![]() |
Apologies for not checking in earlier - got in a bit later than usual, and have only just been able to catch up in the last 20 minutes or so.
Will post my vote for today shortly... |
Quote:
PB can you please go back to the regular font |
Quote:
I have countered the "cleared" part above, which is a ridiculous assumption on both Lathum's part and your own, but I entirely agree about the potential flaws to running with this theory without more evidence, which is why I strongly advocate no one apply it right now (and maybe not ever). Your "communication" example is an excellent point to consider. This theory is based on the underlying assumption that the wolves are fully involved and available and working together with their votes, which is an entirely unsafe assumption to make. It's just another reason why at this point the theory is meaningless, but it will be interesting to see if it plays out anywhere near correct. BTW, this theory is based on wolf decisions, and the wolves have no idea who the sympathizer is. So from their perspective, assuming four wolves, there are 17 villagers. Meaning the likelihood of a villager vs villager battle is 17/21*16/20 == 64.7%. That's a little more likely than your numbers, FWIW. |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
If you don't think your theory looks like you are deflecting attention from yourself to another group of people then your out of your fucking mind. |
something tells me Poli is gonna run off abotu 15 posts.... quoting post from hours ago :)
|
Quote:
|
hey as long as he throws the spotlight on all those needies on me I am all for it.
|
Chief, I don't worry as much about you = cleared (obviously not the case) as floating the idea as a way of changing the direction of the voting.
If we are not villager/villager (43% chance, if Sympathizer does not equal villager, using 4+1 line) then the wolves would probably be in favor of changing the current dynamic to get one of their own out of a potential showdown. So, the question I'm asking myself is whether or not you are trying to do exactly that. |
Quote:
find the last game I was a wolf and acted this way. With the exception of being converted last game I don't even remember the last time I was a wolf. Someone looks at me I look back, period. I always play that way so I guess I am always a wolf. |
Quote:
Except we can't reveal the information the unlisted roles provide, so I'm not sure we're going to be accumulating much of anything. It's always tempting not to lynch a bunch of villagers, as we usually do, but even if we get some good scans or something, without a voting record that's not going to give us much. |
Dola, using your logic that the wolves don't know Sympathizer then they would only feel the need to move/influence the vote to protect their own about 1/3 of the time.
|
Quote:
From post 463: Quote:
Is 'no lynch' a viable option? All it takes for the 'no lynch' to be overridden is one lynch vote - suspect that we (as a group) are going to struggle to get that level of consensus... |
I'm going to give up on "dola" today - too many of you guys posting :)
|
Quote:
I didn't say viable, but it is an option.:p |
Martin, see my "Bah" post above.
|
Danny sucks. There, I said it.
|
Quote:
Just one that appears to have the proverbial snowball's chance... :lol: |
Plus it's my game, so I can go with my own bias of not liking no lynch votes :)
|
Quote:
I did see it - unfortunately, that would be after I'd made my post, and it's a bit late to do anything about it at that point ;) |
Quote:
Hmmm, maybe this game could use some random GM events. I wonder if it would be viable for lightning to strike a player inside the therapy room |
Quote:
:lol: Queue Lathuming in 3.....2.....1...... |
You could always Bull Moose Special me. That seems to work like a champ. I thought I was darn near invincible last game when ntn passed me the rifle.
I felt like I was on Hee Haw. BLLLEEEWWWH. I was gone. |
VOTE PURDUEBRAD
I don't have much reason to vote for him.. but I don't like the other options either. I've stated my case against voting for ntndeacon due to "tendency to be quiet". I also think it's too easy for wolves to hide a vote on EagleFan and claim it's because of his vote jumping (note that Passacaglia vote jumped a lot today too.. 5 different votes). So let's keep this a three-horse race and see how things shake out. And on that note, I'm outta here. Not sure I'll be on again before deadline. |
Quote:
In other words, 'it's ma ba', and ah'm aff hame if ah dinnah get tae dae things mah way'... (Translation available on request :p ) |
Quote:
forgot... UNVOTE ABE VOTE PURDEUBRAD |
Quote:
I guess I'll fit right into this game then. |
Quote:
runs around in little circles afraid of lightning strikes... |
Yeah, I missed that Lathumesque response.
|
I'm moving my vote again, based on something that just happened. The person that earlier said I was the unfortunate victim of a run suddenly flips and votes me? Come on.
unvote ntndeacon vote Telle |
From here on out, I'll only move if a wolf reveals or absolute self-defense.
Like the type size better Lathum? |
Quote:
Thank you Nurse Ratched, that'll do. |
Quote:
AND hit and run to boot! |
Quote:
Understood completely, and that's one reason why I strongly advocate not using this theory at this moment, but keep it as something in mind to look back at in the future. Maybe in game, maybe after the game. In fact, if anyone used my theory to try to build a case at this point in time, it would seal me voting for that person, because no one knows better than me how ripe for flaw this theory is at this point in time. BTW, the Sympathizer is/isn't a villager isn't a choice or a semantic to be judged with respect to the theory. The theory is based entirely on wolf decisions, what they know, and they do not know who the Sympathizer is. My guess is the Sympathizer will have his/her vote on a candidate who is clearly not being lynched, therefore ensuring they do not accidentally vote a wolf out. |
Last time I heard those words I think Jackal was defending himself against one of my votes last game.
AND I WAS RIGHT. |
My previous post was intended to follow PB's Hit and Run comment.
|
I'm off to work out...I may be back before I head off to church.
|
For what it is worth, I'm very interested in seeing how this plays out and I think I would prefer the original run-off of NTN vs EF rather than PB as the lynch.
My perceptions, as of right now: Telle does not want NTN to be voted off. Autumn did not like the NTN/EF run-off, pushed for new candidate. Chief Rum posted a theory suggesting we were likely villager/villager. Now maybe these are all 100% innocent reactions, but right now I'm starting to convince myself that we've got a wolf on the wire in those first two people. |
Quote:
True, but this theory is dependent on a villager-villager Day One battle, and the wolves' only consideration right now is vote spread. |
well, vote spread AND not making a vote that points a target at them saying, "WOLF!", of course.
|
Quote:
I, and I can't believe I'm saying this, think you and I are seeing the same thing here with the ntn-telle-autumn-EF dynamic. I'm not saying this for self-defense purposes but looking back particularly at Telle's posts, that's what I think I'm seeing as well. |
Quote:
Lathum knows, if he tries to Lathum me, I will have no compunction in choosing to Rum him out. ;) |
Quote:
I'm not yet ready to say that we've got a whole flock of wolves in there, but I would like to test our initial two with lynch/scan (whoever has it) and go from there. Obviously that would take a ton of villager coordination to pull off (leaving votes on those two, seer playing ball, people trusting that I'm not pulling some kind of goofy Day 1 angle, etc) but I think it represents a good starting point for our game based on my impressions so far. |
I'm a bit confused here - finding it hard to work out where to put my vote...
The two main candidates appear to be PB and ntn - don't really want to vote for ntn, as it seems to me that the main reason for him getting votes is that he wasn't around for most of the day (at which point I'm feeling a bit fortunate that I didn't get nailed for that one!), but a vote for PB seems a bit too much like bandwagon-jumping. I don't see much point in voting for someone else at this point, as almost everyone else is a long way back. Not absolutely sure about this one, but: VOTE PURDUEBRAD Will be on for the next 20 minutes or so - may change this if I feel there's sufficient reason. |
Danny, do you have a current vote count?
|
I'm working on it now
|
As of post 5597:
1 - Abe - Poli (252) 1 - Passacaglia - Lerriuqs (253) 1 - dubb - saldana (304) 3 - EagleFan - hoopsguy (328), Lathum (396), dubb (416) 5 - PurdueBrad - The Jackel (329), EagleFan (452), Autumn (455), Telle (575), Martin D (595) 2 - PackerFanatic - claphasma (335), NTNDeacon (530) 5 - ntndeacon - PackerFanatic (374), Barkeep (420), Abe (425), Pass (532), PurdueBrad (536) 1 - Telle - PurdueBrad (581) |
Quote:
My concern about the NTN/EF run off was the fact that there wasn't any movement. It seemed like no one was eager to shift off either of these, and four votes on each so early seemed a bit much. I tend to think neither are wolf or else we would have seen an earlier push to get off of them, but maybe you're right that the push has just come later. What is our vote count? Telle is the only one to have pinged my radar. I would consider shifting to him, but I'm wary of shifting off to one of the early vote getters for the reasons above. |
Quote:
YTou list 5 for ntn but count it as four |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:03 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.