Continuing from yesterday’s discussion, let’s take a closer look at the strategy of the werewolf game, specifically focusing on a 9-player setup outlined in this post. Here’s the key insight:
You have 3 werewolves, 3 deities (comprising a seer, a witch, and a hunter), and 3 villagers.
The pivotal aspect of this game lies in the fact that the side of good prevails only if 3 werewolves are eliminated while at least 1 deity remains alive. From a broader perspective, it appears that the deities can play a proactive role by openly sharing information, aiding the other players in identifying the wicked faction, and subsequently voting them out. Not exactly though.
The most engaging and pivotal phase of the game occurs during the day, where all players take turns speaking briefly. However, they are not allowed to engage in discussions or debates. The moderator decides the speaking order and direction (clockwise or counter-clockwise). Following this, players vote, collectively deciding on the execution of the player with the most votes. Consequently, the sequence of speaking holds significant importance. Later speakers possess more information and can exploit flaws in the arguments of previous speakers. The early speakers, unfortunately, lack this advantage as they possess minimal information and can only pass or speak honestly about themselves. Later speakers wield greater influence. For instance, a werewolf speaking after the seer could deceitfully claim to be the seer, misleading other players and potentially leading to the seer’s wrongful execution.
Two key speaking positions are the seer’s and the final speaker’s. The seer’s ability to provide critical information is pivotal for the good side, making the game considerably tougher if the seer is eliminated early without revealing substantial information about the werewolves. On the first day, if the witch still has her “save” potion (indicated by a death on the previous first night), the seer can safely reveal their identity and identify a werewolf. It’s worth noting that werewolves can also impersonate the seer if they speak after the actual seer, or when the seer doesn’t speak up.
The final speaker’s role is significant as they can summarize, reiterate vital information, and potentially influence the outcome through selective statements. However, there can be instances, such as when my brother gets the final speaking slot, where the final speaker can drag on indefinitely for over ten minutes, testing everyone’s patience.
Now, let’s discuss a higher-level strategy. If our objective is to consistently win as a member of the good side, collaboration between the seer and the witch becomes crucial. They should communicate effectively, allowing the witch to poison a suspicious werewolf at night and safeguard the seer, who can then gather more information in subsequent rounds. The hunter, on the other hand, should remain secretive as the “live” deity to secure victory when all the werewolves are eliminated. Occasionally, villagers might choose to impersonate the seer to protect the genuine seer. In general, the key is to act strategically, making optimal decisions and eliminating (or exposing and voting out) anyone obstructing your path to victory.
However, if our objective differs and aims to enjoy a social game without ruthlessly dominating or annoying other players, our focus should shift to entertaining and ensuring that others want to invite us to future gatherings. Winning a reasonable number of rounds is important to avoid being the perpetual loser, but it’s equally important not to excel to the extent of intimidating others. Understanding the game, thinking ahead while leaving room for others to contribute their opinions is the way to go. Winning in terms of gameplay might be straightforward, but winning in terms of social dynamics is the real challenge.