a 25% (5/20 - assuming we do not ourselves lynch a Gifted toDay) chance of purposefully killing a Gifted. It's much much riskier to trust the wolf killing to the wolves, since they are far more likely to kill a Gifted than a wolf, whereas we are slightly more likely to kill a wolf than a Gifted.

[Firefoot]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Firefoot (#37) and Boro (#39), you two are referring to phantom's suggestion at #20?

Yes.

I had the impression it was off the menu

I didn't realize that? No one seemed to be talking about it much...

So you're not even necessarily expecting this to work, you're just seeing it as a way of possibly flushing a wolf ("or a lover")?

Not at all, what the heck? I thought it was an interesting idea and wanted to suggest some considerations, that's all. And I was more interested in it for toDay than future Days. I know it's been a long time since I've done this but I have a lot of memories of really poor day 1 lynches.