Werewolf XXXIII: Animal Farm (SEE POST #4 FOR ALL UPDATES)

[hoopsguy]

Fouts, my understanding is that if I protect the right guy I have a chance to save him, a chance to ID the attacker, and the target has a chance to die.

If they attack me I have a chance to save myself, a chance to ID the attacker, and the target has a chance to die.

Truth be told, I'm not all that worried about this distinction. I'll just worry about putting myself in the right place to have a confrontation and see where the chips fall. But it is nice to know that I can guard two people (me and someone else) every night.

[Fouts]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

Fouts, my understanding is that if I protect the right guy I have a chance to save him, a chance to ID the attacker, and the target has a chance to die.

If they attack me I have a chance to save myself, a chance to ID the attacker, and the target has a chance to die.

Truth be told, I'm not all that worried about this distinction. I'll just worry about putting myself in the right place to have a confrontation and see where the chips fall. But it is nice to know that I can guard two people (me and someone else) every night.

Great role. I can understand your revealing it at this time. What I'm trying to figure out is whether or not the bad guys have the ability to know that the bodyguard is dead already.

[GoldenEagle]

Originally Posted by Fouts

Reason for voting for BrianD?

It was stated earlier from various sources, but he just was not looking much lke a villager to me. Toward the deadline, he tried to play the vote for me card which is the sign of a wolf.

I have already stated that I do not think that Grey is a wolf. It just does not make sense with him voting for a dead guy and all.

[hoopsguy]

Well, there are not many dead people yet. And, best I can tell, they are playing the game nearly as much in the dark as we are in terms of role reveals. The only bad guy seer only spots the seer and the Revolutionaries don't know the Squealer and vice versa. So, I think a bad guy would be taking a pretty big risk with a fake reveal up to this point in the game.

When we are down to less than ten players, I think it becomes a different ballgame. As they approach an end game strategy (remember, the Squealer counts as a villager in this context) I would be surprised if there is not a fake reveal. But it is much harder in a defined roles game.

[Fouts]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

Well, there are not many dead people yet. And, best I can tell, they are playing the game nearly as much in the dark as we are in terms of role reveals. The only bad guy seer only spots the seer and the Revolutionaries don't know the Squealer and vice versa. So, I think a bad guy would be taking a pretty big risk with a fake reveal up to this point in the game.

When we are down to less than ten players, I think it becomes a different ballgame. As they approach an end game strategy (remember, the Squealer counts as a villager in this context) I would be surprised if there is not a fake reveal. But it is much harder in a defined roles game.

Agreed. I don't see how the bad guys would know, and it would be a bad move by them, unless they were trying to bring out the real bodyguard and have him lynched because he is difficult to kill at night.

[Blade6119]

I have to go, looking forward to some posting by chubby over the next 24 hours

[hoopsguy]

I'm hopeful that BrianD would not have gone out quietly if he was a roled villager. Particularly after our conversation about Bek today.

The fact that he didn't make some kind of fake reveal concerning his importance to the village makes me a little nervous, though. I would expect an experienced player, in the role of Revolutionary or one of their supporters, to work hard at giving us reasons not to lynch them.

I want to trust the 7 Farm Rules updates as a clue, but can't do it completely until the rotating days pattern is broken or we get some info on the dead.

[hoopsguy]

OK, going to bed a little earlier than the last couple of nights.

Chubby, hope we have time for some give/take tomorrow.

[Poli]

Am I still alive? I've got like 17 pages to go through.

[Poli]

Hmm, while I'm still trying to find out what's going on, looks like I picked up a vote from Gramm.

[Poli]

Again, I'm sorry I am missing the votes. The timing is just horrible for me. I may have to go back into retirement.

I'm a detriment of sorts to the villagers, though the farm animals should piece together that I couldn't possibly have anything to do with the wolves.

I'm a detriment to the wolves, I suppose, in the same way.

I may have to go back into WW hibernation for another 3 months.

[Poli]

Dang, and hoops too?

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by path12

Not voting: Conflaguration. I will start looking for a replacement.

Thomkal, I see you in thread. Interested?

Hey Path,

You caught me. I've been reading along, but not really putting a lot of thought into who I thought was good/evil. So I'm not sure how good of a replacement I would be, but if you need me, I will take you up on the offer.

[Poli]

Originally Posted by Alan T

I also am wondering how much ardent, dodger and Goldeneagle were doing under the radar and how much are actually just honeslty missing votes for good reasons (or in dodgerchick's case just not feeling people in the running were good votes and threw away her votes each day)

Surely you're kidding.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by ardent enthusiast

Surely you're kidding.

Ardent, I think you had a good reason and honestly wanted to be here. That comment was more directed at Goldeneagle who missed one vote and then convienantly put another vote in after deadline later on.

Sorry if it looked like I was attacking you, I think your situation is well known and not something I was thinking was a game ploy.

[Poli]

Originally Posted by path12

Just in for a quick minute, I've got a couple of projects that need my attention this morning. I have not heard back from Blade yet, and still hope that he will reconsider his request. As for Ardent, I'd like to get some kind of word from him regarding his future availability before making a final decision there, but if I don't hear anything today it's obviously a situation that will need to be addressed.......

Ruh roh. My availability is about 2300-0700 EST. My relief likes to show up early to get on the computer, though. That should give you an idea of how hard it is to get a computer.

[Poli]

No worries, Alan. Am I still in the game?

[Poli]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

I could buy the idea that Pilkerton missed an evening - didn't submit an action - but twice? Even Ardent, who hasn't gotten votes in for consecutive days, was on during Night 2 and would have been able to submit an action.

This much is true, but it was more luck than anything. I didn't even bother looking in the thread. I thought night actions would be 12 hours and day actions 24.

I figured I'd have a chance to vote.

Honestly, I'm not going to the MWR hut to wait an hour and then spend half of my 30 minutes reading the thread to try and vote...especially if I haven't a clue who to vote for...when I could read the thread at work during my 8 hours here.

[Poli]

Originally Posted by path12

I am going to request a replacement for Ardent. I'm sure he understands.

Sigh.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by ardent enthusiast

No worries, Alan. Am I still in the game?

Sorry Ardent, I think unfortunatly Path decided to replace you just a few hours ago I don't think he wanted to we all enjoyed having you back, just thought you were lost for good after 2 days with no votes or antyhing

[Poli]

Originally Posted by ardent enthusiast

Sigh.

A PM would have been nice, so I didn't try to wade through all those posts.

Sorry, yesterday was my "day off", so I wasn't at work. I didn't even think about the WW ramifications of that.

[Poli]

Originally Posted by Fouts

I don't think it matters but..

vote Grey

I think I would have voted Gramm, since he voted me/you two days in a row.

Where's the eyes rolling smilie?

[hoopsguy]

Sorry that it ended up working out this way, AE. I know I was excited to see you back playing again and I'm pretty sure others felt the same way.

[Poli]

12 and 12 doesn't work for me, sadly. I just can't commit to getting on a computer and having the time to logically cast a vote with those time restraints.

[Poli]

dola: There are just way too many friggin Marines around here with nothing to do.

Maybe if some of them, most of them finally got something to do.

[Chubby]

BrianD was one of the 4 in my CoDT.

No rule change leads me to believe he was bad as I had thought.

I'll be back on tomorrow morning, time for sleep.

[path12]

Hey all,

Let's welcome Thomkal to the fray -- he'll be taking the place of Conflaguration.

[Grammaticus]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

Two interesting things. Did path really just confirm your the bodyguard? Id be suprised if he did, as i think its unfair either way.

Secondly, the no rules change. I think this confirms what i believed to be true. It alternates days was my belief, and this reafirms it

I will point out again that both commandment changes occurred on tie votes. The second tie gave us 2 changes. So, it is possible that tie's have something to do with the commandment modifications.

[Blade6119]

WELCOME THOMKAL!!!!!!!!!!

[Grammaticus]

Originally Posted by ardent enthusiast

I think I would have voted Gramm, since he voted me/you two days in a row.

Where's the eyes rolling smilie?

Sorry AE, with the no reveal on death rule, I just did not see voting some of the other players without better evidence. "No votes" seems like the most harmful thing at this point.

Sorry about the computer situation, I'm sure that sucks in general.

[Thomkal]

Hey guys,

Glad I could jump in and help out. I won't be pulling a disappearing act on you, but I likely won't be able to get around to this game until late morning/early afternoon. A basic recap of the previous days complete with role reveals and people being "cleared" would be a big help if anyone is ambitious enough to go for it.

[Thomkal]

And I'm off to bed. See ya in the morning.

[Grammaticus]

Blade,

You may have reclaimed your title of the leading poster in the thread, but over half probably have nothing to do with this game at all.

[RealDeal]

Originally Posted by Grammaticus

Blade,

You may have reclaimed your title of the leading poster in the thread, but over half probably have nothing to do with this game at all.

and the other half suck

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Grammaticus

I will point out again that both commandment changes occurred on tie votes. The second tie gave us 2 changes. So, it is possible that tie's have something to do with the commandment modifications.

I guess thats another possibility.. I just strongly feel that it is related to if they are good or bad. Both of the times there was no rule change, it was on people who I felt had been behaving very oddly and wolfish. Maybe its just a case of me already being suspicious of them, thus expecting them to turn up bad.

I guess my belief right now is that we've nailed 2 bad guys in Bullet and BrianD so far. My gut instincts tell me Blade is number 3. One thing though that we need to consider is if we have gotten a couple of bad guys, there is a chance that we have triggered the sympathizer role:

Minimus the Sympathizer -- You start the game as a villager, have no special powers whatsoever and are not aware of your role. Once a revolutionary is killed (whether by lynch or by Mr. Pilkington) you realize that you are committed to the cause and will become a revolutionary with the full description and powers of that role. If scanned before conversion you will be seen as a villager, if scanned after conversion you will be seen as evil/revolutionary.

I guess we should watch and see if anyone had a change of allegiance without any real good explanation for it in the next day or so. It appears they didnt even know they were the sympathizer until after they turn bad.

[Alan T]

so theories on the rule changes are:

1) No rule change when bad guy lynch
2) Rules change every other day
3) Rules change on ties.

I guess its easy enough for us to rule some of those out, however I still feel very uneasy about there being ties. I still think it gives the bad guys too much of an upper hand.

[Alan T]

Since I have spare time and am talking to myself in this thread (lol), I decided to do some research... the 4 days of votes with bolded information pertaining to who I feel likely were bad guys lynched..

Anxiety 3 -- ardent (146), BrianD (177), Swaggs (180)
Swaggs 3 -- Anxiety (107), Lathum (144), hoops (219)
BrianD 2 -- Bek (131), Passacaglia (153)
RealDeal 2 -- saldana (152), Grammaticus (169)
Blade6119 2 -- Greyroofoo (92), RealDeal (197)
Conflaguration 1 -- st.cronin (77)
Chubby 1 -- bulletsponge (74)
hoops 1 -- Alan T (75)
Bek 1 -- Dodgerchick (79)
bulletsponge 1 -- Chubby (80)
Greyroofoo 1 -- Blade (85)
st.cronin 1 -- Conflaguration (97)

Not voting: GoldenEagle

----------------------------------------


Final vote count:

bulletsponge 7 -- BrianD (364), Chubby (373), GoldenEagle (400), Anxiety (409), Swaggs (424), Lathum (440), RealDeal (443)
GoldenEagle 4 -- Alan T (296), Grammaticus (297), bulletsponge (349), Greyroofoo (432)
BrianD 3 -- Bek (343), Conflaguration (379), Blade (430)
Anxiety 1 -- Passacaglia (381)
Grammaticus 1 -- Dodgerchick (382)
Passacaglia 1 -- hoopsguy (425)

Not voting: ardent


-----------------------------------------


Bek 4 -- BrianD (602), Alan T (690), RealDeal (711), Greyroofoo (730)
Greyroofoo 4 -- Blade (603), GoldenEagle (630), Bek (633), Chubby (732)
Ardent 2 -- Grammaticus (634), hoopsguy (731)
Anxiety 2 -- Passacaglia (646), Swaggs (688)
Chubby 1 -- Anxiety (734)
GoldenEagle 1 -- Dodgerchick (716)


---------------------------------------------------

Final vote count:

BrianD 5 -- Hoops (1250), Swaggs (1255), Alan T (1261), Greyroofoo (1266), GoldenEagle (1300)
Greyroofoo 3 -- BrianD (1195), Dodgerchick (1209), Fouts (1286)
Hoopsguy 1 -- Chubby (894)
Blade 1 -- Passacaglia (1056)
Ardent/Fouts 1 -- Grammaticus (1142)
Dodgerchick 1 -- RealDeal (915)

[Alan T]

Trying to analyze patterns involving votes around the two people I think were bad that were lynched.

Day 1 chubby and Bullet voted for each other. I don't think thats anything super suspicious since those two always vote for each other on day 1.

BrianD voted for Anxiety who we know is good, and Bek who we know is good voted for BrianD along with Passicaglia who we dont know much about.

-----------

Day2, this was an interesting day. This was the day I had some suspicions on Bullet that i threw out that BrianD just jumped on quickly with his vote. At the time Goldeneagle had a 3-1 lead over BrianD, yet Brian refused to vote for GE, and instead jumped on my thoughts about Bullet. That was the day BrianD pinged my radar and started being really suspicious to me.. This also speaks bad of Goldeneagle to me I think.

On this day Bullet voted for Goldeneagle, however it was a pile on after 2 votes already were on him.

--------------

Day3 , BrianD voted for Bek who we now believe was good due to the rule change theory. Votes were kind of spread around some, so not entirely sure what to gain from this day..

--------------

Day4 however is good again I think.. BrianD voted for Greyfooroo here, and Im assuming at this point in the game if Grey was evil, Brian wouldn't have been voting for him. However the thing that really was weird to me was Goldeneagle jumping on the end with a vote for an already lynched BrianD that didnt matter after deadline. I guess where I am torn here is, he could have saved BrianD if he wanted to by tying the vote count with Grey.

[hoopsguy]

You have Grey bolded only in the last day's count - do you think he is bad or is this just a mishap with your bolding?

Heading into work, I'm sure I'll have thoughts after the results of the night kill are posted. It is very hard work posting more than Blade in a game

[Alan T]

So looking at who is left.. and thoughts on them...

Trusted:
3. Swaggs
14. hoopsguy

Good voting history:
4. Chubby
9. Blade6119

Bad voting history:
8. GoldenEagle

Neutral Voting history:
7. RealDeal
11. Dodgerchick
16. Passacaglia

Under the Radar:
2. Greyroofoo
10. ardent enthusiast -- replaced by Fouts day 4
15. Grammaticus
17. Conflaguration -- replaced by Thomkal night 4

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

You have Grey bolded only in the last day's count - do you think he is bad or is this just a mishap with your bolding?

Heading into work, I'm sure I'll have thoughts after the results of the night kill are posted. It is very hard work posting more than Blade in a game

That was a mistake. I actually think based on Brian's voting for him that Grey likely isn't bad at this point.

I'm noticing some guys have really avoided the lynch vote while being very active in the thread. I've been really hot after Blade for a while, but I think part of it is due to him attacking me with me being a good guy setting off wolf alarms.

One thing I guess I am wondering this morning is usually there is a loud wolf and a quiet under the radar wolf in many games.. BrianD was out in the front alot.. What are the chances that we had two loud wolves? Maybe the other wolf is really someone who's been under the radar the entire time without standing out to us too much.

I dunno maybe I'm just reacting too strongly to Blade's attacks and just assuming someone attacking a good guy that much has to be bad. One person thats really jumping out to me this morning is Grammaticus. I'd be interested in hearing from him why he's been trying to avoid any of the meaningful votes so far. The only time he's jumped in was voting on Goldeneagle as the second vote earlier on day 2 right after I did. Otherwise he threw away a vote on RealDeal and then 2 on Ardent...

[Lorena]

Originally Posted by Alan T

I guess thats another possibility.. I just strongly feel that it is related to if they are good or bad. Both of the times there was no rule change, it was on people who I felt had been behaving very oddly and wolfish. Maybe its just a case of me already being suspicious of them, thus expecting them to turn up bad.

I guess my belief right now is that we've nailed 2 bad guys in Bullet and BrianD so far. My gut instincts tell me Blade is number 3. One thing though that we need to consider is if we have gotten a couple of bad guys, there is a chance that we have triggered the sympathizer role:

Minimus the Sympathizer -- You start the game as a villager, have no special powers whatsoever and are not aware of your role. Once a revolutionary is killed (whether by lynch or by Mr. Pilkington) you realize that you are committed to the cause and will become a revolutionary with the full description and powers of that role. If scanned before conversion you will be seen as a villager, if scanned after conversion you will be seen as evil/revolutionary.

I guess we should watch and see if anyone had a change of allegiance without any real good explanation for it in the next day or so. It appears they didnt even know they were the sympathizer until after they turn bad.

I noticed GoldenEagle defending Grey after he "accidently" voted for Anxiety which kinda leads me to believe that:

1.) They're both evil and GE is watching Grey's back.
2.) GoldenEagle found out that Grey was actually good and wanted to defend him which leads me to believe that hoopsguy's "role reveal" might be fake and that either GE or Grey are actually Boxer.

Dunno, there's so many ideas going through my head right now I don't know what to believe.

I'm kinda going with the first option noting both their vote history's:

-GE has voted for BulletSponge/Greyroofoo/BrianD (all pile-on votes). I'm not sure what to think of his vote towards Grey on night 3 though. Does the sympathizer role get activated immediately after a baddie dies? Maybe he didn't realize Grey was the sympathizer and voted for him on accident.
-Grey voted for Blade (possibly the most popular Day 1 vote )/GoldenEagle/Bek/BrianD, again, all bandwagon votes.

Blade, I might give you a run for your money on conspiracies because I can think of some crazy scenarios as well

[Lorena]

Grey, you're on right now... any thoughts on what I said?

[Alan T]

Another thought for why I think I might look at either Goldeneagle or Grammaticus today is that I hate names starting with G. (Just kidding), actually thinking about it by this point in the game I'm trying to think about who the seer might have scanned by now. Whether or not a seer would reveal themselves after finding one bad guy or not I'm not sure. But finding 1 bad guy + 3 good guys for a CoT I think its likely.

I'm assuming by now that our seer would have scanned hoops, Blade and myself. Especially after the last few days. So one of the following might be true:

1) Since no one has really jumped out besides me suspicious of Blade, the seer scanned him and he was good.
2) He got lucky and the seer is already dead, but he would have no way of knowing that.

Don't know.. I think the lack of people responding is causing me to talk myself in circles. Think I will go get breakfast and wait for the night actions.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Dodgerchick

I noticed GoldenEagle defending Grey after he "accidently" voted for Anxiety which kinda leads me to believe that:

1.) They're both evil and GE is watching Grey's back.
2.) GoldenEagle found out that Grey was actually good and wanted to defend him which leads me to believe that hoopsguy's "role reveal" might be fake and that either GE or Grey are actually Boxer.

Dunno, there's so many ideas going through my head right now I don't know what to believe.

I'm kinda going with the first option noting both their vote history's:

-GE has voted for BulletSponge/Greyroofoo/BrianD (all pile-on votes). I'm not sure what to think of his vote towards Grey on night 3 though. Does the sympathizer role get activated immediately after a baddie dies? Maybe he didn't realize Grey was the sympathizer and voted for him on accident.
-Grey voted for Blade (possibly the most popular Day 1 vote )/GoldenEagle/Bek/BrianD, again, all bandwagon votes.

Blade, I might give you a run for your money on conspiracies because I can think of some crazy scenarios as well

Its good to see you jumping in and tossing out ideas My main comment to this would be that I don't think if one of them were boxer that they would necessarily be able to prove someone else was good through any action on their own. They can choose people to guard, but it doesn't give them any info about them.

I honestly think by now a Seer has scanned hoops over the last few days as well as someone would have contested his role reveal. I highly doubt he is bad at this point based on that.

[Alan T]

ok with that, Im really out for breakfast. back in a few!

[hoopsguy]

2.) GoldenEagle found out that Grey was actually good and wanted to defend him which leads me to believe that hoopsguy's "role reveal" might be fake and that either GE or Grey are actually Boxer.

DC, if the "real" bodyguard was out there to challenge my "fake" claim they should absolutely come out and challenge. The bodyguard role is pretty sturdy in this game, compared to one of the seer varients. Less risk with this role out in the open than any other, at least that is how I saw it.

In my opinion, any of the special roles have done their job if they catch one bad guy. Obviously there is a desire to get all of them, but you have to weight the risk/reward pretty carefully before taking on a strategy where you let a bad guy live after he is discovered.

In this game particularly, it is awfully damaging to let someone into the circle of trust without merit. If no one steps forward today to challenge my bodyguard status, then I think you have to assume that either I am actually the bodyguard or that the real bodyguard is dead and I'm making a very high risk play as a bad guy (because they do not have any means to know that information, but a good guy seer might).

[Lorena]

Originally Posted by Anxiety

I would be interested, but I was already somebody

This was posted yesterday at 8:28pm after he died. Maybe it means something, maybe it doesn't mean diddley. Could he have been our only seer? God I hope not. But he was "somebody".

Hmm...

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Dodgerchick

This was posted yesterday at 8:28pm after he died. Maybe it means something, maybe it doesn't mean diddley. Could he have been our only seer? God I hope not. But he was "somebody".

Hmm...

I think he was just saying he would be interested to still be playing, but was already in the game when path was saying he was going to look for replacements.

I'm still not sure I buy Hoops story that he was the seer. I just didn't get the vibe from him. My guess is the seer is still out there, just focused on all the squabbling we've been doing the past 3 days and has been too busy finding out we're all clean.

[path12]

The night passes rather quietly again and you awake feeling rather refreshed -- until you walk outside and see the body of Grammaticus lying in the dirt and yet another bloody message: NO WINDMILL Sure enough, you head to the partially constructed windmill and find it demolished. Is there no end to this?

GRAMMATICUS HAS BEEN KILLED. DAY 5 HAS BEGUN. DEADLINE IS 9PM EASTERN.