[SPOILERS] Werewolf 3 Lurker Thread

[MJW (ya that one)]

Even though 90% of the thread was spam GES did not post at all. All he did was follow the leader. He would have some insights if he was a villager.

[Serdoa]

Had not been following this game closely (or much at all, really). Just read the final write up...ouch. Out of 8 lynchings, the villagers got only 1 werewolf on day 2. 87.5% lynchings of villagers...random chance would do better, especially as the villagers numbers fell.

Was this good play by the wolves, poor play by the villagers, the effects of no PMs being allowed to most of the villagers, something else?

I think part of the reason is that we had on several days players on the block which we had no reason to lynch.

Day 1: MJW - just for how he acts, no matter if he is a wolf or not
Day 3: Pocketbeetle - just because Rowain was on a crusade and too many players just followed along without putting own thoughts into it
Day 4: MNG - not enough defense, coupled with being quiet
Day 5: F&I - not enough defense, coupled with being quiet

Day 4 and 5 I think could have as easily got a wolf as the targets were more or less random. Just to many quiet players which did not really give the impression of villagers trying to help catch wolves.

Day 6: Rowain - backlash from his crusade
Day 7: Lewwyn - brought it upon himself with his playstyle
Day 8: Meiz - too much trying to be smarter then everyone else, finally just making him look suspicious

If one looks at the voting tallies, from 18 villagers only 9 EVER voted for a wolf. If you take away the Selrahc voters you are even down to 6 villagers ever voting for a wolf - and that is mostly for the nearly happened 3-way-tie on Day5. Which really could have been a turning point but we villagers were already too much into that "lets make late switch plays", so that Roland - in this case, but it really could have been anyone - stumbled in late, didn't read what was going on but instead simply threw that chance away. That is something most of us villagers were prone too: Trying so hard to make our vote count that we crossed the line to "make our vote more important then the votes of the others", leading to what I feel was sometimes more of a contest of being the one which vote did finally nail someone, no matter if this someone was a villager or not. Important was that oneself was the one deciding in the end of the day. The same goes imo also for whom to put on the block in the first place. I still can't believe that on Day 3 nobody called Rowain for not stating his theory when it was already shown with others that theories at that point mostly were fantasy without any back-up by reality.

I think the wolves first and foremost did play a good game coupled with a little bit of luck (taking the Seer out on Night 1 coupled with the village having no PMs was surely a relief for them). Add to that villagers which did not play for the village - sorry guys, but some of you really did not in my opinion - and the first wolf-win had to be the final result.

[Serdoa]

As for this discussion about if GES was to quiet or not:

Honestly GES, I think that would have gotten you killed if it hadn't been for too many other players which were equally quiet (MNG, F&I, Mardoc and Jkaen for long parts) OR which instead played to get lynched (Lewwyn, Meiz). It was just that in the beginning so many players did not talk that you simply did not stood out of them and at the time you did the villagers had already all made targets out of themselves.

[zakalwe]

Day 5 was an extremely close call from the wolves' point of view. If you had lynched Scooter on day 5, Mardoc would have been much safer, and you would have gained at least 4 trusted villagers: Rowain, Lewwyn, Serdoa, and Novice. Considering that two of those ended up being lynched by the village instead, that was indeed a "pivotal moment", as Novice said earlier. In fact, only three villagers actually voted for a villager on day 5, so things were definitely "out of control" from the wolves' point of view. On the other hand, almost every other day had multiple villagers on the block, so we had a pretty good margin for error on those days.

Roland was right about one thing: we did want to finish the game on day 8, and we did play fairly aggressively to make that happen. I don't think we gambled too much, as there really wasn't a lot linking the three of us together, but it could definitely have backfired. I almost had to plead for my life in our chat, because GES was pretty eager to play it safe towards the end and sacrifice me.

[Sareln]

Today was the first day that I didn't feel like I needed to wake up in time to process the turn, yet I woke up anyways...

Anywho - I'm catching bits and pieces of it as people do their own post-mortems, but I'd like to hear specifically for my own education:

1. What went right with the running of the game?
   
2. Where were the minor hiccups in running the game?
   
3. What went horribly wrong with running the game?
   

Addtionally, what did people think of the no-PM format, the roleplaying bits, and the no-editing rules?

[Gold Ergo Sum]

Today was the first day that I didn't feel like I needed to wake up in time to process the turn, yet I woke up anyways...

Anywho - I'm catching bits and pieces of it as people do their own post-mortems, but I'd like to hear specifically for my own education:

1. What went right with the running of the game?
   
2. Where were the minor hiccups in running the game?
   
3. What went horribly wrong with running the game?
   

Addtionally, what did people think of the no-PM format, the roleplaying bits, and the no-editing rules?

1. From my perspective, basically everything.

2. If I had any complaint at all, and it is being super nit-picky, I would've preferred to see the "Turn over" email come exactly on time every day. Given the late voting that took place, it could've had a material effect on the outcome some day.
3. Nothing

I loved the no-PM format and cannot honestly see playing in a PM game, because it will require that much more time and because I think you would need to balance it way too heavily in favor of the wolves to even give them a chance.

I think the no-editing rule is absolutely necessary. Otherwise, people get a different view of the thread depending on when they read it.

[Mardoc]

What went right with the running of the game?

I really appreciated how clear and specific everything was from your end. I was never in doubt about how the roles worked, what they were, the deadlines, who lived and died and the information we learned as a result. Well, I guess there was one detail - however Rowain got confused about the Baner save should be reworded.

Where were the minor hiccups in running the game?

There were a couple times where you missed the cutoff for voting, or didn't publish the results fast enough for me Of course the Cull and Bruindane dropouts were hiccups as well, but you handled that as well as could be expected, I think. If it were done again, maybe clarify the rules for dropouts ahead of time.

What went horribly wrong with running the game?

Geeze, now you're just fishing for compliments! I don't think anything did, except that minor detail of the wrong team winning . Maybe next time you could be a tad less fair?

Addtionally, what did people think of the no-PM format, the roleplaying bits, and the no-editing rules?

It seemed to work out well enough. I didn't do much with my role, but that was more a result of my lack of creativity than anything. I really enjoyed those who did put time into it, though - Bruindane, Zakalwe, Meiz, novice. It was a nice touch. Your write-ups were quite nice as well, except when I was on tenterhooks waiting for it :neenernee

no-PM; I haven't played enough to evaluate it compared to a PM allowed game.
No-Edit - good rule. Tolerating the misspellings was worth it for the guarantee that no clue could be swept under the rug. Not that it seemed to help much...

[Roland]

Today was the first day that I didn't feel like I needed to wake up in time to process the turn, yet I woke up anyways...

Anywho - I'm catching bits and pieces of it as people do their own post-mortems, but I'd like to hear specifically for my own education:

1. What went right with the running of the game?
   
2. Where were the minor hiccups in running the game?
   
3. What went horribly wrong with running the game?
   

Addtionally, what did people think of the no-PM format, the roleplaying bits, and the no-editing rules?

1) Just about everything?
2) The player disappearances, which are less a reflection upon you and how you handled it, and more a reflection upon how the players handled the game. I'm still mystified at why the 'Wolves thought Cull's replacement would be a sure-fire Villager, but it wasn't much of a sticking point.
3) Just about nothing?

Honestly, I both loved and loathed the no-PM format. I'd do it again, in a heartbeat, but there were definitely times where I was beating my brains against the wall in frustration because of it. The roleplaying bits were awesome by those who chose to participate. For me, it did nothing - but then I'm not good at creative writing (although I am good at writing). I think it added a nice element that led to a more relaxed atmosphere. The no-editing bit (which was broken at various points without any repercussions, not that I thought anyone deserved any) is... well, a mixed bag. I understand why it was done, but I think so long as people agree to the honor system it's not worth having it as a hard rule. To each their own, but I definitely think it caused the thread to grow about 20% more than necessary. All depends upon which you find more off-putting or game-threatening, I suppose.

I think you did an excellent job Sareln, and I've yet to hear anyone complain about it. My only complaint would be the grammatical / spelling errors in the write-ups, but that's such a non-issue you might as well ignore it. Everything went smoothly I felt, and for the most part there was no need for moderator intervention - as much a testament to the moderator as to the players. Bottom line: good game, would participate again.

[Irgy]

What went right with the running of the game?

All of it really. A well run and enjoyable game.

Where were the minor hiccups in running the game?

At one point I asked for a clarification on the seer/fool mechanics, with regards to what distribution of results were given to the fool (i.e. was it 50-50 each time, or the way you described it). You then clarified the rules shortly after, sensible enough on its own. However the clarification gave an indication that someone had asked, and that someone was almost certainly a fool/seer. Even aside from who was online at the time, there's only a small number of people who would ask that sort of question. So there was something of a risk of the whole event giving information to the wolves.

Only a very minor issue though. I actually planned to use the whole thing as evidence to support my fool claim were it challenged, had I actually survived to make such a claim.

Addtionally, what did people think of the no-PM format

I've always preferred this.

the roleplaying bits

Not everyone did anything with it, but I think it's something that's good to have available.

and the no-editing rules?

I think this should be a given.

[Irgy]

PS Actually I forgot, but I'd call the player disappearances a "horribly wrong" myself, but they were nonetheless handled well, so what can you do really. I also don't understand why the replacement for Cull would have been a known villager, but whatever. Replacements are awkward anyway. At least the two disappearances somewhat counterbalanced each other.