Werewolf XLV - ROME! (Game over, post 3425)

[Autumn]

Ardentus, can you summarize for me your thoughts on what happened yesterday. REAding it all in a rush, I don't have it clear.

[Poli]

Yesterday? I'm not sure I know what you mean.

[Barkeep49]

That is weird. I thought for sure KWHit just hadn't been around at all today.

[path12]

Originally Posted by ardent enthusiast

To me, it just seems like Kwhit had an important role in what had to happen yesterday, and he hasn't shown to report it.

I could understand if he had something keeping him from coming in, but I just happened to see him at the MP FOF league forums. I wasn't looking for him specifically, as I had MP leagues on my mind at the time, but found it odd to see him there and not here.

Just to follow my other thought, I get where you're coming from but I think this is more a case of over-complicating a situation that is complicated enough already. I'll risk being wrong on someone who's been cleared twice in favor of someone who hasn't been cleared at all.

[Poli]

I did as well, BK. I wasn't even thinking about him at the other sites, but I noticed his username "online" there.

I actually returned here to see what his answers were, only to find he wasn't online.

[Tyrith]

I agree, we have to stop the fight over KWhit. We have a lot of other people that need to be cleared; the marginal return on THOSE scans is a lot greater than if we keep scanning KWhit, because it's just as likely that KWhit is NOT part of the little circle and the other two players ARE, using him as a means to clear themselves.

[Ironhead]

Theory I just had (well, call it a theory if you wish). We are assuming at this point that Dodgerchick has gained the services of Ardent. And we don't want to kill an innocent villager tonight. I am more willing to place my vote on her tonight given all of the suspicions I have had with the hopes that if she is innocent Ardent will be able to change enough minds (remember, a laywer is more effective if you truly are innocent) to set her free. It will also give us a measuring stick to look at how Ardent's defense of Coffee Warlord stacks up against Dodgerchick's. They will be the only two people the entire game to have used the lawyers in defense.

[Tyrith]

I'd like to note that I personally feel this is very much toeing the metagaming line...

[Poli]

Ah, whatever. It wasn't like I was hunting for him. Besides, he's been online since the results came out, and he didn't post what he found out.

[Tyrith]

Originally Posted by ardent enthusiast

Ah, whatever. It wasn't like I was hunting for him. Besides, he's been online since the results came out, and he didn't post what he found out.

That's why it's toeing the line and not over it.

[Ironhead]

Another idea I had. The addition of service bids to the game creates another layer of voting record that can be checked by the village to determine whether someone is acting for or against the village. All the wolves really need is one or two people high enough in the wealth chain to win critical services. Given the existence of that voting record and the additional scrutiny that wealthy players have been placed under it would be smart for one or two wolves to remain under the radar. Have we checked to see if any of our members that started off in the lowest rung of wealth have made few if any lawsuits?

[Tyrith]

Originally Posted by Ironhead

Another idea I had. The addition of service bids to the game creates another layer of voting record that can be checked by the village to determine whether someone is acting for or against the village. All the wolves really need is one or two people high enough in the wealth chain to win critical services. Given the existence of that voting record and the additional scrutiny that wealthy players have been placed under it would be smart for one or two wolves to remain under the radar. Have we checked to see if any of our members that started off in the lowest rung of wealth have made few if any lawsuits?

I have only made one lawsuit, and it's not going to stick...I figured I was the bottom, swamped in almost every regard, losing the lawsuits I was getting sued on, why shold I clog up the legal system for no reason? Not everyone can sue everyone every day and ahve the system still do anything.

[Grammaticus]

Originally Posted by Ironhead

Another idea I had. The addition of service bids to the game creates another layer of voting record that can be checked by the village to determine whether someone is acting for or against the village. All the wolves really need is one or two people high enough in the wealth chain to win critical services. Given the existence of that voting record and the additional scrutiny that wealthy players have been placed under it would be smart for one or two wolves to remain under the radar. Have we checked to see if any of our members that started off in the lowest rung of wealth have made few if any lawsuits?

Mustangus and Tyrus

Mustangus being the one that is pretty much UTR.

[Abe Sargent]

Vote to nudge DC


I'm not that comfortable with this vote. I'm only doing it because st.cronin said I had to vote for one or the other.

[Abe Sargent]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

PRIMER:

Today Senators must vote to execute either Barkeepus Valerius of Dodgeus Erchickus.

Which he states here.

[Grammaticus]

Will CR be online at all tonight or is he just out until after the lynch?

[Ironhead]

Originally Posted by Tyrith

I have only made one lawsuit, and it's not going to stick...I figured I was the bottom, swamped in almost every regard, losing the lawsuits I was getting sued on, why shold I clog up the legal system for no reason? Not everyone can sue everyone every day and ahve the system still do anything.

Something is not ringing true to me on this. KWhit also started off in the bottom of wealth and showed a remarkable ability to win both cases and wealth. I only show you being involved in two lawsuits during the first 4 days, and both of those were on Day 3. You have only been involved in a grand total of 4 lawsuits. You mean to tell me that you were thoroughly discouraged from suing people based on that? I also have not sued people this game, but I started off from a position of wealth and did not have trouble accessing services.

[path12]

OK, time to get a vote in:

VOTE THROW DC

I still think they're both OK.

And to clarify about my bid today, per the post that suggested I vote for the first bodyguard, I am placing a bid on Gallus Clarus.

[Poli]

That's good and all, but I don't recall CW confirming that he placed a bid.

[Tyrith]

Originally Posted by Ironhead

Something is not ringing true to me on this. KWhit also started off in the bottom of wealth and showed a remarkable ability to win both cases and wealth. I only show you being involved in two lawsuits during the first 4 days, and both of those were on Day 3. You have only been involved in a grand total of 4 lawsuits. You mean to tell me that you were thoroughly discouraged from suing people based on that? I also have not sued people this game, but I started off from a position of wealth and did not have trouble accessing services.

I had no reason to sue anyone. To be honest, the way the lawsuits work in this game or less abhors me; it's a spam-o-ramic mechanic that I just didn't want to have any part of. If everyone was suing everyone the first few days we'd still be logjammed. Further, KWhit has shown a remarkable capacity to WIN; I have not. I could quite possible have sued myself even worse off, while just making more clutter for everyone.

[path12]

Originally Posted by ardent enthusiast

That's good and all, but I don't recall CW confirming that he placed a bid.

I can't help that. I'm just trying to go with the plan.

[Poli]

Understood, just pointing out that I'm smelling a little bad fish somewhere.

I may owe you, tyrith, and DT an apology before it's all said and done.

[Ironhead]

VOTE THROW DODGERCHICK OFF THE CLIFF

A lot of discussion has gone on regarding Dodgerchick over the past couple of days. I feel good enough about voting for her to simply resolve the issue because I still think the odds are higher that she is a wolf than not. Plus, as mentioned earlier if she truly is innocent then Ardent could possibly change enough minds to save her life.

[Tyrith]

Originally Posted by ardent enthusiast

Understood, just pointing out that I'm smelling a little bad fish somewhere.

I may owe you, tyrith, and DT an apology before it's all said and done.

Honestly, I can't blame you for going after me at this point by and large...I've been quiet, unspectacular, and not particularly useful. This game really threw me off; I haven't been keeping track of stuff in the same manner I might typically, and generally I felt badly informed until this weekend. However, I strongly suspect there is someone at the top fo the game that's bad, or we're just incredibly lucky. Hm, could be either way, actually.

[Tyrith]

Originally Posted by Ironhead

VOTE THROW DODGERCHICK OFF THE CLIFF

A lot of discussion has gone on regarding Dodgerchick over the past couple of days. I feel good enough about voting for her to simply resolve the issue because I still think the odds are higher that she is a wolf than not. Plus, as mentioned earlier if she truly is innocent then Ardent could possibly change enough minds to save her life.

The AE factor depends on how bad we're executing her. What's the vote count?

[Passacaglia]

I'm going to vote against DC after all. Not much today to convince me not to.

DODGERUS VOTE CHICKUS

(that means I vote to break Dodgerus Chickus in half)

[Mustang]

Originally Posted by Grammaticus

Mustangus and Tyrus

Mustangus being the one that is pretty much UTR.

I made 6 or 7 lawsuits the other day and lost all but 1.

Speaking of lawsuits, what is the mechanic that determines lawsuits, I'm hazy on that. There has to be some mechanic where certain people can win all the lawsuits they have.

Is there any connection to who wins what % of lawsuits when certain people or lawyers or in power? I would think that maybe traitors would have a higher win percent when they are paired up with another traitor in some measure (consul, lawyers, tribune)

[Mustang]

VOTE EXECUTE DC

More to end her seeming misery. I can't imagine someone being a Tarq would pound the podium that hard though to go this way...

[Poli]

Hey now, the Warlord is here and can lock in his bid. How bout it, Warlord?

[Barkeep49]

Something to throw out there:
I know Narc said he wasn't going to be around. What if he came around? Would people like him to veto the execution? I've asked cronin and that means both DC and I would go free.

[Poli]

I'm down with that.

[Poli]

Guess that's a no from CW. That's just a little frustrating.

[Poli]

Softball tossing with my wife, I might be gone till the top of the hour.

[Tyrith]

I'd say no on the execution veto...I'd rather keep the vote close while still executing DC, then see if AE weasels her out of it. A raw veto is no test at all.

[Autumn]

Originally Posted by Ironhead

Theory I just had (well, call it a theory if you wish). We are assuming at this point that Dodgerchick has gained the services of Ardent. And we don't want to kill an innocent villager tonight. I am more willing to place my vote on her tonight given all of the suspicions I have had with the hopes that if she is innocent Ardent will be able to change enough minds (remember, a laywer is more effective if you truly are innocent) to set her free. It will also give us a measuring stick to look at how Ardent's defense of Coffee Warlord stacks up against Dodgerchick's. They will be the only two people the entire game to have used the lawyers in defense.

I had this same idea while off washing the dishes. It's looking like it may be too much of a landslide to try it out though. I probably missed some votes but right now I have 10 against Dodgerus Erchickus. I'd be interested in seeing if the lawyer can get her out of this, a la Coffeus so I don't want to make it too extreme.

For what it's worth, I've been rethinking my position on Senator Dodgerus. With that time washing dishes to think clearly about this, it would seem that in this particular game, locking up the seers would be the number one goal of hte traitors. Having someone rich to hire them and waste them on already semi-trusted people would be a safe way to do that. I'm not convinced, but between that and the chance of her innocence being proven by her lawyer, I would be more inclined to vote to execute her. I'm going to see what the vote count is and decide though.

[Ironhead]

Right now I am leaning towards not arresting Coffee Warlord tonight, but he is a strong possibility for me depending on how Dodgerchick's trial goes.

My other suspects are DT, Mustang and Chubby. Anyone have any input?

[Tyrith]

On that note, let's see what AE can do.

UNVOTE KILL DC
VOTE KILL BARKEEP

[Tyrith]

Ironhead, DT has been constantly distrusted throughout the game so he wouldn't be a bad choice. Chubby doesn't really seem to be doing much for us, so that might be another good possibility.

[Autumn]

Does someone have a better record of services won than I do?

[Autumn]

It seems to me that a good traitor strategy would be, as I mentioned above, lock up the lawyers and waste their scans. That turns my suspicion on Dodgerus, as everyone else has been saying. It also turns it on Abeus Anxietus, who scanned someone who had already been scanned.

Bodyguards would be anohter pivotal one for the traitors, but less so since there are so many targets in this game they could hope we'd guard the wrong person.

I'd like to look over the records for lawyer and killer bids if someone has a good one.

[Autumn]

Originally Posted by Ironhead

Right now I am leaning towards not arresting Coffee Warlord tonight, but he is a strong possibility for me depending on how Dodgerchick's trial goes.

My other suspects are DT, Mustang and Chubby. Anyone have any input?

I don't wnat us to narrow the arrests down too visibly, as it seems it gives the traitors a chance to disrupt them. However if you want to confine yourself to a list, those three or something else, then I'll make sure to arrest outside of it.

[Ironhead]

Originally Posted by Autumn

I had this same idea while off washing the dishes. It's looking like it may be too much of a landslide to try it out though. I probably missed some votes but right now I have 10 against Dodgerus Erchickus. I'd be interested in seeing if the lawyer can get her out of this, a la Coffeus so I don't want to make it too extreme.

For what it's worth, I've been rethinking my position on Senator Dodgerus. With that time washing dishes to think clearly about this, it would seem that in this particular game, locking up the seers would be the number one goal of hte traitors. Having someone rich to hire them and waste them on already semi-trusted people would be a safe way to do that. I'm not convinced, but between that and the chance of her innocence being proven by her lawyer, I would be more inclined to vote to execute her. I'm going to see what the vote count is and decide though.

I would personally advise against any hedging of bets, as to me it would be VERY suspicious. It would seem like a wolf trying to save their companion by hiding behind the defense of helping the village. Even if we do kill Dodgerchick and she turns up innocent I am sure we can glean some information from Ardent's defense of her. I imagine the message would be something like "Ardent fought hard for Dodgerchick's life, changing X senator's minds but it wasn't enough." It isn't going to be "Arden't doesn't bother defending her because it is a landslide. Her death one way or another will provide us information and hopefully get us out of this stalemate and feeling of cluelessness. If this turns into a wasted day (no lynch, no information) because of hedged votes I will be pretty frustrated.

[Poli]

Originally Posted by Tyrith

On that note, let's see what AE can do.

IWS. Vote upcoming. I think.

[Autumn]

Originally Posted by ardent enthusiast

Yesterday? I'm not sure I know what you mean.

I was responding to your comment about Kayus Whitus, and his involvement in what happened yesterday. I assume you meant to do with the bidding setup.

[Poli]

Originally Posted by Ironhead

I would personally advise against any hedging of bets, as to me it would be VERY suspicious. It would seem like a wolf trying to save their companion by hiding behind the defense of helping the village. Even if we do kill Dodgerchick and she turns up innocent I am sure we can glean some information from Ardent's defense of her. I imagine the message would be something like "Ardent fought hard for Dodgerchick's life, changing X senator's minds but it wasn't enough." It isn't going to be "Arden't doesn't bother defending her because it is a landslide. Her death one way or another will provide us information and hopefully get us out of this stalemate and feeling of cluelessness. If this turns into a wasted day (no lynch, no information) because of hedged votes I will be pretty frustrated.

Duly noted. Vote staying (and softball tossing didn't last very long )

[Lorena]

You guys are forgetting something, CW was voted innocent and that's why he was let out of jail, am I right? He didn't NEED Swagg's service because WE, as a group, voted for him to be released.

I got Ardent this time around and I WANT to be voted "off the cliff", whatever that means. My assumption is that IF ya'll vote for me as being treasonous (spelling?), then that's when the lawyer comes into play.

Am I missing something here?

[Barkeep49]

Tyrith: I think we've seen pretty clearly that the top lawyer swings 3 votes. How is anything gained?

[Poli]

Originally Posted by Autumn

I was responding to your comment about Kayus Whitus, and his involvement in what happened yesterday. I assume you meant to do with the bidding setup.

Well, he did have time to tell us what he got, if anything. He didn't say anything, and hasn't been here all day.

[Barkeep49]

Originally Posted by Dodgerchick

You guys are forgetting something, CW was voted innocent and that's why he was let out of jail, am I right? He didn't NEED Swagg's service because WE, as a group, voted for him to be released.

I got Ardent this time around and I WANT to be voted "off the cliff", whatever that means. My assumption is that IF ya'll vote for me as being treasonous (spelling?), then that's when the lawyer comes into play.

Am I missing something here?

You are. CW had the lawyer and while he was going free anyway the votes against him were further reduced (6-3).

[Poli]

DC, I assume you haven't used the scan or haven't received word (I believe Cronin hasn't been here either). True?