Werewolf LXXII: Now There's the Truth of It! (Game Thread) - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Nogrod · 02-05-2010, 05:06 PM

It's such a rollercoaster-drive with you Eönwë...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eönwë

Of course, that is not to say we should not talk about our suspicions. Of course that's not the case- suspicions are the most important thing we have. But by focusing on the positive (the people we find innocent), it will force people to talk more and about who they trust (which doesn't happen often, or even ever, in a normal game) and so by a certain point we will have a lot to go on, maybe even more evidence than in a normal game (on the other hand, the spreading out of votes makes it harder to see who they like).

This I think I might agree on. I'm not sure focusing solely on the positive side is a good idea, but the "evidence" thus begotten will be different and interesting to read on D2.

I just don't see how can't one perform the two things at the same time: say one trusts X because of this and that, and say that one suspects heavily Y because of this and that?

My problem in the beginning of this conversation was that no one seemed to suspect anyone - and thence getting a wolf would be the most random thing, something we'd wish to avoid.

Nogrod · 02-05-2010, 05:24 PM

Okay. I had a cigarette and managed to formulate my point hopefully in a better way.

A ww-game is a game where we need to lynch the baddies.

To lynch a baddie we need to have an idea who might be a baddie.

In this game the voting-mechanics work in the way that we vote for those we trust. But that doesn't mean that we are not allowed to think who is furry. Or that trying to figure out who is furry would be against the spirit of the game!

Trying to figure out who is furry is still the aim of the game - and the only way we can win.

With the given game-mechanics (votes of confidence rather than votes for lynching) it just means we need to be even more alert both ways as our votes are not lynch votes, but indirectly. And everyone voting, especially those voting in the last hour, should be really on top of things.

One way of achieving that would be that we would not only make the confident-votes but would also make it clear whom we do suspect.

I can't see anyone but a wolf disagreeing with that point.

Talking only of whom we trust would play to the hands of the wolves - and make this game a boring one.

EDIT: X'd with the phantom... and agreeing...

02-05-2010, 05:24 PM	#2
Nogrod Flame of the Ainulindalë Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Wearing rat's coat, crowskin, crossed staves in a field behaving as the wind behaves Posts: 9,308	Okay. I had a cigarette and managed to formulate my point hopefully in a better way. A ww-game is a game where we need to lynch the baddies. To lynch a baddie we need to have an idea who might be a baddie. In this game the voting-mechanics work in the way that we vote for those we trust. But that doesn't mean that we are not allowed to think who is furry. Or that trying to figure out who is furry would be against the spirit of the game! Trying to figure out who is furry is still the aim of the game - and the only way we can win. With the given game-mechanics (votes of confidence rather than votes for lynching) it just means we need to be even more alert both ways as our votes are not lynch votes, but indirectly. And everyone voting, especially those voting in the last hour, should be really on top of things. One way of achieving that would be that we would not only make the confident-votes but would also make it clear whom we do suspect. I can't see anyone but a wolf disagreeing with that point. Talking only of whom we trust would play to the hands of the wolves - and make this game a boring one. EDIT: X'd with the phantom... and agreeing... __________________ Upon the hearth the fire is red Beneath the roof there is a bed; But not yet weary are our feet...