|
Quote:
Yeah Pass, sorry, I guess it wasn't clear. Point A- Neither EF and I are wolves, they've criticized the one to nudge things towards me (and Lathum is just a bonus) because I hit on something correctly. I know as I play, I scrutinize nightkills and the wolves' purpose more than I do daykills. Point B- EF is a wolf and by criticizing him it at least pulls people to neutrality and makes them second guess votes they put on him while nudging it, again, to me. Look, both might be crazy like all of us but I don't know. |
Quote:
What the hell does that mean? Either you know he is bad or you don't. Quit playing games, role or not I'm not following you on this vote anymore. Its almost like you are just making things up to sidetrack us. Unvote PB |
Is it 3-3 and then 1 on Hoops?
|
Okay, let me reask that. Is it 3-2 and 1 on Hoops?
|
That's correct by my count
|
With Dubb unvoting I think it is 3-2-1 EF/PB/Hoops
|
Quote:
3 on EF and 2 on you, yes. |
A quick read through suggests that the main candidates at the moment are PurdueBrad and EagleFan.
My opinion: A vote for PurdueBrad is basically saying that I am willing to believe that Lathum is one of the good guys, and is playing it straight up by saying that he has a good reason to want to lynch PB. (If we do lynch PB and he turns out good, Lathum is going to have to come up with a good explanation or he'll be a hot favourite for tomorrow...) A vote for EagleFan is saying that the wolves are trying to build trust in one of their own by sending the Criticizer against a wolf - seems like a legitimate tactic to me. If EF is not a wolf/Needie, why would the wolves stop him from voting today? (and raise suspicion on him with the same action?) Despite my vote yesterday, I don't have any major bad feelings about PurdueBrad - was going with what I thought was the best option of the choices on offer at the time I was online yesterday evening. I'm also a bit leery about voting for EagleFan - while I could see him being a Needie, I can also see him being a villager as well. I'm not set on either of the two main candidates at the moment, but need a bit more time than I have at the moment to go through previous posts. Will be back on in a wee while... |
This doesn't help my case but I would *believe* that Lathum is good but I think if you lynch me you then have to lynch him. It's too much of an out-front play on day 2 if he's a wolf.
|
Quote:
Fair enough, I'll go back and read around it. I've just noticed a tendency of wolves to play coy about rules because they generally know a bit more than the village in hidden-info games. But I'm harping in on one line of info, so it's probably nothing. |
Quote:
Yeah, I definitely read it out of context. You weren't saying you didn't know there were 20 roles, just that you could see two people having similar unlisted roles. |
For what it is worth, my vote tracking post from yesterday is missing a couple of votes so I'm going to have to spend some time digging through it in order to accurately represent the vote and totals as people put their votes in. Hope to have it up within the hour.
It is just messy ... the action, as well as my bad counting the first time through :) |
Quote:
It's probably the question mark in there that made it seem like that -- and that was to convey that I wasn't sure how many players there were in the game. |
Lathum the way you are playing your vote on PB makes me think you could be up to something.
I think it is possible the wolves are going out of their way to attempt to steer the vote away from EF today. Looking back making it so he can't vote today is odd. Why EF? What did he do yesterday that scared them? The easy answer is nothing. Then Lathum comes right out of the gate as soon as the night action is posted and votes PB. Again, steering it away from EF. I voted EF yesterday and I've seen nothing to make me less suspecious of him today other than people going out of their way to steer this away from him(Lathum, the wolves in the night action.) With that: Vote EF |
I'm leaning towards EF as well at this point.
|
VOTE HOOPSGUY
This vote is mainly because I'd rather not see EagleFan as a "not-PB" vote. Not to say that I don't have some suspicion of hoops, though. |
I'm going to keep this a three horse race because even if I'm going down, it'll get you more voting information.
vote Hoopsguy |
Pass, what suspicion do you have on me right now?
|
Same question to PB, who I've already asked about the "tunnel vision" comment but not gotten an answer.
|
VOTE PURDUEBRAD
I really think it's a mistake to ignore the Lathum/PB issue. It'll just come back to bite us in the butt. At worst we'll be missing out on catching a wolf, and at best we'll end up talking about it for days and thus derailing other potential useful conversation. |
As of post 1019:
3 - PurdueBrad - Lathum (790), Hoopsguy (822), Telle (1020) 4 - EagleFan - Alan T (951), Autumn (969), DaddyTorgo (971), Dubb (1014) 3 - Hoopsguy - Barkeep (985), Pass (1016), PurdueBrad (1017) |
Quote:
Similar to BK, I guess. I feel like you're driving to drive us around a little. I know it's not much to give you now, but it's not a very concrete suspicion, either. |
Quote:
Oh, sorry, I must have missed it Hoops. Without looking back, I'm assuming you want to know why I thought you had tunnel-vision. If I'm wrong and that wasn't your question, let me know. Okay, you are usually not a quick to vote player, even when things seem very clear. You usually hold back and check all angles and rarely slap a quick vote like that down. In addition, you also usually explore a ton of other angles, which I haven't seen you do here, at least like I'm used to. |
Quote:
But I'm the best candidate at this point in time? Look, there is about zero chance I'm going to vote for you today (will stay EF/PB, barring some kind of really strongly worded reveal) but this is very strange given what has been posted up to this point. |
Quote:
I think the other angles were covered pretty thoroughly in an earlier post. I'll quote it for you in the next post. I don't expect you to like the conclusions I have drawn, but I'm pretty sure I looked through the angles (as I saw them) before putting down my vote. |
Quote:
Hoops, your first post of the day, 822. You covered what angles? Do you usually vote then without thinking it through? |
Quote:
PB, here was my thought process leading up to the vote. Not fully spelled out at the time of the vote because I wanted others to have a chance to form their own conclusions without just piggy-backing on this. |
Hoops, that is post 889, 2 and a half hours later.
|
Quote:
Keep reading. I would argue that I've given it more thought, at least in terms of posted thoughts, than anyone without role-specific information one way or the other, in the game. |
So once you got 2 more on me AND 1 UNVOTED, it was okay to get piggybacks?
|
Quote:
The suspicion wasn't the reason for the vote, if you'll recall. What's strange about it? |
Quote:
Yep, read the last paragraph of the post. Honestly, I don't normally post that much detail validating a vote until later in the day. But since Pass had asked multiple times for why I voted the way I did I gave the long version. |
The difference between 3 votes on me and 4 is what again? How does 7:00 differ from 9:30 (still nine and a half hours shy of deadline vs. twelve hours) in making it okay to get piggybacks?
|
Quote:
I have no idea what you are saying here, or responding to. |
Someone asked who I thought was a better choice. I really don't know at this point to be honest.
These last couple days have really sucked at work as I have become the scape goat for other people not doing their job and following proper procedure (how am I supposed to know something that happened half way around the world and I was not told about it until it became a crisis in the meeting today?). I really haven't had the time and at the moment I don't have the patience to look through the thread. Don't use this last paragraph as anything to base your judgement of me within the game from, just letting you know where my head currently is. |
Quote:
Or did the push lose steam with the 1 unvote and the questions of Lathum's actual info and so it's time to generate piggybacks. |
Quote:
You. You stated that at 7:00 am when you post your vote you don't want to draw piggybacks which is why you didn't post your logic. But at 9:30 it's suddenly okay? |
OK, now I understand what you are saying. I posted it at that time because Pass had asked me to clarify why I voted the way that I did. I had already given a short version in my initial post. This time I gave a longer version.
Really, I'm not quite sure what you are arguing here. Your initial point was that I voted blindly. Now you are disputing my thoughts on whether or not people would copy my vote logic? I cast a vote based on posted logic. I stand behind that vote, barring a set of conditions that drastically change the data as we know it. I do not feel that at any point in time that I've had "tunnel vision" or failed to properly consider how this vote might play out. I'm certainly not targeting you based on any past games ... as much fun as it may be to joke about, it almost never enters my thought processes when I'm trying to make good votes. If we aren't going to get anywhere with this argument, so be it. You have voted for me, I have voted for you. I was trying to give you the courtesy of expanding on your logic for voting for me in the event that you really are a villager. If you are a wolf, I honestly am not interested in the logic. But if you do outlive me, and are a villager, it might be beneficial to your cause to have a justifiable argument for voting for me. |
Quote:
still catching up but cut me some slack, you don't wanna vote with me that's fine, but don't come off like I'm an ass because I am trying to stay within the rules of the game and have strict limitations about what I can say, I've already blown up Danny;s PM box with questions. FWIW I agree with DT's logic about EF and think he is a solid choice. |
Quote:
I agree |
Quote:
Mutiple times? |
Quote:
I'm not concerned about being lynched tomorrow. |
Quote:
Wow, boom boom on hoopsguy |
I'll try to paint cases for voting for the people in the thread:
1.) EF - near lynch yesterday, likely seer scan based on vote results D1. Impact of "no vote" today is probably not weighed as positive or negative. 2.) PB - near top of votes yesterday, somewhat likely seer scan based on vote results D1. Has one player who immediately voted for him after start of day. 3.) Hoops - likely seer scan N1 based on reputation? Perception of floating ideas rather than leading? As an example of my lack of leadership, perhaps others can follow along here and expand on these ideas in positive/negative light? |
Quote:
Okay, now I'm in. Vote PB |
Quote:
I assure you I am up to something. Trying to win the game for the good guys, ask yourself why I would play this way as a wolf? BTW I fully support the vote on EF. |
I'm gonna get my vote out there for now.
VOTE EF |
Votes as of Post #1045:
4 PB - Lathum (790), Hoops (822), Telle (1020), Abe (1045) 4 EF - Alan (951), Autumn (969), MommyTorgo (971), Dubb (1014) 3 Hoops - Barkeep (985), Pass (1016), PB (1017) 790 - Lathum votes PB 1-0 810 - DT votes PB 2-0 822 - Hoops votes PB 3-0 823 - Clap votes PB 4-0 846 - Dubb votes PB 5-0 875 - Clap unvotes PB 4-0 951 - Alan votes EF 4-1 PB over EF 969 - Autumn votes EF 4-2 PB over EF 971 - DT unvotes PB votes EF 3-3 PB/EF 985 - BK votes Hoops 3-3-1 PB/EF over Hoops 1001 - Dubb unvotes PB 3-2-1 EF over PB over Hoops 1014 - Dubb votes EF 4-2-1 EF over PB over Hoops 1016 - Pass votes Hoops 4-2-2 EF over PB/Hoops 1017 - PB votes Hoops 4-3-2 EF over Hoops over PB 1020 - Telle votes PB 4-3-3 EF over Hoops/PB 1045 - Abe votes PB 4-4-3 EF/PB over Hoops |
Quote:
I assure you the PB/Lathum dynamic won't come back to haunt us. At some point I will be cleared and at least my alligence will be known. I know I am being really confusing right now. Blame Danny, I had a different way planned to go about today but he put the kabosh on it so I had to audible. |
Although if PB turns out to be bad that vote is going to look terrible for me since I voted for him on day one with a Penguins reasoning which could've been wolf on wolf. So I think I'm going to go with Lathum here.
UNVOTE EF VOTE PB |
Has it been suggested that maybe Lathum was forced to vote for PB by a wolf role overnight?
|
I've done my part trying to defend myself. My vote is there, my analysis is there. Those of you that were willing to look beyond, much appreciated. I'm going to avoid wasting much more time defending what appears to be a sinking ship, kind of like playing music on the Titanic as it sinks.
|
Quote:
Hehe, no, but I would totally want that role in the future. Let's see: Hoopsguy would vote Hoopsguy Jackal would profess his love for Sidney Crosby and Marc Andre Fleury EF would profess his love for Big Ben and the Steelers and none of you would vote me on day 1. :p |
Quote:
I suggested potential Sympathizer (cultist/sorcerer), but I think that from a percentage chance he is more likely to have a good guy role with information than the one villager who knows the wolves. However, upon further review of that role the Sympathizer does not start off knowing the wolves, but instead scans for them and wins with them. I do not think Lathum makes this play at all as a wolf. So, at the moment I've got Lathum pretty damn high on my trust list. |
Danny. We all know we can't revel roles. If someone guess something that may or may not be associated with your role or one of it's mechanics are you allowed to tell them if they are correct or not?
|
Jackal, for that to happen there would need to be an unlisted wolf role. We've already verified that one of the listed wolf roles is in the game (Criticizer).
The "Desperate for Attention" needy role might fit into the PB/Lathum dynamic. Quote:
|
Quote:
I think it would have to be considered that he is the Sympathizer and his night 1 scan was PB. At that point no matter if he knows the wolves or not he would atleast know PB's role. Assuming PB came back villager to Lathum this could prehaps explain his actions. Like I said earlier I really thought this was a bodyguard block/wolf kill issue where PB and Lathum saw each other, or Lathum was the seer. With both of those out the window per Lathum I really don't know what to make of this. |
Quote:
gah - sorry to hear that dood. that's fracking frustrating! |
Quote:
I agree also. I'm sure Lathum is just struggling to stay within the rules of the game and has blown up Danny's Inbox trying to test them. |
But would Lathum as the cultist put a vote up that would so obviously draw attention to him? If he was the sympathizer and scanned PB as a wolf and wanted to let him know he wouldn't have done it like that, knowing PB would draw tremendous heat from a seer-like vote.
|
Well, PB has said he has a small role. PB did not reveal a larger role when he was on the block yesterday, which makes me believe he does not have one of the pivotal (and public) villager roles. Either he is telling the truth about small villager role or he has a wolf role; those make the most sense to me based on how yesterday went down.
So, would the Sympathizer burn himself on D2 with a showdown against some villager role other than seer? Maybe bodyguard? Otherwise, it would have to be a pretty juicy private role for him to take the 1:1 trade. |
Quote:
Would that really be the optimal play? |
Quote:
not trying to pick on lathum, just interesting that he fully supports the vote on EF but isn't/won't campaign for votes against PB just noting that for later in case it becomes of some importance |
Quote:
It wastes two days lynching the villager and then the Sympathizer. There is no other point for that role other than to cause confusion and to protect the wolves at all costs. |
I find it hard to believe the sympathizer learns villager roles when he scans them, so I'd throw that out. It's possible he's the sympathizer knowing he's voting for a non-wolf to buy the wolves 1-2 days of no suspicion on them, but I donno.
|
Quote:
I just reread the sympathizer role. It only says they would learn if the person was a villager or not. They wouldn't learn anyones role. |
Quote:
My point is that I don't want people to blindly follow me under the assumption I have 100% knowledge. I think the reasons layed out for an EF vote are sound |
I've got some errands to run, I'll be back later. Throw me in the deep tissue massage room, Danny.
|
Quote:
IMO that would be a terrible way to play as sympathizer when early on the odds of a villager being voted out are much greater. If I was sympathizer I would get as many scans as I could and use that info to either deflect attention from known wolves later in game, steer voting, or if need be fake reveal and take the fall. I wouldn't burn through it day 2 so I could get the first person who came back as villager killed and in the process get myself killed. |
Danny throws Jackal in the massage room with a 350 pound woman who thinks Jackal is just dreamy
|
The big hurdle for me today in why I didn't vote for PurdueBrad is the wolf action that we know about from last night. Based on recent games, it seems that type of play of "Criticizing Eaglefan" would more likely attract people to vote for PurdueBrad then anyone else. If a wolf is going to make that play, they do it for one of two reasons:
1) Eaglefan is a wolf and knew he had at least a 40-50% chance of being scanned by the seer and needed some way to try to either push people in a different direction which would require the seer to either out themselves to get him on day 2 with no other COT built. or 2) Neither EF or PB are a wolf, but this makes less sense to me since EF was just as likely to get heat today as PB, why waste an action on a play such as that? Ideally why that isn't used on anyone else that wasn't under suspicion or even saved for when it could have a much stronger effect (ie: stopping one vote out of 20 is far less powerful than stopping one vote out of 6 for instance) doesn't add up at all to me. I already commented this morning that I don't see Lathum making this play as a wolf honestly, I could see it as a sympathizer however but even if that is the case, we still wouldn't want to vote for him since he counts as a good guy for the purposes of bodycount. There are several others that I pondered voting for (Telle for instance), I also don't really have huge problems with a Hoops vote, but already discussed why I did not go that direction either. The main reason my vote is on EF is it seems to be the vote that tells us the most about other people as well (besides PurdueBrad). If nothing else, it seemed like a decent candidate to run against PurdueBad as it would help polarize the playerbase to understand who was on which side of the discussion. |
Quote:
No, see post #513 and on to the end of the thread for optimal play. Werewolf XVII Return to the Forest |
Quote:
Actually re-reading the role descriptions, I see they can criticize once every other night, so I guess it makes sense to use it last night to get it going, but then that still goes back to the original question, assuming both EF and PB had an equal chance of getting heat today, why use it on EF if PB is a wolf? That is going to do nothing but draw attention in the direction they don't want. There were far craftier places to put it (such as on someone who voted for PB the day before perhaps) to reach the same goal. That is the real struggle that I have with that action from last night. |
Quote:
Quote:
a lot less people at that point in that game, so much in fact that was an end game scenerio, and why would I set up for a fake reveal when I can't reveal? Why are you so hell bent on making me look bad here? |
pay no attention to the first quote, thats 513 from this game.
|
Quote:
I'm not. I pointed out a possible scenerio and you have shit on me since I posted it. Why are you so defensive about what I posted yet you are giving everyone else a pass on their theory? |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
You are so delusional. Your first post comes across as very aggressive towards me, telling me to stop playing games and accusing me of sidetracking people. You then post the link to a game when you did a fake reveal in and end game scenerio that helped the wolves win and coyly suggested I am doing the same thing which is an absolutely ludicrous since it's day 2. You then say I am shitting on you and being defensive when I have been nothing but willing to answer questions the best I can, yet YOU are the only one who refuses to accept the limitations put on me and instead try to make it look like I am a wolf making some elaborate play. How can you seriously say that by posting that link you aren't trying to make me look bad? |
Quote:
Lathum, if you had to put a percentage (or if you are allowed to) on your knowledge, what percent would you give it? |
Quote:
I don't think I can say |
ok, so my initial inclination was to follow lathum...he is way to deliberate in his decisions to do something without having a very good reason, especially something that would put him in a position to get lynched if and when it goes bad.
after stewing on it for most of the day, im relatively sure that Jackal is correct, and that Lathum has been compelled to vote for PB, and is not allowed to change it (i came up with that myself, but Jackal had already posted it) or talk about the compulsion. assuming that the above is correct, that puts both lathum and pb at the top of my CoT...it makes sense to me that the wolves would want to use lathum as their unwiting tool, as we would not hesitate to lynch him tomorrow, and no one would ever believe his protestations of innocence, knowing his history as a wolf. that also clears pb for me, as why would the wolves try to force a run on one of their own. i also find myself folloing alan's logic (a fact which i am sure he will use against me, and accuse me of being a wolf trying to ingratiate myself to him)...i can definitely see the creation of the PB/Lathum dynamic as a means to get heat off EF for the next 2 days. vote EF |
dola- If I didn't have a very good reason for my vote today I would be voting Dubb for sure.
It almost seems he knows I am going to be cleared at some point and is trying to plant seeds of doubt. |
Alan, I am right with you on your thinking. Based on what Lathum has said I'm guessing it could be either EF or PB, so I'm fine with a runoff between them.
|
WTF? I have been prevented from voting and now everyone is buying into some story that Lathum can only vote PB, like it's a wolf ability to force him to vote that way? Is this another Abe game where the wolves get all sorts of powers?
Fuck it! Vote me out if you're that gullable. What next, Lathum will claim he can walk on water and that his shit cures cancer and everyone will buy into that too? |
Quote:
I know I just posted it. But please, someone answer me this, am I crazy for seeing this as a blatent attempt to make it look like I am a wolf or the sympathizer attempting to make a move? You all should look at this, I think it speaks volumes |
Quote:
Odd that you would blame it on Lathum. He's voting for PurdueBrad, you realize? He never claimed that he is forced to vote PB, and in fact said he would vote Dubb otherwise. |
Lathum, I think it is fair to try and figure out your angle, especially since you cannot necessarily fill in all the blanks. I disagree with Dubb on Day 2 being optimal for this move in a 21 person game.
|
Quote:
I never said it was fair, but he is blatently trying to paint me as a wolf. First by accusing me of sidetracking the village then posting that absurd link. I'm sorry, but that link got me riled up, it's just so adsurd |
should say wasn't fair
|
I'll be out for the next couple hours, will be back around 6:00 eastern or so.
|
Lathum, I don't know what all you can answer but let me try some things:
1- Were you given a pair of names to choose from or a list? 2- Did it guarantee that one was a wolf? 3- Was EF one of the other names? 4- Will the Penguins go to the Stanley Cup? |
OH, and Danny's gone, screw the rules, tell us all you know and BK will delete it.
Hehehe! |
ha
|
Quote:
Magic 8-ball says: "Outlook not so good". |
Quote:
Hmm, so one of the people voting for me is suggesting that another of the people voting for me will work in concert with him to cheat the rules of the game. And people wonder why I'm paranoid? :banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead: :rant::rant::rant::rant: :jawdrop: :cry: |
Quote:
Quote:
That's definitely going to be a deep tissue massage... :lol: |
Probably a happy ending as well ...
|
Quote:
Deliberate mistake? ;) (Yes, I know that it's just a typo, just one that I found amusing...) |
Quote:
It is a little known fact that I play Werewolf like the Da Vinci code. If you carefully look at all of my posts in a row, you could possibly break the code and learn all of the secret roles in the game. I have already said too much. |
^----- illuminati
|
Quote:
THE CODE IS BROKEN :lol: |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:47 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.