Discussion in 'Werewolf: The forum game' started by Harrow Orn, Jul 3, 2017.
Don't over-complicate games. It puts noobs off playing.
So seriously, day 1; what are you really supposed to do in the first lynching?
Every game there's confusion.
Vote the quiet ones or non posting? Vote anyone who is named whether good or bad?
Player role distribution shows the Seer generally has about a 12% chance of naming an evil so pretty unlikely on day 1.
General consensus seems to be to get the quiet ones out as they are either wolves or not contributing to team good so may as well go, and we save lynching a useful good contributing player.
But recently wolves have been more vocal in the opening sessions.
Always causes so much contention.
There's not really a right answer. If two are named good, then they are both likely good.
The odds of losing an evil in the first round by the villagers is very unlikely. Far more likely to go out through a bad kill.
I've kind of U-turned on this. Getting rid of the non-players at first is probably a good strategy. The Mods might cut them anyway, so it limits the number of good losses. No need to lose extra good players unnecessarily, until a few messages have come in, and we can start to get a sense of style etc.
Having one/ two extra villagers can give you a day or two more at the end to pick out an evil, when it is far easier to do so.
Also, the seer should remain as consistent as possible. They should always name everyone they have seen, so that there can be no confusion.
The wolf will at a certain point opt to copy the seers style, so watch out for that. There is no reason the seer would change their style to copy the wolf, but loads of reasons why the wolf would change their style to copy the seer.
There is a huge list of potential other roles if you google werewolf. might want to limit to 1 or 2 extras. personally never seen the point of maso
Difficulty is then that the wolf copies this pattern as you say and then what does the seer do?
Game theory plays out and evolves. It is what makes it interesting, particularly when we play lots of games close together and it becomes iterative.
You can often catch one person who is less suspicious, by looking at who the wolf chose before changing styles. The seer changing styles does not help the village, whilst staying the same has some benefit.
The most useful thing the seer can do is clearly post who they have seen each day, to create a chain (i,e, A good, B evil, C Good). You should hopefully force the wolf to do the same. When one of the chains is broken, unless you're unlucky with the tinker, it will highlight one or more individuals who are good.
If the wolf makes a mistake and writes a message about somebody obviously good, they may be forced to copy the chain of the seer and this will clear all the goods mentioned by both the seer and the wolf in the chain.
I think the minimum post limit should be raised .
It's too easy for Wolves to just say I was busy and couldn't post and therefore slip under the radar
I disagree, the minimum of 1 fine, however I do think that the alpha wolf should post an anonymous message on each of the first couple of days
I do think that everyone should vote, even if they do make a minimal amount of posts.
I'm not sure that the wold should be made to post, thats part of the game
Re: post numbers, it's completely up to the Mods discretion. If team evil are doing badly, and some good players are barely getting involved, I wouldn't blame them for kicking them. You want to strike a balance which is fair.
Personally, I've always liked the idea of creating a list of the bottom 3 posters, and giving away gentle clues in the write ups for repeat offenders.
So where did the thoughts end on one final pre season game?
Did the onsite anon option come through?