# Werewolf (Mafia)--The Split \[Signups--In progress\] **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [February 13, 2009, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692 "2009-02-13T15:44:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 36
**Author:** ![Ichini\_Sanshigo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/d9b06d/32.png) [@Ichini\_Sanshigo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ichini_Sanshigo)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/701 "2009-02-26T01:17:17Z")
Also, I think we should wait a little bit longer to lynch. I haven’t really had the time to sit down and plot out my argument, although, mostly, I think I’d just be re-hashing what I’ve said in previous posts. I can tell you that if I don’t have it up before tomorrow morning, it probably won’t get done. ☹ It’s been a hectic week. ---
**Author:** ![Ichini\_Sanshigo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/d9b06d/32.png) [@Ichini\_Sanshigo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ichini_Sanshigo)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 1:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/702 "2009-02-26T01:37:41Z")
> [@Seeker of Truth & Beauty](#): > > Is this some kind of…_code?_ > > :dubious: Oh no! It’s all very exciting. There’s exhibits and courses (Tomorrow morning I’m attending a 3-hour course on insurance code billing. Thrilling!). There’s also sales booths where you can get deals on burs and handpieces (what you civilians think of as “drills”) and x-ray film and scalers and prophy paste and flavored latex gloves. Flavored! Enough hijack. Since I’m here: > [@DaphneBlack](#): > > Yeah, this post looks pretty scummy. Not really because you are defending Freudian, though two of your three alternate scenarios are really pretty weird (the first one makes some sense, as we’ve all been saying if Freudian is not a wolf that must be what’s going on). How are the other two weird? I’ll grant number two ( **Freudian** lied about her occupation) is weak sauce, but I pointed that out. Number three (power role she doesn’t want to reveal) seems unlikely, but not beyond the pale, considering we have no idea what the power roles are , beyond **pedescribe’s** admonishment that they would be not very strong. I thought of a fourth possibility this morning, but then I forgot it. ☹ > [@DaphneBlack](#): > > You’re voting for Freudian – why, if you feel this way? It’s not like anyone else is in danger of being lynched at this point. It looks to me like its so you can safely be on the bandwagon and not stick your neck out, but still point to ‘I didn’t like it’ later if she does turn out to be a rancher? As I said, I’m voting for **Freudian Slit** because her test results don’t match her claim, and because we already agreed to pair testing and lynching, at least in the early days. I feel that the need to establish some sort of meaningful baseline on the testerizer (Is it consistent? Is it not? What does it all mean?!) outweighs the strength of my feelings about **Seeker** in this case. Not only that, but I’m willing to bet that if I _had_ maintained my “Lynch Seeker” vote, I’d be marked as scummy for _not_ sticking to the agreed test-lynch plan. More to come. ---
**Author:** ![Mahaloth](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mahaloth/32/1079_2.png) [@Mahaloth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mahaloth)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 2:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/703 "2009-02-26T02:22:01Z")
> [@Telcontar](#): > > A lot of people are saying that they think Freudian is a rancher. If you guys really believe that, argue for lynching someone else. I don’t believe it as much as I’m guessing it. But, I have to see for myself to see if Freudian is lying. If she is a wolf, the testerizer is back in the game in a serious way…or at least we are closer to finding out what it means. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 6:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/704 "2009-02-26T06:02:25Z")
:: checks watch and calendar :: I wouldn’t object to moving up the lynching if lots o’ people are getting fidgety, but am in no particular hurry myself. ---
**Author:** ![Ichini\_Sanshigo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/d9b06d/32.png) [@Ichini\_Sanshigo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ichini_Sanshigo)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 6:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/705 "2009-02-26T06:57:28Z")
Sorry for the sequential posts, y’all, but I thought it would be better to break this down into chunks. Looking back over the thread to build my case against **Seeker of Truth & Beauty** (or is it **Seeker of Farmers & Ranchers**?) has actually widened the scope of my suspicions. This is gonna be a long one folks. 1. **Lemur866** was the first person to suggest lynching lurkers. Seems sensible right? As others have said, lurkers reveal the least information. But here’s the thing. The wolves know each other, and at least one of them has probably played before and knows of the common town inclination to lynch lurkers on the first day. Wouldn’t they make damn sure that none of them were on the bottom of the post count list? 1. **Justin Credible** was the first person to finger **Daphne Black** , right after she called **rexnervous** on his unseeming interest in power roles: [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10836393&postcount=122](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10836393&postcount=122) [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10836402&postcount=123](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10836402&postcount=123) Despite this, he votes for november anyway. Is DB _really_ that scummy? Or were the lycanthropes trying to lay the groundwork for a future lynch mob against DB? [**Justin Credible**](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10862616&postcount=487) was also the 2nd person after **rexnervous** to finger **Freudian Slit** for “protecting” Daphne by voting for Seeker instead of Daphne. [Rex’s reasoning](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10862082&postcount=473) in that post was sound, but the main problem with it was that the reasons for lynching **Daphne** were weak and kinda scummy in the first place. Remember? She was talking too much? Being too helpful? Also, **Freudian** wasn’t actually defending **Daphne** , just asking for reasons why she was being targeted. If Daphne had been fingered for better reasons (e.g. suggesting suspect strategies), and if Freudian had actually been defending DB, I’d be behind rex’s reasoning. But she wasn’t, so I’m not. ---
**Author:** ![Ichini\_Sanshigo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/d9b06d/32.png) [@Ichini\_Sanshigo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ichini_Sanshigo)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 7:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/706 "2009-02-26T07:03:14Z")
I think **Seeker** and **Telcontar** are tag-teaming. I’m not sure if **rex** is involved. He’s all over the place on my scum-dar, one post I’m like, “he’s definitely a wolf”, and the next post I’m all, “Oh, he’s pro-town”. **Zeriel** summed up my feelings about **Seeker** and **Telcontar** in [this post](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10844414&postcount=306) about Telcontar: > [@](#): > > Basically, Telcontar, I think you’re trying hard to make things entirely too simple and pat. Mafia games are not simple and pat. My case: I. It starts with **Telcontar’s** idea to not lynch on the first day, and his idea of having a [useless group of live tested people.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10837025&postcount=149) > [@](#): > > I was volunteering to be tested, lynch status TBD. Personally I think we should attempt to create a pool of live tested people so that we have a sense of the color patterns and frequencies before we start killing people. There’s also a chance the werewolves will tip their hand. He even lays out how reasonable not-lynching is in [this chart](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10843055&postcount=269). He listed the number of players, but he needed to list numbers of townies vs. wolves to be comprehensive. You’d need about 4 columns: 1. Starting number of players (townie/wolf) 2. Numbers of players (townie/wolf) if no lynch 3. Number of players (T/W) if lynch is successful (a wolf gets it) 4. Number of players (T/W) if lynch is failed (a townie gets it) All this is bearing in mind that the wolves get a definite kill every night. Simplified, the wolves get a max 2 kills per day/night round. The townies get max 1 kill, assuming the lynch is on target. In the beginning there’s a 50% chance for town to kill a wolf. No lynch means 0% chance of a kill for town, while wolves still get their 1 kill at night. Were these columns honest omissions? Or was **Telcontar** just obfuscating the whole “my math is solid” thing to push a bad strategy? II. On the top of page 8, both **rexnervous** and **Seeker** advocate leaving off further discussion until the next day (this was just after the first day Testerizer results). Namely because, as rex says, “The more info we provide them [meaning wolves] now, the more they have to influence their vote (and throw us off).”. But time is not on the town’s side. The wolves already have more information than us (they know who they are and who they want to kill), and since they’re masquerading as town, they will _always_ have the same info town has. Postponing or reducing the information we get in any way is NOT pro-town. III. On Page 11 **rexnervous** , and especially **Seeker** came down strongly against the possibility that wolves could pose as farmers/ranchers. [It was never clearly stated](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10865136&postcount=531), and I have to wonder why Seeker would discard the possibility when it could possibly strongly affect the results from the testerizer, and therefore, the town lynchings? ---
**Author:** ![Ichini\_Sanshigo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/d9b06d/32.png) [@Ichini\_Sanshigo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ichini_Sanshigo)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 7:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/707 "2009-02-26T07:20:03Z")
But wait, there’s more! IV. **Seeker** said > [@](#): > > Well, I’m really new to the game, and so while I’m not the lurkiest lurker, I’ve also not contributed much to strategy, but then, I’m really inexperienced… and in general kept harping on the whole “inexperienced” thing. It’s already been addressed, but I’ll say it again: “Inexperienced” doesn’t mean “clumsy” or “unclever”. Just ignorant, but given that this is the SDMB 😉 , he’s probably the type of person for whom even steep learning curves aren’t much of a problem. The whole experienced/inexperienced issue seems like misdirection to me. V. When **DaphneBlack** commented that lynching **november** was the “easy option”, **Seeker** said: > [@](#): > > So. We have here the most vociferous poster defending the least talkative. Obviously, they know each other… need I say more? (post 218). Daphne wasn’t actually defending november, just calling for more consideration in the rush to vote for the lurker. VI. The idea of wolves defending their own was reinforced when **Telcontar** said [“It is always a little worrisome if no one is defending the intended target (especially including the intended target). Wolves would care more.”](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10841524&postcount=234) This was reinforced by **Justin Credible** and **Mahaloth** (p.5). But I don’t think the wolves would _defend_ that person. They’d just make sure none of them were in that low post-count position. They would also simply try to sway opinion to another target. I don’t think it’s likely they’d risk outing themselves by defending another wolf. VII. In [post 269](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10843055&postcount=269) **Telcontar** continued the campaign when he asserts that **Daphne** is being “high strung” in her reaction towards **Seeker** ’s smudging. In [Post 280](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10843405&postcount=280), Telcontar says that we should go after Daphne because she’s generating the most conflict. The thing is, she really wasn’t. At least not until [**rexnervous** said she was](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10841546&postcount=236). Note that up until that point, **Daphne** had only voted to test **Telcontar** due to his “poor” math skills and no-lynch suggestion. Both Seeker and Telcontar had fingered her for talking too much. [**Telcontar said**](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10839938&postcount=201) > [@](#): > > Most notably: She’s talking an insane amount compared to everyone else. Mafia tend to look different than other players (the way varies, but standing out tends to be slightly indicative). Her post count suggests she’s worth watching. I know I’m repeating myself, but I believe the exact opposite: that is, _post count is one of the easiest ways for the wolves to blend_. In [post 172](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10838682&postcount=172), **fluiddruid** suggests that in these early stages, we stick to our test-lynch decision, and use the remainder of the day to discuss the nest day’s test-lynch. I’m still leery of **Freudian Slit** , and I’m unwilling to lose the information we could gain from her lynch. But I think we should seriously look into **Seeker** and/or **Telcontar** tomorrow. My vote stands. ---
**Author:** ![AllWalker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/db5fbb/32.png) [@AllWalker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AllWalker)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 8:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/708 "2009-02-26T08:32:14Z")
What, **Ichini** , is that all? 😃 I agree that **Telcontar** and **Seeker** seem to trust each other too much, given at how vocal they both are. Maybe they like each other because of their similar trains of thought, but that is highly stupid. If you are town, and somebody else agrees with you, it is dumb to automatically trust them. So there may be some wolfishness there. But, I think the whole “are wolves just wolves, or can they farm/ranch?” issue is nonsense. I myself assumed three distinct teams with no overlap. I now realise that there is the possibility that there are wolf farmers and wolf ranchers, the only difference between the two of them being testeriser results, so I don’t see that as _necessarily_ a scum tell. Who knows. I think any group of players who are consistantly on the same side opinion-wise should be suspect. The most glaring example in my mind is Seeker and Telcontar, but if there are any others I’d like to hear it. ---
**Author:** ![MHaye](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/bbe5ce/32.png) [@MHaye](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MHaye)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 9:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/709 "2009-02-26T09:59:53Z")
On the subject of the lack of discussion after the Testerizer results, this is an artefact of the results themselves. Under different circumstances we might be glad of more time to discuss who to lynch. Let’s take a simple hypothesis. FS turns out **not** to be a Rancher, but a Wolf. Then, tomorrow, we lynch (random player) and get a result of **Green Red**. We are quite likely to conclude that (Random Player) may be a Rancher. At that point there will be a debate about whether to lynch (Random Player) to verify that hypothesis, or lynch someone else, and if so who. We’re going to want more than 24 hours for _that_. Pede, as an alternative; how about adding a rule that if 75% of the living players have voted for the lynch of a player tested by the Testerizer this turn, the Day ends early. We then have a 48 hour Night. The next Day will then start early. The deadline for Dusk, however, will remain Noon EST on the following Friday, and the Testerizer deadline 48 hours before that. An example timeline applying these rules to Today.26/2 Noon : Day 2 lynch. Alignment revealed. Night falls. 28/2 Noon : Dawn of Day 3. Wolf kill result announced. 4/3 Noon : Testerizer use. 6/3 Noon : Dusk Day 3.(All times converted to EST). I’m in favour of lynching FS today to develop more information about the Testerizer. If FS turns out to be something other than Rancher, the hypothesis that the two-colour report is consistent for each role is still viable; if she is a rancher it is disproved. I suggest that that is valuable information. **Vote Freudian Slit**. (Sorry FS, but we need to know). If FS does turn out to be a rancher, we’ll either have to have a lot more data to work out the meaning, or even if it’s meaning_less_. If that is the case I’d be treating the Testerizer as a Day 1 conversation piece with no long-term meaning, until evidence emerges otherwise. ---
**Author:** ![Mahaloth](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mahaloth/32/1079_2.png) [@Mahaloth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mahaloth)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 1:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/710 "2009-02-26T13:00:27Z")
> [@MHaye](#): > > On the subject of the lack of discussion after the Testerizer results, this is an artefact of the results themselves. Under different circumstances we might be glad of more time to discuss who to lynch. Yes, this is exactly what I was saying up above. We will definitely need the days(small d) between the test and the lynch in the future. I just assume that the testerizer is complicated and we don’t have it figured out at all, which is making it a poor way to choose a lynch(unless Freud _is_ a wolf, of course). ---
**Author:** ![Telcontar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/3bc359/32.png) [@Telcontar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telcontar)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/711 "2009-02-26T14:42:01Z")
> [@Ichini\_Sanshigo](#): > > I think **Seeker** and **Telcontar** are tag-teaming. I’m not sure if **rex** is involved. He’s all over the place on my scum-dar, one post I’m like, “he’s definitely a wolf”, and the next post I’m all, “Oh, he’s pro-town”. > > **Zeriel** summed up my feelings about **Seeker** and **Telcontar** in [this post](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10844414&postcount=306) about Telcontar: > > My case: > > I. > It starts with **Telcontar’s** idea to not lynch on the first day, and his idea of having a [useless group of live tested people.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10837025&postcount=149) > > He even lays out how reasonable not-lynching is in [this chart](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10843055&postcount=269). He listed the number of players, but he needed to list numbers of townies vs. wolves to be comprehensive. You’d need about 4 columns: > > 1. Starting number of players (townie/wolf) > 2. Numbers of players (townie/wolf) if no lynch > 3. Number of players (T/W) if lynch is successful (a wolf gets it) > 4. Number of players (T/W) if lynch is failed (a townie gets it) > > All this is bearing in mind that the wolves get a definite kill every night. Simplified, the wolves get a max 2 kills per day/night round. The townies get max 1 kill, assuming the lynch is on target. In the beginning there’s a 50% chance for town to kill a wolf. No lynch means 0% chance of a kill for town, while wolves still get their 1 kill at night. > > Were these columns honest omissions? Or was **Telcontar** just obfuscating the whole “my math is solid” thing to push a bad strategy? > > II. > On the top of page 8, both **rexnervous** and **Seeker** advocate leaving off further discussion until the next day (this was just after the first day Testerizer results). Namely because, as rex says, “The more info we provide them [meaning wolves] now, the more they have to influence their vote (and throw us off).”. > > But time is not on the town’s side. The wolves already have more information than us (they know who they are and who they want to kill), and since they’re masquerading as town, they will _always_ have the same info town has. Postponing or reducing the information we get in any way is NOT pro-town. > > III. > On Page 11 **rexnervous** , and especially **Seeker** came down strongly against the possibility that wolves could pose as farmers/ranchers. [It was never clearly stated](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10865136&postcount=531), and I have to wonder why Seeker would discard the possibility when it could possibly strongly affect the results from the testerizer, and therefore, the town lynchings? Wow, you’re really bad at this game. That’s really all there is to it. Given an even number of players, the possibility of one lynch per day, and the possibility of one kill per night, the town should sleep without killing once. They just should. The thing that counts in this game is permissible mistakes. Given an even number, you can sleep without losing a mistake. Doesn’t anyone know basic game theory? If four people are alive at the end of the game and one is a wolf then the villagers should sleep; your odds of killing the wolf are higher the next day. It’s up for debate whether this should happen early or late in the game, but it really should at some point. There’s a strong case for doing it right now, actually, but for some reason people are desperately impatient and it’s not worth arguing the point. As for the rest…this reads like a paranoid rant. for one thing, I don’t trust **seeker** , I just think that the case against him is crap. I’m quite open to him being a wolf, I just don’t think anyone has given me any special reason to think that he is. Your cases against the other players are very random. You could easily have made equally strong cases against every player in the game. Only thing I’d like ot point out is that you and **AllWalker** seem to be going together a lot. ---
**Author:** ![\_Undecided\_Adrian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/_/eada6e/32.png) [@\_Undecided\_Adrian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/_Undecided_Adrian)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/712 "2009-02-26T15:38:40Z")
**Telcontar** , that’s just silly. The odds of killing a wolf get of course higher the more villagers are killed, but they are cumulative! Treating every decision as random chance, if there were 4 townies and one wolf, you can lynch someone (20% chance at getting the wolf), let the wolf kill one if you didn’t get him and then get one more lynch opportunity at 33%. That means .2 + .33\*.8 = 46.4 % chance. If you do nothing at this round, you lose one more townie and have only one lynch opportunity at 25% chance. So your (carefully picked?) example of 4 players alive is the _only_ time waiting might make sense, because it’s over if you don’t get the wolf and you go from 25% to 33% if you wait. But that really is a special case because only then do you not lose a lynch opportunity if you wait. At all other times waiting means one less opportunity to get a wolf. Doing nothing only makes sure that only villagers die. Sorry, but that is a really crummy strategy, a bad idea and makes you suspicious. ---
**Author:** ![\_Undecided\_Adrian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/_/eada6e/32.png) [@\_Undecided\_Adrian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/_Undecided_Adrian)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/713 "2009-02-26T15:54:16Z")
OK, I just finally really got what you meant. I thought you meant waiting was a good idea in general and not that you spoke about that one specific case at the end of the game (3-1 split) and worked your way backwards. But it’s still a bad idea. How do you figure that it will be a 3-1 split? We could be better or worse at figuring out the scum. And, most importantly, waiting now means less opportunity to figure out the machine from our color-crazy scientist friend. There actually might be a reason for not lynching anyone later, but certainly not before we figure the code out; we gain nothing from a pool of tested live people until then. ---
**Author:** ![fluiddruid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c2a13f/32.png) [@fluiddruid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fluiddruid)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/714 "2009-02-26T17:17:30Z")
> [@Telcontar](#): > > That’s really all there is to it. Given an even number of players, the possibility of one lynch per day, and the possibility of one kill per night, the town should sleep without killing once. They just should. The thing that counts in this game is permissible mistakes. Given an even number, you can sleep without losing a mistake. Doesn’t anyone know basic game theory? Telcontar, you are either deliberately being obtuse or missing the core of the argument which is that _voting is not random in Mafia._ It certainly is not random for scum, who know each other and know who the townspeople are; scum votes are obviously motivated by keeping as many scum players in the game as possible. For town, people are voting on the information they have available. Lack of lynches/votes (or ‘random’ votes for that matter) are not helpful as they continue to provide no information for the late game. Furthermore, how can you guarantee a set number of players will be in the game at any point? For all we know, there could be someone with a power for a one-off night kill or a block. ---
**Author:** ![Oredigger77](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/oredigger77/32/3181_2.png) [@Oredigger77](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oredigger77)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/715 "2009-02-26T18:03:02Z")
I am against shortening the game for two reasons. Firstly we do need the time to talk about results of the testerizer or if we ignore the testerizer time to discuss the lynch. Secondly I like not having to post from my phone on weekends to stay in the game, my spelling is atrocious and my grammar is worse. With Z not posting this week I think her replacement is will probably be safe until a Day has passed, which means that we will have 13 players in the running tomorrow. I think its interesting that Ichini and I have a very similar list of suspects. I also haven’t seen anyone else publish a list of suspects. I think that part of the reason is that people don’t what to let on what they are thinking out of fear of exposing themselves. I’m against this play because one of will die to night and any thoughts or suspicions they hade will help us find their killer. I think that it would be best if everyone let on who they think is most suspicious before the day ends so we can use that toMorrow and gain an extra townie. ---
**Author:** ![Telcontar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/3bc359/32.png) [@Telcontar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telcontar)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/716 "2009-02-26T19:18:29Z")
> [@'\[Undecided](#): > > Adrian;10878139’]OK, I just finally really got what you meant. I thought you meant waiting was a good idea in general and not that you spoke about that one specific case at the end of the game (3-1 split) and worked your way backwards. > > But it’s still a bad idea. How do you figure that it will be a 3-1 split? We could be better or worse at figuring out the scum. > > And, most importantly, waiting now means less opportunity to figure out the machine from our color-crazy scientist friend. There actually might be a reason for not lynching anyone later, but certainly not before we figure the code out; we gain nothing from a pool of tested live people until then. Sigh. I’m getting really tired of this argument. If you don’t understand it, then fine, but stop pretending it’s a good reason to be suspicious. Basic form (AGAIN): 18 players with 4 wolves = 4 mistakes 17 players with 4 wolves = 4 mistakes 4 = 4 Additional night kill and testerizer result = more information. 4 mistakes + more information \> 4 mistakes and less information. Also: In four person mafia with one wolf you need the votes of all the remaining townspeople to kill the wolf. In three person mafia with one wolf you need the votes of all the remaining townspeople to kill the wolf. It is a lot easier to get 2/2 than 3/3. This generalizes to all situations in which there is no longer a free mistake. Look, it may be that we win this game early and it doesn’t matter (though that would probably be a sign of crappy game balance). But, in the event that it is a close game smart play might actually matter. ---
**Author:** ![rexnervous](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e9c0ed/32.png) [@rexnervous](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rexnervous)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/717 "2009-02-26T20:50:34Z")
Just FYI - totally swamped at work right now so not sure how much I’ll contribute between now and lynch. Vote stands. ---
**Author:** ![MHaye](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/bbe5ce/32.png) [@MHaye](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MHaye)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/718 "2009-02-26T23:47:22Z")
> [@Ichini\_Sanshigo](#): > > Sorry for the sequential posts, y’all, but I thought it would be better to break this down into chunks. > > Looking back over the thread to build my case against **Seeker of Truth & Beauty** (or is it **Seeker of Farmers & Ranchers**?) has actually widened the scope of my suspicions. This is gonna be a long one folks. > > 1. > > **Lemur866** was the first person to suggest lynching lurkers. Seems sensible right? As others have said, lurkers reveal the least information. But here’s the thing. The wolves know each other, and at least one of them has probably played before and knows of the common town inclination to lynch lurkers on the first day. Wouldn’t they make damn sure that none of them were on the bottom of the post count list? This is a touch ironic. The player of this role has completely reversed their position on this issue. Lynching lurkers is A Bad Idea in the early game, not least because we haven’t actually discussed what “lurker” _means_. A player with a low or nonexistent postcount isn’t necessarily a lurker. They might have had a sudden change in circumstances that renders them unable to post for a week, or even forget about the game for a few days. I’ve seen both happen. Such a player isn’t _lurking_; they’re not playing at all. Lynching them is almost always a mistake on Day 1, because you learn nothing and deprive yourself of the chance of learning something when they do eventually turn up. The death of November actually provides an example of why it can be better to kill a more active player on Day 1. We learned nothing from November;s death except that **Green Red** is associated with a Rancher. A lurker is someone who is reading the game but not posting, or not posting much, or who is posting much but most of their posts are fluff and/or non-game related. making a policy of killing players with a ;low postcount isn’t a good plan, because all you have to do to not have a postcount is post lots of content-light posts. That makes it harder for everyone to play the game. Lastly, my playing style is that I post infrequently in the early Days. I don’t like “me too” posting in most circumstances; it’s one of those ways of increasing one’s postcount without saying much. There can be justifications for it, but in general I avoid “me too” unless I want to stress some part that deserves more attention. I also don’t subscribe to “vote early, vote often.” Votes are significant things; you shouldn’t let them be tossed around by passing winds of suspicion. Settle on voting for a reason, and evaluate new cases as they come up, that’s me. ---
**Author:** ![AllWalker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/db5fbb/32.png) [@AllWalker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AllWalker)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2009, 3:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/719 "2009-02-27T03:12:49Z")
> [@Telcontar](#): > > Only thing I’d like ot point out is that you and **AllWalker** seem to be going together a lot. Thanks for pointing this out - it is what I suggested people do, to spot the pairings - but you seem to have misunderstood. “Going together a lot” suggests that we, you know, agree on more than one thing. So we both find you and **Seeker** suspicious for similar reasons - oh noes, the furriness! :rolleyes: You and **Seeker** though, it’s like you are married. Well, not quite but you do follow each other’s less than rational leads with alarming eagerness. J’accuse, pendo. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2009, 4:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/720 "2009-02-27T04:13:50Z")
Many apologies. I was on a vacation from Saturday until today, which shouldn’t have been a problem… until my USB cell modem decided to up and fail to work at all with my wife’s laptop. So that’s why I’ve been completely gone. Reading to catch up, but I can’t see any reason to NOT vote Freudian Slit–but his alignment will tell us a lot about how far to trust the testerizer. By the by, folks, I think I have an important bit of information I want to throw out there–I’m a pseudo-useless power role. Namely, I’m a town alignment investigator–I can submit a name nightly and find out ONLY whether they’re farmer or rancher. Needless to say, to preserve my own longevity I’m not revealing which of the two I am. The reason I’m coming out with this? It’s expressly stated in my PM that the werewolves DO have farmer/rancher identities. Firstly, this prevents me from investigating to find them. Secondly, it colors our interpretation of the testerizer results. Given the way discussion has gone today, I figured that was worth throwing out a claim–especially since as far as I’m concerned, I’m a vanilla for the purposes of the main town vs. scum game–it’s only the farmer vs. rancher game my power can affect. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692.md?page=35) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692.md?page=37)