Snack WWars (Game Thread)

Started by kaydubs
Veterinary Science Graduate Programs from U. of I.
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Day Three

Unlike the previous day’s flashwagon, the players coalesced on a particular player in a somewhat more gradual fashion. Had they finally found the villain among them?

They felt certain. They couldn’t be wrong.

Could they?

Removed from the snack drawer is @screamqueenbee - Salmiak - 1x ninja WOLF
PHOTOROOMTRANSPARENT-Photoroom-2024-06-25T165642.382.png


It is now Night 3. Please submit any night actions. Submit those by no later than 8pm Eastern/5pm Pacific TOMORROW, Thursday, 2/12/26.

8 players remain

Roster
3. @beans2020
5. @_rae_
6. @Clem J
7. @WildZoo
8. @kitzsuna
10. @vampyrica
12. @SARdoghandler
14. @Zenge142

Out of the Running for Best Snack
1. @GoSpursGo - Peanut M&Ms - village mason
11. overcastkidjuno - Bear Paws - village 2x blocker
13. @samac - Squashies - vanillager?
itb. @fruitsalad - Fruit cup - vanillager
67. @apoptosis09 - Pretzels - village 1x commuter
9. fruitsnack - Nilla wafers - [redacted] villager
4. @chicandtoughness - Boba - village 1x ability seer
2. @screamqueenbee - Salmiak - 1x ninja wolf

Tots:
2. shorty
3. Barks
7. Stagg737​
 
there’s a very real possibility i die this evening. so i will try to be as helpful as i can be on thread so the rest of village can find eachother and we can secure a W this game
 
I want to look back over SAR's SQB pair analysis and see if I have anything to add to it. Seems like a good place to start
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
SARdoghandler said:
Ok yall here's the updated grid based on my own opinion

View attachment 415216


I'm tired now so I'm going back to slanking for the rest of the day ok?
Click to expand...
Bringing this back

So based on my analysis yesterday (ymmv), scream's partner likelihood would be from most likely to least likely:

Beans/kitz
Clem/dubz
Rae/Zenge
 
I do need to reevaluate my kitz read based on this.

I have a behavioural consult for my cat this morning and may have to go get some medical things taken care of after that but if I have time for more pairs analysis, I'll be starting in kitz/beans so that if I die (lol wishful thinking with vampy and zenge around) there is a trail to consider
 
i mean honestly i think regardless of who dies tonight, wolves are in a sticky situation. the way i see it, were closing in. they may have had the super hand and some unexpected support with the modkills, but we're kinda cookin rn
 
vampyrica said:
i mean honestly i think regardless of who dies tonight, wolves are in a sticky situation. the way i see it, were closing in. they may have had the super hand and some unexpected support with the modkills, but we're kinda cookin rn
Click to expand...
Unless the other wolves are Zenge and rae and they've been planning the deep wolf move all along :heckyeah:
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
I do think a 3 wolf pack isn't outside the realm of possibility since they had a ninja - and if it's Beans, then also a yeet avoidance (possibly an alpha?) as well.
 
I added the sum totals from yesterday's analysis and calculated the disparity, which I think paints a picture that's even harder to ignore regarding Clem and Beans:

1770907030743.png


The sum totals in row 17 are all positive comments and negative comments that player made about other players added together.

We can see that most players are negative, while Clem and Beans sit at +17 and +9 respectively, and that SQB was at +13.

Looking at column Q, we have the sum total of how often each player was attacked or defended by other players.

Weighing the columns against each other at the bottom, we have the disparity, between the two, which becomes even more stark, with Clem and Beans at a whopping +27 and +29 respectively.

What this tells us is that these players have the largest difference between how often they promote other players, vs. how often other players feel negatively about them.

In other words, Clem and Beans are the players most interested in not stepping on anyone's toes, despite other players attacking them, which is inherently wolfy.
 
Zenge142 said:
I added the sum totals from yesterday's analysis and calculated the disparity, which I think paints a picture that's even harder to ignore regarding Clem and Beans:

View attachment 415263

The sum totals in row 17 are all positive comments and negative comments that player made about other players added together.

We can see that most players are negative, while Clem and Beans sit at +17 and +9 respectively, and that SQB was at +13.

Looking at column Q, we have the sum total of how often each player was attacked or defended by other players.

Weighing the columns against each other at the bottom, we have the disparity, between the two, which becomes even more stark, with Clem and Beans at a whopping +27 and +29 respectively.

What this tells us is that these players have the largest difference between how often they promote other players, vs. how often other players feel negatively about them.

In other words, Clem and Beans are the players most interested in not stepping on anyone's toes, despite other players attacking them, which is inherently wolfy.
Click to expand...
I'm really glad there was a diff check (tinfoil excepted) between you and screams because otherwise I'd have to worry if you are going this deep into analysis to try and misdirect village 😂 this is so convoluted to my brain that I'm just smiling and nodding
 
Zenge142 said:
I added the sum totals from yesterday's analysis and calculated the disparity, which I think paints a picture that's even harder to ignore regarding Clem and Beans:

View attachment 415263

The sum totals in row 17 are all positive comments and negative comments that player made about other players added together.

We can see that most players are negative, while Clem and Beans sit at +17 and +9 respectively, and that SQB was at +13.

Looking at column Q, we have the sum total of how often each player was attacked or defended by other players.

Weighing the columns against each other at the bottom, we have the disparity, between the two, which becomes even more stark, with Clem and Beans at a whopping +27 and +29 respectively.

What this tells us is that these players have the largest difference between how often they promote other players, vs. how often other players feel negatively about them.

In other words, Clem and Beans are the players most interested in not stepping on anyone's toes, despite other players attacking them, which is inherently wolfy.
Click to expand...
I don't think I typically make a lot of negative comments
 
I also don't think I usually worry about stepping on toes much so maybe that's a conflicting self-view lol
 
Clem J said:
I don't think I typically make a lot of negative comments
Click to expand...
I think you're generalizing the language here, but it's more about the numbers.

No one in this game alive currently can really say you've been pushing to get them voted out, which in and of itself is a story that tells a tale.

But then in contrast with people who have promoted the idea of voting you out, you haven't felt the need to promote the idea of voting anyone out, in the aggregate that is.

So the disparity calculation comes in when in spite of people pushing you, you haven't found anyone wolfy enough to push yourself.

And it's the sheer size of the disparity that makes it so telling.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
kitzsuna said:
What is a ninja and alpha?

Edit: I see answer for ninja now
Click to expand...
Alpha can't be voted out until all other wolves are.

So for example if Beans is an alpha, instead of having a 1x yeet avoidance, we would have wasted an additional cycle yeeting her D2 only for there to be no results.
 
Zenge142 said:
Alpha can't be voted out until all other wolves are.

So for example if Beans is an alpha, instead of having a 1x yeet avoidance, we would have wasted an additional cycle yeeting her D2 only for there to be no results.
Click to expand...
lowkey wish we did that so we would know
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Zenge142 said:
I think you're generalizing the language here, but it's more about the numbers.

No one in this game alive currently can really say you've been pushing to get them voted out, which in and of itself is a story that tells a tale.

But then in contrast with people who have promoted the idea of voting you out, you haven't felt the need to promote the idea of voting anyone out, in the aggregate that is.

So the disparity calculation comes in when in spite of people pushing you, you haven't found anyone wolfy enough to push yourself.

And it's the sheer size of the disparity that makes it so telling.
Click to expand...
I think I usually push people more as mafia than as town
 
SARdoghandler said:
How do you feel about my conclusion that Clem is somewhat unpaired from scream?
Click to expand...
You yourself thought it was Clem yesterday.
SARdoghandler said:
Scream
Clem
Click to expand...

SARdoghandler said:
Clem/SQB interactions pt 1, Clem edition

Ok so there is a lot of WIFOM here. Conclusion at the bottom but I'm not spoilering it so that everyone has to at least scroll past it, even if they don't read it


Clem has scream firmly in village lean here +pairing

This just made me :thinking: because it would be funnee to say as a wolf

Still townreading scream, no other justification provided at this point +pairing


Same narrative continuing here +pairing

Doubling down at this point +pairing

Now this is where it gets interesting. Contextually, this is when scream started being a possible alternative to me/apop. While this could be distancing to try and minimize fallout if scream does go over, it doesn't quite fit. -pairing

This puts me farther out of contention and brings scream higher into it. This put apop at 2, me at 3, and scream at 3. So this literally took it from 4-2-2 with me in the lead to 3-3-2 with myself and scream tied. Unless you are sure your wolf partner is going over (which I don't think was a given at the time, but a possibility) I don't see a wolf doing this. Especially when clem had been saying he wasn't sure on apop. --pairing

Advocating dubz to take a shot on screams. This could be distancing but mostly null.

I agree on this. And I don't think it makes sense to push this on a packmate -pairing


Conclusion
My conclusion so far is that while I think Clem/scream isn't impossible, Clem's behaviour at yeet close doesn't really jive with this unless the wolves were convinced scream was about to go over. Overall, sadly I think they are lower likelihood to be paired. Which means my POE is probably bad and that makes me uncomfortable.
Click to expand...
As for your "unpairings"
I'll direct you to what I said to Dubz, which addresses these:
Zenge142 said:
Distancing for the first when it honestly seemed like you were fibbing about having a shot at all.

For the second he was in a bit of an awkward situation where he was willing to follow me, but not on SQB? Which I pressed him on and he said SQB was in his town core, which he relented on since he didn't have a good reason to have SQB in the town core by his own admission, and only then did her vote her.

This data is pretty damning.

Aside from still being at a net positive on SQB, what's abundantly clear here is that he's trying to hard to not make any enemies. With the exception of SAR, which only exists from sheeping me D1, Clem has not one single net negative unilateral interactions total (NNUIT) with any living player. That's not normal. That's not a village spread.
Click to expand...
 
Zenge142 said:
Distancing for the first when it honestly seemed like you were fibbing about having a shot at all.

For the second he was in a bit of an awkward situation where he was willing to follow me, but not on SQB? Which I pressed him on and he said SQB was in his town core, which he relented on since he didn't have a good reason to have SQB in the town core by his own admission, and only then did her vote her.

This data is pretty damning.

Aside from still being at a net positive on SQB, what's abundantly clear here is that he's trying to hard to not make any enemies. With the exception of SAR, which only exists from sheeping me D1, Clem has not one single net negative unilateral interactions total (NNUIT) with any living player. That's not normal. That's not a village spread.
Click to expand...
I think that is pretty normal for me

This is really a bit confounding for me because I sometimes get caught as mafia for not having enough townreads, so to be scumread for the opposite is...disconcerting
 
Zenge142 said:
You yourself thought it was Clem yesterday.



As for your "unpairings"
I'll direct you to what I said to Dubz, which addresses these:
Click to expand...
I did, until I reevaluated based on interactions with scream.

You still feel he has higher wolf equity and beans or kitz even though he put scream into direct danger by making her tie me for the lead the day we yeeted apop?
 
I also don't think I was really forced to vote queen d2, or to shake things up at all frankly

Even if we pretend I needed to be there for eod, if I were trying to yeet sar I would've started that wagon later, and even if I had mistimed that I absolutely didn't have to end up on queen (and before you say "BuT i MaDe YoU," I didn't have to push you to give me a read to sheep either)
 
If it is Clem and Beans then we have to kill Clem first, sheerly from the possibility of Beans being an Alpha instead of having a 1x Yeet avoidance.

Vig Shot won't work.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

kaydubs
Snack WWars (sign up thread)
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
290
Views
7K
reddeadrobin
reddeadrobin
Animal Midwife
Ten - Game Thread
79 80 81 82 83
Replies
4K
Views
67K
beans2020
beans2020
GoSpursGo
SDN High SchooWW (game thread)
43 44 45 46 47
Replies
2K
Views
34K
reddeadrobin
reddeadrobin
supershorty
The Good PWWace - GAME THREAD
79 80 81 82 83
Replies
4K
Views
101K
samac
samac
Clem J
CWWem's HoWWiday ExtWWavangza (mafia game thread)
36 37 38 39 40
Replies
2K
Views
70K
GoSpursGo
GoSpursGo