Quote:
Originally Posted by Pitchwife
I just lost a post replying to G55's #45 twice due to internet failure, and I'm not going to type it all again. We can discuss the question tomorrow, if it's still an issue. For now, it's bedtime for me. See ya!
|
Well, I'm not even sure if it's an issue, cause I'm not sure what you were referring to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by THE Ka
Also would that make it far too easy for WW to hide when the evidence can be spread across the entire day's worth of posts, instead of the instrumented panic that usually occurs before deadline?
|
So this is the second time toDay that a person implies a lack of evidence in people's early posts *squints at
Lommy and
Ka*. Are you in cahoots, or you're just both coincidentally trying to subtly turn people away from the idea of focusing on existing evidence and pretending all the evidence will come later?
Quote:
Originally Posted by THE Ka
Let's say the latest in the QT thread is a wolf and by some way this happens where there is a tie. The wolf is obviously going to know who their compatriots are, could they throw the vote from the GT?
It would take a bit of finagling and if there is a mix of roles in QT obviously the villagers would know and outvote anything the wolf is trying to suggest. If successful even once it could be the evening of odds they want...
|
Well yes. And it's interesting, because we assume that the QT will be innocently dominated, but if we're better than we think at catching infectors it might be quite even. And then we would always have to second-guess whether the QT vote is the innocents' opinion or the wolves' preference.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ka
This is an interesting mechanic, because it does make even a 'bad vote' more complicated. If they take a villager, then there is at least more votes in their favour in the QT. If it's a wolf, sure it removes them from the GT, but if there's another wolf already in the QT it could lead them to trying alternate attempts to steal a vote.
It would be interesting if wolves in QT didn't vote together, however. Granted the number in QT would be significantly smaller than in the GT to try and use the 'spread suspicion by voting for one another' tactic, but it would make you pause and wonder why.
|
Thing is, if a known CutieWolf casts a vote, the other Cuties are going to use that as their information. Is the known wolf protecting a packmate? Trying to off a suspected gifted? Or bluffing the rest of the Cuties and going wolf-on-wolf, because the Cuties will then vote the opposite way? Or double bluffing? Or just messing with their heads? And if there are two dead wolves, that just complicates the matter further - and if I can remember correctly, I believe they are allowed to PM with dead mates, so they can coordinate this behind the stage. Are they voting together to save a mate? Are they both bluffing? Are they voting differently to confuse everyone? To bluff? To make the QT spread their votes and fail to vote the right way as a result? This is actually an interesting line of QT tactics I haven't considered before.
Edit: xed with Zil and Boro