WWildzoo Family Reunion - Game Thread

Veterinary Science Graduate Certificate from UofI
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Stagg737 said:
Lol, you're not supposed to between closes and the write-ups. We can post strategy again.
Click to expand...
Oh **** sorry
Members don't see this ad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Members don't see this ad :)
Members don't see this ad :)
genny said:
You think Capri will be around tomorrow to kill? I'm sure you will be. But I'm not so sure about Capri. Guess we'll see!
Click to expand...
upload_2019-1-16_22-58-47.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Karabiner13 said:
that's only between when we post a 'closed' and when that corresponding write-up is posted. Although dubz and I have been lenient with that rule
Click to expand...
Mostly because I forget that is ever a rule myself and don't really care about it that much :laugh:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
genny said:
You think Capri will be around tomorrow to kill? I'm sure you will be. But I'm not so sure about Capri. Guess we'll see!
Click to expand...
I've lived this long lol. Clearly wolves villagers either forgot or have some sort of insurance.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I’m thoroughly enjoying my SNL gifs I may continue for the game. Don’t think I have some type of restriction lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
To answer previous questions about my samurai ability, from my role description it's essentially a vig kill which has to be performed during a lynch cycle. So I couldn't just take the shot any time, I had to submit it as an action.
 
dolphin106258 said:
Did jboo answer?
Click to expand...
Yep, in PM. Not satisfactorily really. She said the item allowed her to eavesdrop on me, but that it didn't tell her a lot. Not sure what to make of that.

I am most suspicious of Pip and Jboo atm. But Jboo is voting for pips so I have no clue what to make of that either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
dolphin106258 said:
Since you already knew the answer why did you ask? You already knew AM had the double vote. Unless AM was also just referencing her dying and us losing her as a player.

Idk the interaction felt odd, will look back when less tired.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at. I thought something really really bad might happen if she died. But nah, she just died.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
capri1722 said:
Kind of. I saw that you posted it. I appreciate you posting it because I like looking at them but until I learn how to do VCA they're not much more than just pretty to look at (for me).

Edit: Sorry, I didn't like how I worded that; I feel like I implied it's other people's responsibility to teach me VCA and it's not. Anyway I usually don't look super in-depth to tallies because it's hard for me to take anything away from them. They are satisfying to look at, however.
Click to expand...
It's fine. I've been trying to learn more VCA, and honestly it's just something I've had to slowly pick up over time with both experience but also picking up tips when other people are putting out their thoughts on VCA. It's not like something I've found a super useful "just read this WW strat article on."

To some extent it is the responsibility of the village (and pack) to teach each other better gameplay.

I shared the little tip about the last 3 votes on a bad guy lynch/kill usually having at least 1 baddie on it. Obviously not hard and fast, but there it is. (I will note that I said this rule of thumb AFTER having voted WM last, not really thinking about what I had done. If I was really a baddie voting with MJ on the bus, would I really say that? Would I really have voted with MJ on a baddie if I was baddie? We could have swung to Sporty if we were going to vote together. I could have easily stayed off and avoided all this WIFOM. That's WIFOM, still.) I got that tip from a mafia wiki article.

The other thing is to look at who was the first on a bad guy vote. Usually baddies don't lead buses or votes on their fellow baddies. If it looks like a good guy is going to die for sure then you might see a baddie do a vote for another baddie. If a baddie votes a baddie early and then it starts to catch steam, they will often switch off because they're like holy darn I wasn't really trying to get them killed I thought someone else would die.

Another thing to look for, if someone dies, you want to maybe consider why the people that were early on their vote decided to switch off later. Like, the person you wanted to die was going to die, why the cold feet? Baddies will do this when they wanted to vote another baddie for some sort of fake shade on them w/w interaction in case of a flip later, but they didn't actually want the vote to pick up steam. They will also do this when they decide at some point through the day that they don't want to be on record as having led that kill when that player dies. Obviously goodies waffle, too.

This gets into another principle - do people's votes every day match what appears, by what they are saying, to be their agenda? This gets into how you detect baddies lying. A lie isn't typically found by the quality of the content of the lie, how believable it is. Baddies like to stay close to the truth, usually, and obviously try to tell believable lies. It is the intent to deceive. Meaning, it doesn't seem that the person really believes what they are saying, even if what they are saying is plausible. (Example, Mel said my misremembering something was a trick to convince him of something which led to him voting and killing someone. The issue wasn't that the content of the lie wasn't believable (me being a baddie and lying to manipulate his vote) it's that it isn't believable Mel would sheep me to that extent. So it didn't pass the test of "does Mel believe what he is saying.") So how do you apply the intent to deceive concept to VCA? The other way you catch "intent to deceive" is when someone's actions don't match what they say. So saying how suspicious someone is and not voting them. Voting someone but then saying you don't really like that vote. There's a lot more ways that the discrepancy in agenda vs what is said/done can be seen, and seen in votes, but I'm not a sensei.

One way I do VCA is I try to look at the tallies towards the end of the day and try to think about how the players think about each other. Do I understand why each player is voting their vote? Were they vague? Are they contradicting themselves in some way? These questions can be asked looking back at tallies after, too.

Look for people who seem to keep voting together and consider why. Do they seem like goodies that trust each other? Do they seem to "mistrust" each other, yet are voting together anyway? Are they unaware they are voting with someone they say they don't trust? Is it a baddie "buddying" up to a goodie and sheeping their vote? Is it a lazy good guy sheeping voting?

Any pattern that emerges - they keep voting the same person everyday, or they vote them a while and now they're not any more. Why? They never vote the same living person twice - why?

Are they only ever on the person with the majority vote that day? Or are they never on a vote to kill someone? Are they often the only vote on player or one with few votes?

The reality is that at some point there are so many what ifs that it makes it hard to do this. You'll never run out of questions, there are few strong guidelines (like the bus tip), and it's impossible to see a tally and glean from it all that might be there, and there could be little there.

For me, even if I don't think I'm going to make anything of it, I make myself at least look and think about a tally, even if I'm not systematic about it and don't think I'll get much from it.

And I do learn the most when other villagers, and AM has really been this person for me, explains what they have observed in a tally that clears/is suspicious to them.

For example, the idea that dolph is not likely to be a wolf since 2/3 people on her vote one day were baddies, suggesting they wanted the "easy vote" ie one that was easy to justify (noob) and might easily pick up steam. (You can WIFOM that, yeah). I didn't really pick up on that until she basically explained it.

The issue I have is that often people make statements that are based on VCA, but don't break down what was the observation and why that observation leads them to their conclusion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Crayola227 said:
It's fine. I've been trying to learn more VCA, and honestly it's just something I've had to slowly pick up over time with both experience but also picking up tips when other people are putting out their thoughts on VCA. It's not like something I've found a super useful "just read this WW strat article on."

To some extent it is the responsibility of the village (and pack) to teach each other better gameplay.

I shared the little tip about the last 3 votes on a bad guy lynch/kill usually having at least 1 baddie on it. Obviously not hard and fast, but there it is. (I will note that I said this rule of thumb AFTER having voted WM last, not really thinking about what I had done. If I was really a baddie voting with MJ on the bus, would I really say that? Would I really have voted with MJ on a baddie if I was baddie? We could have swung to Sporty if we were going to vote together. I could have easily stayed off and avoided all this WIFOM. That's WIFOM, still.) I got that tip from a mafia wiki article.

The other thing is to look at who was the first on a bad guy vote. Usually baddies don't lead buses or votes on their fellow baddies. If it looks like a good guy is going to die for sure then you might see a baddie do a vote for another baddie. If a baddie votes a baddie early and then it starts to catch steam, they will often switch off because they're like holy darn I wasn't really trying to get them killed I thought someone else would die.

Another thing to look for, if someone dies, you want to maybe consider why the people that were early on their vote decided to switch off later. Like, the person you wanted to die was going to die, why the cold feet? Baddies will do this when they wanted to vote another baddie for some sort of fake shade on them w/w interaction in case of a flip later, but they didn't actually want the vote to pick up steam. They will also do this when they decide at some point through the day that they don't want to be on record as having led that kill when that player dies. Obviously goodies waffle, too.

This gets into another principle - do people's votes every day match what appears, by what they are saying, to be their agenda? This gets into how you detect baddies lying. A lie isn't typically found by the quality of the content of the lie, how believable it is. Baddies like to stay close to the truth, usually, and obviously try to tell believable lies. It is the intent to deceive. Meaning, it doesn't seem that the person really believes what they are saying, even if what they are saying is plausible. (Example, Mel said my misremembering something was a trick to convince him of something which led to him voting and killing someone. The issue wasn't that the content of the lie wasn't believable (me being a baddie and lying to manipulate his vote) it's that it isn't believable Mel would sheep me to that extent. So it didn't pass the test of "does Mel believe what he is saying.") So how do you apply the intent to deceive concept to VCA? The other way you catch "intent to deceive" is when someone's actions don't match what they say. So saying how suspicious someone is and not voting them. Voting someone but then saying you don't really like that vote. There's a lot more ways that the discrepancy in agenda vs what is said/done can be seen, and seen in votes, but I'm not a sensei.

One way I do VCA is I try to look at the tallies towards the end of the day and try to think about how the players think about each other. Do I understand why each player is voting their vote? Were they vague? Are they contradicting themselves in some way? These questions can be asked looking back at tallies after, too.

Look for people who seem to keep voting together and consider why. Do they seem like goodies that trust each other? Do they seem to "mistrust" each other, yet are voting together anyway? Are they unaware they are voting with someone they say they don't trust? Is it a baddie "buddying" up to a goodie and sheeping their vote? Is it a lazy good guy sheeping voting?

Any pattern that emerges - they keep voting the same person everyday, or they vote them a while and now they're not any more. Why? They never vote the same living person twice - why?

Are they only ever on the person with the majority vote that day? Or are they never on a vote to kill someone? Are they often the only vote on player or one with few votes?

The reality is that at some point there are so many what ifs that it makes it hard to do this. You'll never run out of questions, there are few strong guidelines (like the bus tip), and it's impossible to see a tally and glean from it all that might be there, and there could be little there.

For me, even if I don't think I'm going to make anything of it, I make myself at least look and think about a tally, even if I'm not systematic about it and don't think I'll get much from it.

And I do learn the most when other villagers, and AM has really been this person for me, explains what they have observed in a tally that clears/is suspicious to them.

For example, the idea that dolph is not likely to be a wolf since 2/3 people on her vote one day were baddies, suggesting they wanted the "easy vote" ie one that was easy to justify (noob) and might easily pick up steam. (You can WIFOM that, yeah). I didn't really pick up on that until she basically explained it.

The issue I have is that often people make statements that are based on VCA, but don't break down what was the observation and why that observation leads them to their conclusion.
Click to expand...
I'm not in a state of mind toreadand understand this right now but thank you

Note to self to come back later
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
ziggyandjazzy said:
Lynch jboo

I would also be fine with a snowy or skimble lynch
Click to expand...
I forget what jboo did that basically cleared her for a lot of people earlier... the lynch cancel?

and in any case we're hunting converts... when was the lynch cancel in relation to when we think conversion happened?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Crayola227 said:
I forget what jboo did that basically cleared her for a lot of people earlier... the lynch cancel?
Click to expand...
Yep

Crayola227 said:
and in any case we're hunting converts... when was the lynch cancel in relation to when we think conversion happened?
Click to expand...
It (the lynch cancel) was the night after the conversion supposedly happened

And yes, we are officially convert hunting
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
PippyPony said:
There are alphas with lynch avoidances, and then there are alphas that are unseerable.

I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility that either Capri is lying or AM is hiding what she got for being voted pack leader

I'm also trying to wrap my head around why a pack of wolves needs an affiliation seer in the first place, but that's a whole other tinfoily path
Click to expand...
I thought by definition alphas can't die by vote until the other baddies are dead first?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
only now am I considering this was a dumb questions

the tinfoil hat just told me that there are no more conversion opportunities left in the game

I thought it would be nice to know that anyone that people have cleared in POE from the point of me getting this answer don't have to be reconsidered (beyond the reconsidering of the roster that should happen every day anyway)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Crayola227 said:
I thought by definition alphas can't die by vote until the other baddies are dead first?
Click to expand...
That's one definition

Although, who knows. Last game, I discovered that I have all these weird Pip-specific definitions of things. So maybe my definition of what can constitute an alpha is not totally aligned with everyone else's definition.

I personally think of it as an OP wolf who has some kind of lynch avoidance or seering avoidance, with lynch avoidance being the most common iteration.
 
PippyPony said:
That's one definition

Although, who knows. Last game, I discovered that I have all these weird Pip-specific definitions of things. So maybe my definition of what can constitute an alpha is not totally aligned with everyone else's definition.

I personally think of it as an OP wolf who has some kind of lynch avoidance or seering avoidance, with lynch avoidance being the most common iteration.
Click to expand...
the seering avoidance doesn't make them alpha, that would just make them unseerable wolf, if they had both lynch and seer avoidance, they would be an unseerable alpha, but I think that would be a bit OP but anything is possible
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Crayola227 said:
the seering avoidance doesn't make them alpha, that would just make them unseerable wolf, if they had both lynch and seer avoidance, they would be an unseerable alpha, but I think that would be a bit OP but anything is possible
Click to expand...
Yeah I dunno man, I think about these categories in weird, special ways
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
You must log in or register to reply here.
Next unread thread

Similar threads

kaydubs
Melee WW Game Thread-April 2024
27 28 29 30 31
Replies
2K
Views
9K
samac
samac
kaydubs
WWhat Theme? Game Thread
9 10 11 12 13
Replies
603
Views
22K
samac
samac
kaydubs
Lucky 7777777 WW Game Thread-Non Champs April 2024
9 10 11 12 13
Replies
621
Views
3K
Stagg737
Stagg737
Zenge142
MaWWke YoWWr OWWn WW - Game Thread
152 153 154 155 156
Replies
8K
Views
156K
supershorty
supershorty
supershorty
SHWWENANIGOATS: The Unauthorized GGOATS Sequel - GAME THREAD
28 29 30 31 32
Replies
2K
Views
15K
sheltermed
sheltermed
Top