MEM wrote:Maybe I've missed something with necklessone - can someone lay out the case for him? It's not that I'm averse to voting for him, he's just not my top choice. Honestly, I think that both Visigoth and Meta4 seem to be more likely candidates. I am liking the "new" Visigoth though. These posts are at least helpful unlike his earlier ones.
I agree with you about Visigoth. CAD is pretty much the straw that broke the camel's back here - if I drop voting analysis entirely except for fringe cases, he's contributing more than a lot of players so there's no driving reason to lynch him over Meta4 at the very least.
The more important point, however, is Necklessone. I had been getting "Visigoth" vibes from him up to when I made that big reads list, where I had that point in there a couple times before I chopped it off because the whole damn thing was too long. Ryvvn is right, his tone has lately changed in a way that I can't describe, although the content of his contributions hasn't changed much. It seems like voting position doesn't matter as much as timing in this game and even that's suspect, so if a player's tone is off then that may be the best thing to run with. Remember, as DOM said, all we really have to do is find one wolf and then not lynch the hunter - preferably by voting "no lynch" although I'd not be surprised if sphenodont prevented that.
When I'm this lost trying to find wolves statistically, I'm going to give very heavy weight when players that have a history of catching wolves through feel are agreeing on one person. That's why I followed Zark on AVS, and that's why I'm following Ryvvn and Omega on Necklessone. Omega is pretty much the deciding factor for me - sometimes a player is just on the right wavelength, and Omega definitely fits the bill after sniping San.
Visigoth wrote:Just some other notes about why I suspect Hellheart.
which couldn't possibly be a wolf since stigmata was a wolf and wolves don't vote next to each other
Can we talk about this fiction for a second here. I can see three cases of confirmed wolves voting next to each other this game, and a fourth if necklessone turns out to be a wolf.
Or are we saying that they don't vote temporaly next to teach other. regardless of target?
Okay, let me clarify this. Standard wolf voting practices exist for a reason, otherwise they're random metagame artifacts that make zero sense.
Wolves normally don't vote in pairs partially because it draws suspicion, both at the time of the votes ("two wolfy players just voted for that guy, now I don't want to lynch him anymore") and for later analysis ("whenever a wolf has been in trouble, these two players pile up on a guy. I think they're wolves and anyone they've piled up on is a human"). In a more practical sense, the wolves aren't all on at the same time of day and so they'll spread out simply because they're voting at different times. The idea that a group of 4-5 wolves are all huddled at their monitors waiting for the command to cast their votes is ludicrous - wolves prefer to vote when it's convenient for them and not when it's convenient for the wolves. This also works in reverse - if a wolf votes at a time that is normally not convenient for them it can draw attention, which is a form of what happened with Zark catching AVS.
Wolves don't pile up on one player in a vaccum outside of the early couple of days because it creates "dirty" wagons, meaning that most or all of the voters on a player are neutral or wolfy. It's like a big red sign saying "hey there's probably multiple wolves on this wagon so don't lynch this guy today." Even if they do that to a wolf, it ends up calling more attention to them than spreading out will. The major exception to this comes when a wolf is in danger, but if the wolves start doing it as often they did in this game, then you can use the most braindead wolf-catching method: "okay, so this wolf was a leading bandwagon with this human. Let's lynch EVERYONE on the human's wagon and we'll catch half of the wolves right there." That also plays into a certain long-term Rictus wolf-catching method: "Hellheart and DOM have voted for the same player so many times...I actually think they might be the last two wolves."
The Sheriff Wagon on Day 1 just baffles me. If you're going to pile up on one player don't make it Nitestorm. ICB made a questionable vote and Stigmata was doing wolfy things, but we got Stigmata and ICB so early and AVS drew so much suspicion primarily because Ozy was working off of a shortlist consisting of players that voted for Nitestorm as Sheriff. People listen to Ozymandias after he's right once or twice and the wolves just made it really easy for him to be right
Voting an unknown wolf to death usually doesn't pay off in the long run. Sure I'll give a player a huge human lean for doing that, but other players aren't so generous. Killing a totally safe wolf also has its own problems: how did that player figure that whoever they voted for was a wolf? Like if ICB claims he's protecting Nitestorm and successfully kills wolf-MEM, it just doesn't sound right. Eventually it would've started to make me nervous - you don't see many players picking off wolves with random suspiciously late votes like that, Ryvvn nonwithstanding.