Werewolf discussion thread

sKeith · 04-01-2019 5:33pm

Pter wrote: »

Why was it not a good thing? Game went well. Weren't any issues with player selection. There was full transparency.

So in answer to your question, no, we cant all agree not to do it again. I wont do it every game but i dont understand the issue to have it as an option.

Who was it you picked again, Necro, sKeith and Beakerjoe. Why did you pick these people?

Baggly · 04-01-2019 5:35pm

Because i thought they would be good in the roles i chose them for, as well as being unlikely to bail out of the game.

sKeith · 04-01-2019 5:37pm

Pter wrote: »

Because i thought they would be good in the roles i chose them for, as well as being unlikely to bail out of the game.

Well, if it was a rand, everybody gets a fair chance of getting a role.

Picking players who you think would be good for a role is not fair on the people that you do not think would be good for a role.
They should have just as fair a chance of getting the role as everybody else.

Baggly · 04-01-2019 5:44pm

sKeith wrote: »

Well, if it was a rand, everybody gets a fair chance of getting a role.

Picking players who you think would be good for a role is not fair on the people that you do not think would be good for a role.
They should have just as fair a chance of getting the role as everybody else.

If its a rand, there is an equally fair chance that the game becomes unbalanced by someone flakey leaving the game or throwing their toys out of the pram, which isnt just unfair on every player in the game, but on mods too (Whether there are subs or not).

Someone leaving the game unexpectedly after maybe not contributing to the game and then suddenly getting a sub in who does contribute changes the game.

TBF, the reason we split the draft between the three of us is that all 3 of us have varying and differing opinions on who would be good. Thats where the semi-rand nature of the draft comes in.

If you have 3 different people using 3 different selection criteria, it is basically random! Thats how i chose my picks, but i have no idea how the others chose theirs! It doesnt matter how tbh, since there are 3 different selectors not orchestrating the full roster outside of their own pics.

This is a great discussion i think we should hammer out Keith (if you are amenable to it) but it probably belongs in WW discussion rather than this awards thread....?

sKeith · 04-01-2019 5:48pm

Pter wrote: »

If its a rand, there is an equally fair chance that the game becomes unbalanced by someone flakey leaving the game or throwing their toys out of the pram, which isnt just unfair on every player in the game, but on mods too (Whether there are subs or not).

Someone leaving the game unexpectedly after maybe not contributing to the game and then suddenly getting a sub in who does contribute changes the game.

TBF, the reason we split the draft between the three of us is that all 3 of us have varying and differing opinions on who would be good. Thats where the semi-rand nature of the draft comes in.

If you have 3 different people using 3 different selection criteria, it is basically random! Thats how i chose my picks, but i have no idea how the others chose theirs! It doesnt matter how tbh, since there are 3 different selectors not orchestrating the full roster outside of their own pics.

A) This is a great discussion i think we should hammer out Keith (if you are amenable to it) but it probably belongs in WW discussion rather than this awards thread....?

a) Can you copy posts, because TB's post is relevant to the discussion.

b) That's not unfair, its exactly fair. The rand have brought these circumstances that are out of your control to make the game design unique. The next time you play that exact game setup, the rand will produce a different game.

actually b) covers all your other points.

b+) Do the rand, trust the rand, do not mess with the rand.

Banjo · 04-01-2019 5:50pm

Pter wrote: »

Because i thought they would be good in the roles i chose them for, as well as being unlikely to bail out of the game.

Caveat : While I love to have a go at you, this is not me having a go at you. Yet. The night is young!

You can't run this game that way. That's fine when you're managing a sports team or casting a movie, but it's completely unacceptable in Werewolf. The game only works when you don't know who is who.

Example Formula :
Pter is Modding, Pter likes Necro as Wolf, It's Day 1 and I have no other suspicions so let's lynch Necro
That's antifun, and it comes from human hands touching what should be a purely random selection.
You can argue "But I would not be predictable!"
In which case - why not just rand it?
"So I don't get a no show!"
OK, so I know none of the new guys or flight risks have roles. N0 is a dangerous time to be dependable.

At the end of the day, it's your game to mod as you see fit, but there is no benefit to the draft that doesn't undermine the entire point of playing the game. It stops being Werewolf and starts being "Werewolf-esque".

Baggly · 04-01-2019 5:52pm

TBs post is in #1530 within your quote sK, if that suffices?

With regards to the other point you raised, We could play that Yulewolf game again with the exact same players in the same roles, with new anon accounts, and get a different result too.

We could pick new players in the same roles and different anon accounts and get different results too.

I get the rand removes all doubt with regards to mod collusion and wrongdoing, but it has its own issues we have never tackled, which have been raised as issues after games as well.

sKeith · 04-01-2019 5:55pm

Pter wrote: »

TBs post is in #1530 within your quote sK, if that suffices?

With regards to the other point you raised, We could play that Yulewolf game again with the exact same players in the same roles, with new anon accounts, and get a different result too.

We could pick new players in the same roles and different anon accounts and get different results too.

I get the rand removes all doubt with regards to mod collusion and wrongdoing, but it has its own issues we have never tackled, which have been raised as issues after games as well.

What issues are not fixed by subs?

Baggly · 04-01-2019 5:55pm

Banjo wrote: »

Caveat : While I love to have a go at you, this is not me having a go at you. Yet. The night is young!

You can't run this game that way. That's fine when you're managing a sports team or casting a movie, but it's completely unacceptable in Werewolf. The game only works when you don't know who is who.

Example Formula :
Pter is Modding, Pter likes Necro as Wolf, It's Day 1 and I have no other suspicions so let's lynch Necro
That's antifun, and it comes from human hands touching what should be a purely random selection.
You can argue "But I would not be predictable!"
In which case - why not just rand it?
"So I don't get a no show!"
OK, so I know none of the new guys or flight risks have roles. N0 is a dangerous time to be dependable.

At the end of the day, it's your game to mod as you see fit, but there is no benefit to the draft that doesn't undermine the entire point of playing the game. It stops being Werewolf and starts being "Werewolf-esque".

I know what you are saying, but you dont announce the game isnt randed, so no-one can bank on Necro being picked.

Also are you sure i dont pick Necro for seer instead of wolf?

Trying to predict player picks when you arent sure there is a draft in place is just silly. If you want to do it, go for it, but its not a good idea imo. There are better ways of picking people to lynch!

Baggly · 04-01-2019 5:57pm

sKeith wrote: »

What issues are not fixed by subs?

So someone rands wolf and doesn't vote, gets subbed out on Wednesday during the day.

Sub comes in and either a) is immediately suspected for being subbed in (this has happened lots) or b) has a free ride because there is no post history to analyse from Sunday, Monday, Tuesday. Players playing or not changes the game. The risk is minimised when its a NRV not playing, but the game is setup under the assumption powers will be used. If they aren't, its a problem.

Banjo · 04-01-2019 5:58pm

Pter wrote: »

I know what you are saying, but you dont announce the game isnt randed, so no-one can bank on Necro being picked.

Also are you sure i dont pick Necro for seer instead of wolf?

Trying to predict player picks when you arent sure there is a draft in place is just silly. If you want to do it, go for it, but its not a good idea imo. There are better ways of picking people to lynch!

But now Necro can play the "Village! Don't lynch me! You know I have a role you just don't know what it is but it's probably not a wolf because I was voted most evil last year!" defence.

It turns the game into even more of a popularity contest, it creates a Metagame -

that is, N0 and D1 the safest thing to do is assume there's a Draft in the absence of other information.

that doesn't need to exist or add anything into a game that already works as is, and to outsiders it reeks of cliquishness.

What does it give back?

Banjo · 04-01-2019 5:59pm

Pter wrote: »

So someone rands wolf and doesn't vote, gets subbed out on Wednesday during the day.

Sub comes in and either a) is immediately suspected for being subbed in (this has happened lots) or b) has a free ride because there is no post history to analyse from Sunday, Monday, Tuesday. Players playing or not changes the game. The risk is minimised when its a NRV not playing, but the game is setup under the assumption powers will be used. If they aren't, its a problem.

Play anon. The sub pedals hard to catch up or gets lynched. C'est la werewolf. There is no rule that says you can't solve the game by lunchtime on a tuesday and NOT call it a success.

Baggly · 04-01-2019 6:02pm

Banjo wrote: »

But now Necro can play the "Village! Don't lynch me! You know I have a role you just don't know what it is but it's probably not a wolf because I was voted most evil last year!" defence.

It turns the game into even more of a popularity contest, it creates a Metagame -
that is, N0 and D1 the safest thing to do is assume there's a Draft in the absence of other information.
that doesn't need to exist or add anything into a game that already works as is, and to outsiders it reeks of cliquishness.

What does it give back?

Again, this is based on the assumption everyone knows there is a draft. They wont.

Banjo wrote: »

Play anon. The sub pedals hard to catch up or gets lynched. C'est la werewolf.

Anon doesnt shield someone going from 0 to 90 overnight. I dont see how a sub coming in doesnt impact the game. It can be a good stopgap measure, but i think proaction is better than reaction. Thats just my way of doing things, so i understand if its not shared by all!

sKeith · 04-01-2019 6:11pm

Pter wrote: »

So someone rands wolf and doesn't vote, gets subbed out on Wednesday during the day.

Sub comes in and either a) is immediately suspected for being subbed in (this has happened lots) or b) has a free ride because there is no post history to analyse from Sunday, Monday, Tuesday. Players playing or not changes the game. The risk is minimised when its a NRV not playing, but the game is setup under the assumption powers will be used. If they aren't, its a problem.

A player not posting and only being subbed out by Wednesday is incorrect. If a player has signed up to the game and has not posted the minimum by lynch on Monday, they should be subbed out. The whole concept of mentioning of subs at all on the game thread should be shut down. (via rules)

Necro · 04-01-2019 6:13pm

On the sub issue; sometimes it's not possible to have subs for your games. Most want to play each month given the schedule only provides for one game per calendar month (sometimes a shorter/vanilla game alongside as well).

Depending on what set up you are running it may/may not be possible to regenerate a player from the dead - certainly easier with anonymous accounts regarding smoother transitions.

I totally understand the need and want to put certain players in certain roles.

For me, sometimes in a very challenging or complex role - when I'm randomising the process I might take it out of the general rand and do that one first. How I work this to ensure the process is not simply 'cherry-picking' is as follows:

Take a role: eg - Jafar in Disney.

All of the mod team do a rand and three names come out on top from that.

Then, the three names are again randomised and the top name to come from that gets the role.

Sometimes things just don't work out: a role you worked hard on can get munched night 0 (like poor old Murray/lynch invigilator in Stephen King), but that's the game. Assuming the balance on the game is well planned beforehand, it should be able to handle a no show/early death of a pivotal role.

But that's probably veering a bit off topic there.

Banjo · 04-01-2019 6:18pm

Pter wrote: »

Again, this is based on the assumption everyone knows there is a draft. They wont.

I'm not saying they know there's a draft.

They know there's the possibility of a draft.
That's enough. Once it's on the table, it sticks to the table like 3 day old shredded wheat (it had milk on it when it fell on the table, the analogy works!).

In the absence of someone saying "Hello, I'm a wolf" you look at the mod team and think "Who would they pick?"
If you're wrong, sure it's Day 1, it's always a crap shoot. But if you're right.... well they'll probably add in another wolf or a double lynch to "rebalance", but at least now you know there's a draft! And if you hit the seer - well that's why the draft is a terrible idea.

Anon doesnt shield someone going from 0 to 90 overnight. I dont see how a sub coming in doesnt impact the game. It can be a good stopgap measure, but i think proaction is better than reaction. Thats just my way of doing things, so i understand if its not shared by all!

No it doesn't, and nor should it. That's the life of a sub.
A sub impacts the game positively because without the sub you had a dead role! That's enough! They just need to play it right. You need to be more ruthless with your modkills if you're leaving it so long that it's clear there was a sub. However, it leaves the Fake Sub play as a ploy for laying low.

I do understand why you've done it, but again, I just don't think it's appropriate for this game. I realise how that sounds coming from someone who rarely plays and doesn't play well, but I don't need to be good at something to understand it. (Insert "your ma" joke here).

What you might want to address instead is the major barrier to new entries that causes the no-shows - the commitment the game requires. It runs breakneck speed morning till night for 5 working days. That's a lot of work for the mods, but also for the players - every game sees people get lynched for not keeping up and looking wolfy.

I think the issue is that you don't play enough games here, so there's pressure on every game to be a huge event.

Screw that. Start a new game every week. Run games in parallel. Let them finish in 2 days if thats how they roll. Let them run over the weekend. They might be smaller games, bigger games, slower games, faster games, but it will remove some of the pressure everyone feels to make this the best werewolf ever. There's less pressure to be on the thread all day every day, and less people's posts to catch up on when you're playing. You should get more quality posting, less overall quantity to slog through and maybe a golden dawn of rainbows, unicorns and throat-ripping.

(But still keep the "dibs on themes" thread thing going to avoid someone gazumping an idea you've been planning for 4 months)
And by all means, run that big monthly game that everyone plays. But don't draft the roles in it....

Baggly · 04-01-2019 6:23pm

Necro, banjo: any chance of TL:DRs?

Banjo · 04-01-2019 6:24pm

Draft Wrong
Rand Right.

There you go. But if that were enough you'd have listened to sKeith.

Necro · 04-01-2019 6:29pm

Banjo wrote: »

I think the issue is that you don't play enough games here, so there's pressure on every game to be a huge event.

Screw that. Start a new game every week. Run games in parallel. Let them finish in 2 days if thats how they roll. Let them run over the weekend. They might be smaller games, bigger games, slower games, faster games, but it will remove some of the pressure everyone feels to make this the best werewolf ever. There's less pressure to be on the thread all day every day, and less people's posts to catch up on when you're playing. You should get more quality posting, less overall quantity to slog through and maybe a golden dawn of rainbows, unicorns and throat-ripping.

(But still keep the "dibs on themes" thread thing going to avoid someone gazumping an idea you've been planning for 4 months)
And by all means, run that big monthly game that everyone plays. But don't draft the roles in it....

Ok, on this. I agree the schedule is slightly limiting in regards to player availability and indeed attracting new mods (I think Ecto touched on this in the feedback thread about wanting to mod but there not being a free slot).

The issue - primarily with Boards - is that it is not a site set up solely for Mafia/Werewolf and we rely a lot on COP for the backrooms.

Mafia Universe is able to run multiple games of different lengths all at once because everything is integrated into the site, it is entirely dedicated to the game so allows for this to happen.

COP CAN be used in a similar fashion, although it's more challenging. For example, if I'm modding a game (LOTR as example), and Pter is running a seperate game that I want to play in - there's not a way to hide the backrooms from me and allow me to play in the game - and thus I lose out on playing.

Now in saying that, the other fashion is to have Pter run his game, and Necro run his and neither are permitted to play in the opposite game - it's a possibility, but to do so the player base would need to probably also be significantly expanded beyond it's current form or you'd end up with one game of 5 players (like the last live game) and one of 26.

Baggly · 04-01-2019 6:30pm

Think you are doing your opinions a disservice there banjo but that ok I'll read the long text version of both of yisser posts later tonight.

I think I got the jist while running out the door at work. Whether we ever do a draft again people will be able to suggest that line of reasoning. Pandoras box is open! It's no different to when necro or I go after low posters and people tell us to stop being silly.

Baggly · 04-01-2019 6:30pm

I'm off home to enjoy my evening with my family so if I'm not back on tonight I'll look forward to reading more tomorrow!

sK if you are joining us at the beers I'll have that pint ready for us to have those few discussions we agreed to! We can throw Rand vs draft and the sub chat in too for good measure

Banjo there is an open invite if you wanted to join us!

Baggly · 04-01-2019 6:32pm

Two pints. Not one. Not expecting you to share the pint sk

Mollyb60 · 04-01-2019 6:37pm

Banjo wrote: »

But now Necro can play the "Village! Don't lynch me! You know I have a role you just don't know what it is but it's probably not a wolf because I was voted most evil last year!" defence.

It turns the game into even more of a popularity contest, it creates a Metagame -
that is, N0 and D1 the safest thing to do is assume there's a Draft in the absence of other information.
that doesn't need to exist or add anything into a game that already works as is, and to outsiders it reeks of cliquishness.

What does it give back?

Banjo you know I hate to agree with you but this is the bottom line for me with the draft thing. If new players know that a draft is even a possibility they'll think 'oh why would I bother playing if all the good roles will just go to their mates?'. Even if that's not what's happening, it's the perception to new players.

And for experienced players the thought will always be in their minds that a draft is a possibility so they'll assume that it has been used and that Necro is a wolf and Beaker is a seer and Drumpot is a shaman. If we want N0 to be less serious then having a draft scenario be a possibility just completely pisses all over that. Players won't be able to help looking for things in the nonsense people say.

quickbeam · 04-01-2019 7:03pm

Pter wrote: »

Because i thought they would be good in the roles i chose them for, as well as being unlikely to bail out of the game.

Another point against non-rand. NRVs are left thinking they weren’t good enough to be given roles. I know someone has to be NRV and not everyone can get a role but it is sorta like being picked last during school sports day.

Look, I’m all for trying new stuff and have no objection that this was tried. But I too would vote for rand only in future.

04-01-2019 8:10pm

sKeith wrote: »

In most games, if similar happened, it would be called cheating.
listing of few games where it would be called cheating;
chess
draughts
poker
scrabble
etc..

This whole comparison makes no sense mods aren't players they are game creators so they can't cheat only players can cheat as only players can win

Kolido · 04-01-2019 8:20pm

Wouldnt be gone on the idea of drafting tbh. I dont think we've ever had a game become unplayable because someone no showed or had to drop out.
If you are drafting players to roles because you can trust them to be around then you'd end up drafting the same bunch of players every time.

Banjo · 04-01-2019 8:46pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

This whole comparison makes no sense mods aren't players they are game creators so they can't cheat only players can cheat as only players can win

Of course referees can cheat. Don't be silly

04-01-2019 8:59pm

Banjo wrote: »

Of course referees can cheat. Don't be silly

No I don't agree if you can't win something then you can't cheat, you can be unfair or biased but you can't cheat.

This could be some poor understanding of the English language on my part so I'm open to being convinced otherwise

Necro · 04-01-2019 9:02pm

Deleted User wrote: »

No I don't agree if you can't win something then you can't cheat, you can be unfair or impartial but you can't cheat.

This could be some poor understanding of the English language on my part so I'm open to being convinced otherwise

*Cue Necro creating some sort of secret mod game where the aim is for the players to find and lynch the moderators*

Banjo · 04-01-2019 9:03pm

A referee who gives a penalty on a dodgy call because he's intimidated by the home crowd or the big occasion is not impartial.
A referee who gives a penalty on a dodgy call because he has €10,000 on the game is cheating.

Werewolf discussion thread

Comments