oh felix, dont throw stones about posting now.. we've all seen your posting the last few days

Does this lead to maximum win rate though?

Theory: it doesn't.

The reason it doesn't is because you don't play perfectly as a villager.

Because you don't play perfectly as a villager, you have latitude to make "mistakes" as a wolf. Lynching one villager or defending one wolf is not certain to get you lynched (in any role, or else wolves would always win by way of selecting from the villagers who mislynched using their superior voting power).

Because you have "plausible deniability", as it were, you should use it to make more "mistakes" when you're a wolf.

I think I'm paraphrasing soah from his advanced wolf strategy post: "a wolf should ideally look like he's having a bad villager game".

Unless you're one of a very, very select few, you also have bad villager games as a villager. So you can't be identified as a wolf purely by virtue of having a bad game.

In the end your (Defend Partners) and (Ignore Partners) should be much higher than 33%, and your (Bus Partners) should be much lower than 33%, for any selection of random players.

Being hard to read helps you as a player.
Being easy to read helps you as a villager and means you're dead weight when you are a wolf.

I prefer the former over the latter.

Also being hard to read adds the enjoyment of having to deflect wagons that come your way. You miss out all that fun if you are always an obvious villager

I've always thought that a wolf team in a sufficiently small game would absolutely freaking pleasure cruise to a win purely by voting as a bloc and making up sufficiently good arguments for their vote.

It would have to be well planned and executed, but it shouldn't be that difficult.

I actually think that in the current environment villagers would tinfoil themselves well past the obvious conclusion.

You don't seem to try or post though.

being hard to read should be due to your wolf game

you shouldn't do anything as a villager to make it hard for people to read you

how can you possibly argue with this?

liar

I don't think it's a good idea to have a plan to bus or not before the game. You need to react and play correctly in real time. If you're just bussing for the hell of it there's no chance you are helping. If you are calling teammates out who villagers think are villagers you are basically teddying the game. Interacting with other wolves isn't hard

I am not arguing with that. If I am a villager I try to be an obvious villager. If I am a wolf I try to be an obvious villager too.

It seemed to me that you were defending players that are obvious villagers only when they are villagers, so that they can be good (helpful for their team) in 75% of their games.

it's not a coincidence that the smart people are making good posts and the stupid people are making stupid posts itt

if we ever end up on a wolf team together, wolf chat will be "fun"

I might set an alarm for the middle of the night just to cajole you into playing for the team rather than for your own survival.

...but really, dude, next time you have a wolf game, challenge yourself as a personal challenge to attack villagers and defend wolves. I can do it...

FURTHER WWDB THING
UncleDynamite does not show up when I search the database

...I was going to say... and I've played X more games than you and I still suck at WW. If I can do it, you can do it!

it's not my fault it seemed that way to you

maybe being hard to read is more of a natural quality?

or rather maybe

assume Gabe's a RPG character and he LEVELS UP!!! and can put points into "various mad skillz" or "easy to read", he'd rather put the points into "various mad skillz"

and points into "easy to read" may disappear

obviously the perfect player is easy to read: he is an incredibly obvious villager in every game

Then why is it they call you "The Legend of the Docks"?

my stupid posts are long

long posts are smart

my range is perfectly balanced

even the DB doesn't take him seriously

You are wrong

You wrote that.

You are saying being hard to read seems stupid ==> being easy to read seems smart ==> being easy to read equals dying early as a wolf ==> makes you quite useless in 25% of your games

Please point out my logic fail

^^
sick burn

I think the wolf team gains more equity if they do plan the bus (not before the game but the night before, or given 24 hour wolf chat approx. 12.4 minutes before) and they ensure that their late game wolves - who they have already identified by analysis of the game - get maximum credit.

If you bus and your wolfy-as-**** soon-to-be-lynched wolves get credit and your late-game wolves jump on, it's a crappy bus.

If you bus and there's no coherent plan and wolves don't know how to react and are FROZEN it's a crappy bus.

etc.

Massive caveat that "correctly" needs to be "correctly for the wolf team" because seemingly 95% of wolves interpret that as "correctly as I would play it as a villager except I have perfect information so push ALL THE WOLVES" (slight exaggeration).

This is all 100% spot on and I would enjoy wolfing with vix because he has a correctly wolfy perspective.

why do you call yourself "they"?

you're assuming you have to either always try to be hard to read or always try to be easy to read, instead of what you should obviously do which is try to be hard to read when you're a wolf and try to be easy to read when you're a villager

What does "you are playing different" mean?

Other than it's a different game.

Why do people keep telling me that as if it means anything?

they want you to make the same posts in every game