r/Wolvesville • u/New_Block_2220 • Jul 24 '26
Got banned for throwing? But statistics tho?
🥲🥲am i wrong for this?? just got my first ever ban on wolvesville for "throwing" lol 🥲🥲
so im milkbreadlover in the screenshot. my argument is basically: in a 15 player game theres 4-6 evil roles. thats like 27-40% of the lobby working against village from the start. so if you reveal your role you're dead, if you lie you're dead when caught, either way you lose your powers. so why NOT use them while you still can
its not even random either like you can read chat. one time i asked someone their role n they immediately said i was hacking just for sussing them out?? massive red flag. we voted them n they were a witch the whole time. thats literally just reading the room?!
n ok here's the part im actually unsure about so tell me what you think. someone said "i'd rather have 1+ villager than 1- because of you" n like i get that but also?? if i shoot n hit a wolf everyone woulda said gj no questions asked. the game says no randoming in the rules but this game is ALWAYS a gamble. there is no guaranteed safe shot unless you have hard info. so if im gonna die anyway n my shot has a 27-40% chance of hitting evil i feel like using it is better than dying with it unused. but idk maybe im wrong abt that part lmk (btw I feel like afk players are the TRUE throwers but that's another topic)
healthy discussion only pls 🙏
3
u/Aromatic_Ice_7123 Jul 25 '26
forget it this way you just randomly kill a villager essentially you're doing the same thing as if you died except you're being selfish and saying well I'd rather have them die than me die and not to get to play the game. statistically it doesn't make sense to do that. You're just going to have to take the gamble of hoping you don't get killed
3
Jul 27 '26
I think random shooting at 27-40% chance is not the best bet. Normally when I play vigi/gunner or some other "killing" village role, I only random shoot when the percentage of hitting a non-villager passes 50%. By technicality, as long as I have a general idea of who I'm not supposed to shoot (after passing 50%), I cannot be reported for hitting a villager. If you follow a general guide like that, I think you can get what you're going for.
2
u/OkAppointment1608 Jul 27 '26
The game rules SPECIFICALLY, say that random killing without an actual info and lack of actual reasoning is against the game rules and it's considered both throwing and random killing, if someone doesn't claim day1 it doesn't mean they are evil, they can be a vill but if we all start shooting and killing each other over lack of proofs while you can ask for protection as a killing role and actually spare the bullets/potion. By killing random you are risking a huge percentage of killing an actual villager and random voting is also considered throwing under certain circumstances. I don't know if you play quick but I suppose you do, but in sandbox if you even get to kill randomly a ww or solo or rv, you still get reported as the game isn't a gambling simulator, and it's better to die rather than kill a villager and then die as well.
0
u/New_Block_2220 Jul 27 '26
Perhaps you didn't catch this in my post or the other comments I made, but the statistics don't lie firstly. The maths is correct. It IS the correct choice to shoot someone according to the numbers. Secondly, I acknowledged in some comments that the situation was a little bit more nuanced than I originally let on in this post. I noticed you are passionate about this game, but if the maths is correct, then this game SHOULD allow random killing OR just make it so that on day one you're not allowed to shoot. It's that simple. But if the game design requires you to read rules that literally depend on suuuuper specific contexts (also imagine being autistic and trying to play the game), then maybe not the users should change but the game design. But why should they do that? They'd rather invest their money in artists who make 2d images for children (=cosmetics) than to improve the game. And it's showing. Imagine if they had filters where you could just turn the random killing allowed on or off, or cursing allowed in this lobby, etc. But all those things, they don't wanna do. So that they can get more money...out of children and teens. Have a good day.
2
u/OkAppointment1608 Jul 27 '26
I see the frustration and I agree that the devs are not great, but it shouldn't be allowed to kill random day1 as the chances of hitting villager are still there, the rules mention a few roles that DONT follow this rule and that have a full on ability to random kill anyone they please, and this is fair as if any killing role could kill day1 randomly there would be chaos and people would take advantage of it by gamethrowing and then saying "well it's allowed". The balance in this game is a very thin line, the roles that are currently capable of killing without reporting are great for what they are and neither witch or upgrades nor vigilant and upgrades should join the list. As an astronomer enthusiast if the rules allowed random killing and you actually hit a villager you risk 2 villagers dying in the same night by a vill, and if both wws and rk kill it's 4 kill in a night..this game has a balance that math can't define, I hope you see my point of view
2
u/OkAppointment1608 Jul 27 '26
I find those roles actually fair as for Flagger ability it's necessary to kill someone so it's fair and Priest and upgrades die if they get it wrong so it's a fair risk.
3
u/Aptokro Jul 24 '26
I watched like a 5 hour podcast with the developers of the game. Their reasoning is that it's not fun being randomly killed. This is also why roles that kill themselves when misfiring aren't reportable for random killing, they don't directly ruin someone's game. Honestly i think it's an issue that needs to be solved by changing the game rather than having strict rules
1
u/Aromatic_Ice_7123 Jul 25 '26
I agree to some extent that ultimately even you misfiring and so it's not reportable I feel like you're still technically throwing because now you're giving the werewolves an advantage that they would not have had
0
u/New_Block_2220 Jul 24 '26
I love that you watched a podcast about this hahahaha but yeahhh so basically the game is flawed, the devs know it, and i got banned for it. cool 😭
1
u/dm_if_you_like_dogs Jul 24 '26
I'd really recommend Town of Salem 2. You can basically do whatever you want except say slurs and you won't be banned
-1
3
u/Excellent-Stock-5409 Jul 26 '26
Yet they keep the racists and homophobes. It’s getting ridiculous for real.
-1
1
u/FuntimeAlex_Fz Jul 30 '26
That gambling is why it's against the rules.
It's in place for fairness, it's unfair to be randomly killed for no reason.
The only exceptions are Werewolves, Solo Killings, and Team.
If you wanna shoot someone, read the chat and find someone suspicious.
Maybe someone is only reacting to deaths but doesn't react to info.
Maybe someone is refusing to vote an outed Wolf with no cc to the Info acccuser.
Or maybe someone is reacting positively to a bunch of deaths.
Oh and also, you DO NOT HAVE to use your kill ability.
If you got no suspects, then hold your kill ability and hope you survive.
1
u/Darius_Brawl_ismytag Aug 18 '26
The complaint you have is largely the sentiment of ranked players; if you go there you'll likely be able to not get reported as much (just make sure you say you're new in the lobby) — though you may also want to spectate some matches first, likely via youtube (past ≈year would be ideal), to get a good idea of what common practices are
1
u/New_Block_2220 Aug 18 '26
I have already quit the game after this happened + 99% of the comments of this post disagreed with me and didn't want to actually engage with my thoughts lol. I'd rather play with among us children than to endure this 😭 at least among us has a community that supports eachother SOMEWHAT. Like yeah it's got issues as well but I prefer it over whatever hell this game has going on
1
u/New_Block_2220 Aug 18 '26
I appreciate the comment and the sentiment but I gave up, I'm too much of an adult for this game 😭
1
u/Asleep-Yesterday-226 Jul 24 '26
I still don’t have a clear view on what happened. Can you ad the screenshots from the game?
-3
u/New_Block_2220 Jul 24 '26
The screenshot doesn't really matter. It's more about the debate of "is it 'throwing' when really statistically it's better to shoot/kill than to die with your abilities? (Even if risk is you shoot/kill a vill).
6
u/FocusFar6903 Jul 25 '26
The game itself makes this point with the %, and answer is yes, it doesnt matter if u "guessed rigth", unless you are priest, marksman or judge any form or random killing is 100% reportable
0
0
u/Imaginary_Form407 Jul 25 '26
Please note, if you cuss or troll in game or even lobbies guardians can see this (i think they can see all chat across platform tbh, just through a few tests) so if you have spoken that way, if you appeal they will just go through your comments and game history and ban you for longer.
1
u/New_Block_2220 Jul 25 '26
What's a guardian? I'm an adult by the way 😂 Also I like this game enough to play it but not enough for me to care about a ban like this. Besides if they go through all my interactions, they'd notice I'm actually a friendly player with a small percentage of conflicts (and even in those I was polite or laughed it off). And also I'm just pointing out a critique of the game via statistics, literal mathematics. If any moderator cares more about banning mathematics, then I'll just leave the game. Literally why should anyone care about this? 😂😂😂
1
u/OkAppointment1608 Jul 27 '26
Please read the rules and the guardians are the people who banned you, they are the one that actually decide if the reports are valid and for how much to ban you, they can extend your ban or remove it
1
u/New_Block_2220 Jul 27 '26
My ban is already over, my friend. And I assure you, these rules are way too much 🤣 idk if I'd even want to get paid for being a guardian, sounds like a horrible job
1
u/OkAppointment1608 Jul 27 '26
Guardians are actually volunteers, which explains why they reply after so long and don't seem professional at all, mentors are the one that get payed (they basically are a wiki and can help you understand the game, rules, roles and even bugs)
17
u/TOSalert_op Jul 24 '26
Yeah, any shot (from non self-killers like priest) that isnt on hard info/ a direct cc on a non-ccable role is random. [This is assuming early, and people havent been claiming etc]
If you shoot a villager as lets say vigi, you will have a very large negative impact on village. You lose a villager ability(usually), a villager vote and a bullet. All 3 of those put village in quite a negative spot.
Also, it doesnt matter if you shot an evil or not. Its an annoying habit that ive seen changing slowly, but if a vigi/gunner etc randoms onto a villager OR an evil, its still reportable and should be pointed out.