TWG CXX: Postgame - Grinch’s gambit and Grandma’s troll dooms Christmas

[Oricorio]

As for the balance: this game has a lot of what we call "swing", which is when minor actions can have a huge influence in the game's result. I think a large part of the problem is that the game has a nightstart; if the Seer redchecks the Grinch or the Grinch naughty lists Santa N1, it severely limits the options of the other faction before the game really begins. Still, I think the game was townsided if anything. This was because the Seer was an immediate gameending threat to the Grinch while the Grinch didn't have anything as powerful to use against town, and while I believe cardflips being off is meant to balance the inherent townsidedness of OC games, in this case that dynamic didn't work since town knew that anyone who died that didn't end the game wasn't the Grinch anyway. Still, the unbalanced/swingy mechanics ended up balancing each other out in this game, so I can't complain too much.

[davy]

This was my first time playing a Fool (or Jester if you prefer) role. When I saw I rolled it, I was like: this is easy, I always get (almost) lynched, so I just need to play ever so slightly worse than I usually do, BDS will point out all the flaws I'm making and I'll get lynched.

It already started with my very first post: With the Grinch's ability, my calls on red and green seering were completely wrong, and the Grandma seering was very shakey at best. Oddly enough I didn't get too much suspicion from that, and I was quite dissapointed to not see BDS jump on my flaws.

When I realised I would be at an event that would end around the time for D1 end, I realised I could use it to my advantage to just not play for the last 24 hours and self-safety. I remembered having precedent for self-safetying, but did not realise how long ago that was and that barely any one from that era was currently still playing. Despite that, once I explained myself after D1, no one brought it up again, so I don't think it was that bad of a play.

The "I'm worried about Grandma and Grinch teaming up" was 100% an invitation. Really disappointed that the only player to point that out in topic was the one player that should have been able to realise that was going on and could clearly have teamed up with me at that point, yet didn't.

Wednesday I really did have a bad day that took the energy out of me. I was actually planning to make an analysis post, but just couldn't muster the energy for it. In hindsight, I'm kinda glad I didn't, since the D2 events would have made it instantly irrelevant.

Orange seering going public left me with little options, as I outlined in my PM to Oricorio. Unfortunately, I was too caught up in my plans to not lose the game that I neglected to point out to Oricorio how discrediting THC and TZP would aid in his survival. Bit of a shame that, as I do think discrediting TZP/THC would have given Oricorio a better chance at surviving than the towncred he gained from betraying me (though he won, so appearantly it was a winning move).

The "Good luck surviving this, BDS" was made because I felt wolf!Oricorio made a sub-optimal play by betraying me, and therefore I believed him to be the miller, which left only BDS as a possible grinch to me (Xiao was also possible, but I believed there wouldn't have been a N1 wolfing then). Also, just to create some chaos, as that's what a 3rd party that has already lost is supposed to do.

When I saw Oricorio's vote for me, I jumped on the opportunity to push for my last chance to win. I fully expected Oricorio to change his move at the last moment, so I was hoping TZP's unvote would only happen so late into the phase that Oricorio couldn't change his vote anymore. However, in my rush to get TZP to co-opperate with me, I neglected to mention that. After TZP changed his vote, I kept refreshing to see if Oricorio would change his vote, so I could take him down in revenge, but told myself I needed at least 15 seconds to confirm if taking revenge would remove my chances of winning or if there were none to begin with. So A+ timing on that, Oricorio, just a little earlier and I might have changed my vote. Though I'm kinda surprised THC didn't do the same, as him changing his vote to Oricorio would actually win the game for his team.

Speaking of THC, I hope you don't role seer in the near future. Nobody's going to believe you if you do.

As a final note, I'm not too big of a fan of the direction the meta seems to be moving here, where people are human read if they put considerable effort in the game, and wolfread otherwise. When I returned from my event on Tuesday, I spent 2 hours defending myself and didn't even get to analysing other players, which was what also discouraged me from posting those thoughts on Wednesday (along with my shitty day). I really can't justify spending so much time on this game every day for an entire week, and it's making me second guess if I even want to continue playing on here.

Though I think it would help if we could re-introduce a chatroom. Since A# hasn't played the last couple of games, are there any players remaining that have objections to using discord?

[Oricorio]

This was my first time playing a Fool (or Jester if you prefer) role. When I saw I rolled it, I was like: this is easy, I always get (almost) lynched, so I just need to play ever so slightly worse than I usually do, BDS will point out all the flaws I'm making and I'll get lynched.

It already started with my very first post: With the Grinch's ability, my calls on red and green seering were completely wrong, and the Grandma seering was very shakey at best. Oddly enough I didn't get too much suspicion from that, and I was quite dissapointed to not see BDS jump on my flaws.

When I realised I would be at an event that would end around the time for D1 end, I realised I could use it to my advantage to just not play for the last 24 hours and self-safety. I remembered having precedent for self-safetying, but did not realise how long ago that was and that barely any one from that era was currently still playing. Despite that, once I explained myself after D1, no one brought it up again, so I don't think it was that bad of a play.

The "I'm worried about Grandma and Grinch teaming up" was 100% an invitation. Really disappointed that the only player to point that out in topic was the one player that should have been able to realise that was going on and could clearly have teamed up with me at that point, yet didn't.

Wednesday I really did have a bad day that took the energy out of me. I was actually planning to make an analysis post, but just couldn't muster the energy for it. In hindsight, I'm kinda glad I didn't, since the D2 events would have made it instantly irrelevant.

Orange seering going public left me with little options, as I outlined in my PM to Oricorio. Unfortunately, I was too caught up in my plans to not lose the game that I neglected to point out to Oricorio how discrediting THC and TZP would aid in his survival. Bit of a shame that, as I do think discrediting TZP/THC would have given Oricorio a better chance at surviving than the towncred he gained from betraying me (though he won, so appearantly it was a winning move).

The "Good luck surviving this, BDS" was made because I felt wolf!Oricorio made a sub-optimal play by betraying me, and therefore I believed him to be the miller, which left only BDS as a possible grinch to me (Xiao was also possible, but I believed there wouldn't have been a N1 wolfing then). Also, just to create some chaos, as that's what a 3rd party that has already lost is supposed to do.

When I saw Oricorio's vote for me, I jumped on the opportunity to push for my last chance to win. I fully expected Oricorio to change his move at the last moment, so I was hoping TZP's unvote would only happen so late into the phase that Oricorio couldn't change his vote anymore. However, in my rush to get TZP to co-opperate with me, I neglected to mention that. After TZP changed his vote, I kept refreshing to see if Oricorio would change his vote, so I could take him down in revenge, but told myself I needed at least 15 seconds to confirm if taking revenge would remove my chances of winning or if there were none to begin with. So A+ timing on that, Oricorio, just a little earlier and I might have changed my vote. Though I'm kinda surprised THC didn't do the same, as him changing his vote to Oricorio would actually win the game for his team.

Speaking of THC, I hope you don't role seer in the near future. Nobody's going to believe you if you do.

As a final note, I'm not too big of a fan of the direction the meta seems to be moving here, where people are human read if they put considerable effort in the game, and wolfread otherwise. When I returned from my event on Tuesday, I spent 2 hours defending myself and didn't even get to analysing other players, which was what also discouraged me from posting those thoughts on Wednesday (along with my shitty day). I really can't justify spending so much time on this game every day for an entire week, and it's making me second guess if I even want to continue playing on here.

Though I think it would help if we could re-introduce a chatroom. Since A# hasn't played the last couple of games, are there any players remaining that have objections to using discord?

Discrediting TZP/THC would not have aided in my survival. They were the two people who I knew could still use their vote, so they were the last people I wanted to piss off, and it would have been basically impossible to convince the two people who had the seer results to completely ignore them. You were basically asking me to put my life on the line for you, which is something I couldn't do. I did feel bad, but I had no other choice if I wanted to win.

[BlackDragonSlayer]

This was my first time playing a Fool (or Jester if you prefer) role. When I saw I rolled it, I was like: this is easy, I always get (almost) lynched, so I just need to play ever so slightly worse than I usually do, BDS will point out all the flaws I'm making and I'll get lynched.

I think I was a lot more cautious about that because of the express possibility of Grandma. Definitely make me reconsider and, generally, be a lot more cautious about accidentally tunneling (something which I've been trying to improve on progressively as the TWG revival has kept on).

It already started with my very first post: With the Grinch's ability, my calls on red and green seering were completely wrong, and the Grandma seering was very shakey at best. Oddly enough I didn't get too much suspicion from that, and I was quite dissapointed to not see BDS jump on my flaws.

Huh, I must've missed that.

As a final note, I'm not too big of a fan of the direction the meta seems to be moving here, where people are human read if they put considerable effort in the game, and wolfread otherwise. When I returned from my event on Tuesday, I spent 2 hours defending myself and didn't even get to analysing other players, which was what also discouraged me from posting those thoughts on Wednesday (along with my shitty day). I really can't justify spending so much time on this game every day for an entire week, and it's making me second guess if I even want to continue playing on here.

On one hand, I feel that's a natural inclination of people. On the other hand, I can kinda see what you mean—even if you establish a baseline ahead of time of "hey, I'm probably not gonna be as active as I usually am," people naturally gravitate toward distrusting people who could be intentionally inactive, and I feel as if there isn't enough incentive to change that way of thinking. I get the feeling this is a natural consequence of having so many games with so few players; if we were regularly having games with 12-16 players, for example, I think the problem would resolve itself, but with 8-10 players, inactivity can be a ridiculously deciding factor that people just assume that if someone is inactive or otherwise not deeply involved with the game, it must be intentional to try and throw the game, ergo they must be a wolf.

Any thoughts on how we could go about consistently changing that (rather than just relying on the mechanics of individual games)?

Though I think it would help if we could re-introduce a chatroom. Since A# hasn't played the last couple of games, are there any players remaining that have objections to using discord?

It would be neat to have a chatroom game, at least as a trial! Though, I will say that chatroom availability may make the problem worse and overall require heavier player involvement; I remember a game in the past where I was suspected solely for the fact that I never showed up in the chat at all (simply because I was too busy or burned out to do so, IIRC).

[A# Minor]

okay, time to unrevive myself then hehe

[SpecsFlyer17]

Time for a Specs, TZP, Math, A#, Poet, THC, Toby, Oricorio, BDS, davy, Xiao, Kai, Olimar, EGadd, N1P2 showdown.

Magnet can host.

[Oricorio]

A little more on the davy situation. To be honest, I did come up with a gambit that may have had a small chance of working: Send TZP and THC a message that I wanted to test the reliability of the Seer. To do this, I would send davy a message that I am the Grinch and would like to collaborate with him. If davy keeps this to himself and/or responds to me, he's Grandma, and if he outs it to the thread, he isn't Grandma because he would be pushing a lynch on someone else. Then I would direct davy to "out" my "confession" to the thread, which may make people think he's not Grandma. The main problem with this was they'd think that this would be a gambit to get in touch with Grandma as the Grinch (even if davy messaged me first) and I had a strong suspicion that TZP was the Seer anyway, and people aren't going to disagree with mechanical information. Unfortunately, who I put on the Naughty List unintentionally jeopardized any chances davy had of winning without him being aware.

There are three laws of dealing with a red check that I have learned from experience:
1. Don't shut down.
2. Don't tunnel the Seer.
3. Don't counterclaim Seer.

Going along with davy's plan would have violated the second law, so outing him was the only real option if I had any hope of survival.

[Oricorio]

On one hand, I feel that's a natural inclination of people. On the other hand, I can kinda see what you mean—even if you establish a baseline ahead of time of "hey, I'm probably not gonna be as active as I usually am," people naturally gravitate toward distrusting people who could be intentionally inactive, and I feel as if there isn't enough incentive to change that way of thinking. I get the feeling this is a natural consequence of having so many games with so few players; if we were regularly having games with 12-16 players, for example, I think the problem would resolve itself, but with 8-10 players, inactivity can be a ridiculously deciding factor that people just assume that if someone is inactive or otherwise not deeply involved with the game, it must be intentional to try and throw the game, ergo they must be a wolf.

In fairness, I was one of the major ones pushing the "inactive = scummy" because that narrative benefitted me; I am typically a lot more skeptical of that. Still, the amount of inactive townies certainly gave me a lot of breathing room as well as space to create narratives, and Xiao's phantom gave me a consistent way to win the KitB.

[Oricorio]

Still, you gotta admit it's funny that I was mislynched last game despite having a green check but I got away with having a red check in the very next game. That's NSM for you I guess

[ThatHiddenCharacter]

I suppose it may have appeared a tad wolfy, but you're THC; you can get away with it!

It's sad how true this is.

[ThatHiddenCharacter]

I saw virtually no reason to be suspicious of you at really any point (sorry THC, I just didn't see it).

That was exactly it. Once he did start posting, he was way too clean. He was suspiciously unsuspicious. Also, I generally put full trust into BDS, so it kinda made sense to balance it out with one game of the exact opposite. Sorry, BDS!

[davy]

Discrediting TZP/THC would not have aided in my survival. They were the two people who I knew could still use their vote, so they were the last people I wanted to piss off, and it would have been basically impossible to convince the two people who had the seer results to completely ignore them. You were basically asking me to put my life on the line for you, which is something I couldn't do. I did feel bad, but I had no other choice if I wanted to win.

There was no way for me to know at that stage of the game who were on the naughty list, but I see where you're comming from. Though teaming up with me and acting like you're  teaming the other one in is something I could see both TZP and THC doing, meaning I could see a world where you'd be able to convince THC that I'm the grinch.

It would be neat to have a chatroom game, at least as a trial! Though, I will say that chatroom availability may make the problem worse and overall require heavier player involvement; I remember a game in the past where I was suspected solely for the fact that I never showed up in the chat at all (simply because I was too busy or burned out to do so, IIRC).

I find it takes less time of me to pop into a chatroom every now and then than to formulate a well-researched post every day, which is why I think chatroom would at least help me.

[SpecsFlyer17]

I play on mobile a good amount of the time anyway, so I don't think a Discord chatroom would really make a difference for me.

Definitely open to trying it, however.

[BlackDragonSlayer]

We currently have six people voting positively for participation in the next TWG. Unfortunately, I'm not sure if that's enough to run a TWG with.

[Oricorio]

We currently have six people voting positively for participation in the next TWG. Unfortunately, I'm not sure if that's enough to run a TWG with.

I mean, you could do 4 VTs and two serial killers. Or you could run 2v4 nightless