Werewolf Game: Extreme Version

[the dude]

kinda hard to figure with no kills to use as clues, huh?

 

if this is unfortunate coincidence (ie the villains have a knack for attacking immune players), they must be sweating bullets right now. insofar as one is capable of sweating bullets in an imaginary game, anyway. :P

[Talya]

Don't think I could have put it better Dude :roll:

[the dude]

i have my moments. 8)

 

and don't roll your eyes at me, young lady! :P

[Sirayn]

Okay, I'm not thinking about who I'd like to lynch next. :lol: I thought I'd done this in my earlier post but I can't see it. So here I come with a game projection for nobody ever killing! I'm going with the 25-50-25 role distribution from earlier.

 

Day One: 3 evil, 9 innocent. Lynch, modkill.

Day Two: 3 evil, 7 innocent. Lynch.

Day Three: 3 evil, 6 innocent. Present. Lynch.

Day Four: 3 evil, 5 innocent. Lynch.

Day Five: 3 evil, 4 innocent. Lynch.

Day Six: 3 evil, 3 innocent. Endgame.

 

Add in a finder, a healer and maybe another good role and this is such an apocalyptic projection for the evil team that I absolutely can't credit it. I mean, honestly - every single one has to live to at least day six without being investigated or lynched? They'd be massacred. I have more faith in the mod than to think he would put this into play. This leads me to a conclusion that I wasn't originally going to post, but - edit: actually it's too dangerous to post. Um. Forget I ever said anything.

[Kison]

Of course Sirayn could be evil and just messing with everyone's mind. :)

 

Anyhow, I tend to think the evil ones are either most vocal or try their hardest to play neutral. Normally you can spot it, like they won't ever try to make big accusations towards someone if they're playing neutral, but instead kind of say things like "i do agree that so and so looks suspicious but id like to have further analysis before i come to the conclusion that they should hang"

 

If they're vocal, they don't back down ever, because doing so would look scummy.

 

Anyways, honestly, I don't think we've had quite enough participation(recently) to tell who is scum and who's not scum. From a statistical viewpoint, we're rather screwed. Because, as of now, we have a 1/3 chance of hanging the right person tonight. If we hang the wrong person, and the scummy ones don't hit a sanctified target, that's two of us that're killed. That would bring us to 4/3. At THAT point it would be bloody hard to win. So yes, Sirayn is right in saying that today is a critical day in choosing who to hang.

[Raena]

I'm way too tired to do this... :roll:

 

1.Sirayn - Drives me crazy.

2.Raena - This is me.

3.Zylazlo - Seems innocent, but I don't know. Needs to be watched.

4.Tessa Sedai - Seems innocent, but she might be sneaky. I'll look through her posts later.

5.the dude - Posts a lot as usual. Has had no hunches yet.

6.x3scout - Kinda absent. Voted for GG after she was dead and night had fallen. Doesn't pay attention it seems.

7.Dark Justice - Kinda absent as well. Hasn't voted I think?

8.Kison - Voted for himself day 1. Why?

9.Loki - Haven't seen him around much. Random.

[Sirayn]

Hey, that reminds me - Kison. Do you get extra powers or something if people vote for you? I trust you'll forgive me if I say that you haven't been all that subtle about trying to get yourself voted for. :roll:

[Kison]

Hehe, no, actually, that was just a joke. I'm just an innocent bystander. :(

[Raena]

Innocent jokes have gotten people killed many times. :P

[Kison]

It was worth the risk.

[the dude]

why raena, you're right. no hunches... i'll have to work on that. my apologies for the lapse. 8)

 

SITUATION C. RELEASING CONTROL ART RESTRICTION SYSTEM TO LEVEL 3.

[Talya]

So Kison why the risk...are you a bomb or something so that the last person who votes for you dies :D

[the dude]

let's find out.

 

kison.

[loki redfern]

yes becuase the evil ones will vote last on that wont they. and kison just dont feel evil. and this is just another case really of lynch the new player

im thinking x3scout, i mean like raena points out above, he was pretty desperate to get on that bandwagon there? its the strongest, well the least tenuous thing i can see right now

[Raena]

loki redfern. Just a hunch.

[Dark Justice]

sorry7 for my absence. to much party.

I have a hunch aswell.

 

kison

[Kison]

Nope, not a bomb. Just an innocent bystander, as you will see if you vote me dead. If you really think that voting for myself(obviously as a joke) is somehow a danger to you all, then you've all been driven mad by the true evil of this town.

 

All votes of my that have made a difference were in order to help the hunches of others here. I myself have no hunches on who is scum in this town.

 

So I'd recommend taking a deep breath before you guys go and ruin the game, as I made clear would be the case if we took a wrong step in this round.

[SBoydW]

11 hours to night.

 

Kison- 2 Votes (the dude, Dark Justice)

x3tscout- 1 Vote (loki redfern)

loki redfern- 1 Vote (Raena)

[Sirayn]

Let's see ...

 

Kison, voting for yourself is not in itself dangerous under ordinary circumstances. However, a combination of circumstances in this particular game makes it strange and suspicious.

 

1. This is the first game I've played in where voting for yourself is even possible as far as I know. It may have been added deliberately.

2. It's not an intuitive move to make. People shouldn't want to lynch themselves - how would that help their team? This leads me to think that there is some hidden benefit to you.

3. Earlier somebody brought up the possibility of the evil team having conditional kills. I discount the possibility that the evil team has no kills at all, and I also discount the possibility that their kills are being blocked for reasons I've gone into already and will go into again, so I think there's a fair chance kills may be conditional. In that case the evil team isn't fulfilling their conditions for a kill. And who is conspicuously not getting the weird and wonderful move they want?

 

I think this shows that while we can't be certain that you are dangerous to us, there is a solid possibility that you have a conditional role you're trying to activate, and the evil team is the logical place for that conditional role. I can't say I dig the thought of you hanging around when you could be a ticking time bomb. If anything does happen when we lynch you, I'd prefer it be sooner, while we have 8 other players to absorb the effect, than in the endgame.

 

And while I'm at it, I think you're pretty suspicious yourself. I'd like to call you out on either 1. not paying attention or 2. being deliberately misleading here. Here's what you said:

 

"From a statistical viewpoint, we're rather screwed. Because, as of now, we have a 1/3 chance of hanging the right person tonight. If we hang the wrong person, and the scummy ones don't hit a sanctified target, that's two of us that're killed. That would bring us to 4/3. At THAT point it would be bloody hard to win." (underline mine)

 

You think the evil team hit a bulletproof or got healed or guarded two nights in a row? Which means that they could kill tonight? Really? After I went into detail here about why that wasn't possible? Let me go from the top.

 

There obviously isn't a guard. If they guarded somebody on night one and there was no kill they would have revealed immediately and we would have lynched their target. If they guarded the same person on night two - let's assume that they aren't stupid enough to switch targets in this scenario - and there was no kill they would with even more certainty have revealed immediately and with the aforesaid even more certainty we would have lynched their target. There has been no reveal so there is no guard. (PS: Don't anybody get any ideas about faking a claim.)

 

If there is a healer, they did not heal both night targets. The probability of a single healer healing both night targets is minute. I worked it out in the other post and I'm not going to do so again but it came out at 2.38%.

 

Bulletproof? Barring the possibility that everybody is magically bulletproof, which is venturing back into shoot-the-mod territory, it seems reasonable to think that one player may be bulletproof. The odds of the evil team hitting the bulletproof player on night one were 14%. But that's irrelevant because nobody would ever have targeted that player again in those circumstances. If your kill's been blocked once and you have no pressing reason to try again, eg. they're not a revealed finder, then try somebody else!

 

Okay, maybe - just maybe - there are two bulletproof players. And magically they both survive to night two without being lynched or modkilled.

 

Night One: 2 bulletproof out of 7 innocents = 0.29

Night Two: 2 bulletproof out of 6 innocents = 0.33

Both nights: 0.29 * 0.33 = 0.0967 = 9.67%

 

Is that likely? Is it hell. Scrap that possibility too. But maybe there's a bulletproof and a healer out there! A finder, a healer and a bulletproof isn't that unbalanced of a combination if the evil team can kill. In the best-case scenario the healer never targets the bulletproof so there are two invulnerable targets. What do you think?

 

Night One: 2 invulnerable out of 7 innocents = 0.29

Night Two: 2 invulnerable out of 6 innocents = 0.33

Both nights: 0.29 * 0.33 = 0.0967 = 9.67%

 

And we're back to our old friend <10% again. So! What conclusions can we draw?

 

1. There is no guard.

2. The healer did not stop both kills.

3. The killers did not target one bulletproof player.

4. The killers did not target two bulletproof players.

5. A healer and a bulletproof did not block both kills.

 

Now I went into this in two of my previous posts and I know you read them because your post referred to something I said. But you obviously don't agree with my analysis. Why is that and why didn't you say so explicitly? If you see something I've said that's clearly wrong then for all you know I'm trying to pull a fast one. You disagreed ... but didn't want to draw any attention for it? I get the feeling you're trying to slip under the radar here.

 

The other possibilities are, of course, that you have information I don't or you're trying to mislead us or, I don't know, maybe you don't think we can work this out ourselves. :roll: I think the reasonable conclusion to draw under these circumstances is that the evil team either did not or could not kill on those two nights. So why, out of curiosity, do you want us to think that the evil team did try to kill and can kill again?

 

Kison, incidentally.

[the dude]

I AM AN ELASTIC FIRECRACKER!

[SBoydW]

Kison- 3 Votes (the dude, Dark Justice, Sirayn)

x3tscout- 1 Vote (loki redfern)

loki redfern- 1 Vote (Raena)

 

Alright since there has been progress I am extending day another 8 hours. However if there is no lynch by that time, we will go to night lynch or no.

 

9 players 5 votes to lynch.

 

Vote!

[Kison]

1. This is the first game I've played in where voting for yourself is even possible as far as I know. It may have been added deliberately.

 

Well' date=' honestly, I've never known it to not be allowed.

 

2. It's not an intuitive move to make. People shouldn't want to lynch themselves - how would that help their team? This leads me to think that there is some hidden benefit to you.

 

Only time I did it was during the "random voting" stage, when votes really didn't matter.

 

3. Earlier somebody brought up the possibility of the evil team having conditional kills. I discount the possibility that the evil team has no kills at all' date=' and I also discount the possibility that their kills are being blocked for reasons I've gone into already and will go into again, so I think there's a fair chance kills may be conditional. In that case the evil team isn't fulfilling their conditions for a kill. And who is conspicuously not getting the weird and wonderful move they want?[/quote']

 

Well, I guess under those circumstances it's possible to have conditional kills. I never really thought about it, but I think the evil team has a better chance of having people hang the wrong person rather than put a "VOTE ME" tag on their back and hope to get enough votes to break the conditional barrier and kill someone during the night while not being hung themselves.

 

I think this shows that while we can't be certain that you are dangerous to us' date=' there is a solid possibility that you have a conditional role you're trying to activate, and the evil team is the logical place for that conditional role.[/quote']

 

If I were to have a conditional role, you seem to think it is one based on the number of votes I have on me. Why would I want to purposely get people to vote for me, then? Just to activate my role? That'd be pretty rough, considering I'd be risking myself just to use my power when I could just as easily try to lead people to kill off the wrong players. That is why I voted for myself in the beginning, I knew no-one would take it seriously, and we had 0 hunches at that point. When we DID get a hunch, what'd I do? I helped you guys follow up on them.

 

If there is a healer' date=' they did not heal both night targets. The probability of a single healer healing both night targets is minute. I worked it out in the other post and I'm not going to do so again but it came out at 2.38%.[/quote']

 

The only problem with your statistics is that you assume too much. First of all, you assume the distribution of roles. 3-6-3. You didn't expect the possibility of conditional roles, among other things, and you yourself bring up other scenarios to explain for the lack of kills. It's only when someone else brought up the possibility of conditional roles that you started to yet again assume that it was the case.

 

Two healers sounds like a good explaination to me. Or a couple bulletproofs, one healer. Or maybe the evil team just wasn't active enough to kill. Or maybe they purposely chose not to kill. Who knows? Not me. Do you?

 

 

Okay' date=' maybe - just maybe - there are two bulletproof players. And magically they both survive to night two without being lynched or modkilled.[/quote']

 

Again, assumption. Maybe there are two bulletproofs and a healer. Maybe there are three, maybe there are none. Maybe maybe maybe maybe. You can't have statistics with too many maybes.

 

 

Now I went into this in two of my previous posts and I know you read them because your post referred to something I said. But you obviously don't agree with my analysis. Why is that and why didn't you say so explicitly? If you see something I've said that's clearly wrong then for all you know I'm trying to pull a fast one. You disagreed ... but didn't want to draw any attention for it? I get the feeling you're trying to slip under the radar here.

 

I obviously believe that you are assuming way too much. The main thing I was trying to point out in my other larger post was that if we kill the wrong person tonight' date=' and the evil side gets a kill, then we're going to be extremely hard-pressed to win the game, because we'd be down from 6 VS 3 to 4 VS 3. That'd mean you not only have a near 50% chance of hanging the wrong person every night, it'd take THREE nights to kill them all off, minus the role of a vigilante(who would likely be dead at that point).

 

The other possibilities are, of course, that you have information I don't or you're trying to mislead us or,

 

No, I don't have any information that I'm holding back. Even if I did, you'd probably think I was lying.

 

I don't know' date=' maybe you don't think we can work this out ourselves.[/quote']

 

Bingo. Too much of your "analysis" is simply "speculation".

 

I think the reasonable conclusion to draw under these circumstances is that the evil team either did not or could not kill on those two nights.

 

Uh' date=' of course that's reasonable, because there's no other possibility. They either tried, and failed. Or they didn't even try.

 

So why, out of curiosity, do you want us to think that the evil team did try to kill and can kill again?

 

Because it's the safe thing to assume that they tried. You're going around killing off random people, with just basic hunches. If you do that again tonight, and you realize tomorrow that they succeeded to kill, you're going to be hard-hit tomorrow when you're close to outnumbered. Even if they DON'T succeed, you're down to 5 VS 3. I'm going to have to admit I'd be extremely skeptical that the evil team is 100% unable to kill, and if you keep trying to use that as an excuse for why it doesn't matter who you vote off, then that's on you.

 

Kison' date=' incidentally.[/quote']

 

Alright, so be it.

[Zylazlo-]

*feels the heat of discussion coming on* And not that it counts for anything, but I think the evil team has conditional kills OR they have no kills at all, and discounting a vigilante would be using too much logic, I mean the mod could easily just be giving one team a very unfair advantage is all.

 

I mean we should all have in mind that this is a new mod... who knows what he's cooking up really? I mean the evil team only being able to lynch kill really isn't that absurd, it'd be the first "equal" game, but in that case... what happens during night?

[the dude]

we go the the peeler bar?

[Dark Justice]

I think this night will tell us alot.

no nightkill means something weird is going on.

If there is a nightkill we know we have either fullfilled a condition for the baddies to kill, or just got lucky the two first nights.