[Werewolf] - Rediscovery - Wolf Victory!
- Thread starter Troll
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Xardob said:The truth is I have no idea what to think about Archer, so i'm asking around for opinions. I know it seems insane to think you guys can better determine someone's role than I, but it doesn't hurt to try.Big McLarge-Huge said:
He made fun of Big McLarge-Huge's illogical reasoning, his vote is a joke ( connected to the first part of the sentence ) and he opposed Fishy's idea. He did not accuse everyone seriously so far, he is just showing the flaws of the reasonings of others, quite a defensive game. Hard to say so far. Why don't we talk about Jock's concern though, it is quite similar to the point of Archer (the morale drop part). They both seem cautious and unwilling to vote for someone that is not clearly a wolf. Maybe too much in Jock's case, yet not knowing him I can't say. In both cases I need more data.
I didn't get the impression that Jock was being that cautious. Maybe I've just accepted that part of the culture of this forum is that we never get anything done until about 12 hours before deadline.
His reminder that there are more people to discuss about without actually striking any new ground isn't good (it could be a wolf trying to signal his innocence), but a wolf would probably be happy with restricted discussion unless his packmate was under heavy fire. But if this was the case, you'd expect a more concerted effort in shifting focus.
His reminder that there are more people to discuss about without actually striking any new ground isn't good (it could be a wolf trying to signal his innocence), but a wolf would probably be happy with restricted discussion unless his packmate was under heavy fire. But if this was the case, you'd expect a more concerted effort in shifting focus.
Arch3r said:
My point was that in a game that lacks a jester or any roles besides straight up wolves and straight up innocents, we have far fewer variables to concern ourselves with. My comment about not going after the vets was based on the easily provable objective fact that vets post more frequently and with longer posts. You can observe the first few pages and see that this is just plain fact. They're so into the game that they're willing to devote more time than most people (which is not a dig at anyone who prefers to post less frequently, myself included.) With this in mind in makes more sense to me to lynch a new player who doesn't post as often because regardless of which team a frequent-posting vet is on, he/she can be counted on to consistently give us more information to digest simply because they like to post more. This provides us with an abundance of material to reference and poke holes in and to more easily and concretely establish patterns. I know that by this logic I, as one of the less frequent posters should be on the chopping block as well, but I know that I'm an innocent so of course I'm not putting my name in the hat.
In summary, frequent posters keep the game moving forward both in terms of pace and in the amount of evidence for or against them being one team or the other. If you lynch a more quiet player, then you're removing one or two posts every (real life) day that is likely lacking in as much substance as compared to a vet's post. I like playing WW a lot, but I'm nowhere near as invested as Xardob or McHuge and as a consequence I don't post as often. This means that I am worse for the village, because ultimately Werewolf comes down to a game about time management. The longer each (in game) daily discourse continues, the more information is available to everyone, and information is by far more important to townies than wolves. Lynching a low-participation player removes one or two things we can examine, while lynching a vet removes far more information to review.
Naturally, if a low-participation player is lynched and comes up inno, it's not good for us. But it's better than lynching someone who is going to give us more to go on no matter what side they're on. I'm not saying that we need to rely on the vets to figure everything out for us, but that they will give all of us more to work with. The wolves can easily get by by keeping their heads down and ripping people to shreds night by night, while the innocents should seek to create and preserve as much conversation as possible.
I will catch up and post regarding the last two pages later today, at which point I'll also try to address any rebuttals that may be made to this post.
NotAdaham
Knight
Wow, Fishy...you just spend three long paragraphs talking about the benefit of vets posting more. At the same time you claim to not post a whole lot, yet you do spend a considerable amount of space talking about something generic such as that. One could argue that you might have spent that time better ACTUALLY commenting on the game or at some specific players, rather than throwing generics out there, especially if we aren't to expect a ton of posts from you.
In other words, seems like a bunch of hot air to appear active. So, anything else to say?
In other words, seems like a bunch of hot air to appear active. So, anything else to say?
MaHuD said:
Read my post concerning the reasons of my swing vote more carefully and hopefully you will understand them better. Not knowing you ( all of you ) is quite a disadvantage for me and certain tactics can prove fruitful, but at the same time suspicious. I won't deny that. I am doing my best to study you in different situations and in different relations with me, but I have to do it quite fast to catch up with you. That's all I can say.
I don't like Archer at all: Xardob already commented on his early vote and I don't find his argument with Fishy that relevant. I am talking about time because it is relevant with the amount of votes some people are accumulating right now. And Xardob is not even that suspicious at this point, there is really no other reason to lynch him other than Biggie said so - granted we're dealing with Biggie who, as he already mentioned, is trying to have fun and stir discussion (since early posts). All in all I don't think either of them are worthy of lynching on day one based on what we've seen.
I'm leaning towards innocent on Dago so far.
I'm leaning towards innocent on Dago so far.
TheFlyingFishy said:
It sounds like a roller-coaster self vote to me. You spent a lot of time trying to prove that killing inexperienced and not devoted guys is better than killing veterans and the only thing that you say to save yourself from this self denounce is that you know that you are innocent? Moreover the part concerning the relation between post length and frequency - experience is clearly false. I clearly did not claim to be a veteran, yet I posted at least as frequently as Big McLarge-Huge and Xardob and everyone can see that my post were more or less as long as theirs. I do not like long posts for practical reasons ( I am not a native English speaker and writer, even with my knowledge it takes some time to post a correct and clear message. Not to count the time to read and reread every post to not misunderstand you. Moreover as of now time is not by my side as I explained earlier. I quite disliked the idea of starting sooner, but no problems, I can handle it ) to be honest, if that is what you are recriminating. I agree with Big McLarge-Huge for what concerns this, but I do not share/like his tone.
Joke: Are we sure that there really is no jester in this game?
Big McLarge-Huge said:Dago Wolfrider said:
Also, Fishy...
TheFlyingFishy said:
That's Mr. McLarge-Huge, m'kay? Or Humongous, as my friends call me.
We are, me and the real Big McLarge-Huge ( with memes or not ).
Your old persona is back, the only thing good about it is memes. I am personally more akin to the real Big McLarge-Huge, if it looks conversely ( my first post to the Doge of Benis ) I do not mean to and read my last post that answers Mahud's concern.
How far in are you, because I think there's some pretty good captains in Discovery, but I don't want to spoil too much.Big McLarge-Huge said:There you go, that's my take. Even though that might change now that I'm watching DiscoveryBig McLarge-Huge said:
Guilty about not voting too seriously, but I do not think at my time of voting there was anything to base my vote on, and now I still need to formulate a theory and a reason to change my vote.Dago Wolfrider said:Xardob said:The truth is I have no idea what to think about Archer, so i'm asking around for opinions. I know it seems insane to think you guys can better determine someone's role than I, but it doesn't hurt to try.Big McLarge-Huge said:
He made fun of Big McLarge-Huge's illogical reasoning, his vote is a joke ( connected to the first part of the sentence ) and he opposed Fishy's idea. He did not accuse everyone seriously so far, he is just showing the flaws of the reasonings of others, quite a defensive game. Hard to say so far. Why don't we talk about Jock's concern though, it is quite similar to the point of Archer (the morale drop part). They both seem cautious and unwilling to vote for someone that is not clearly a wolf. Maybe too much in Jock's case, yet not knowing him I can't say. In both cases I need more data.
Understandable, see above reason.Jock said:
Plus I need to clarify, and I told Sootshade this before the game started, I am moving countries on Monday. So naturally, I have had little time and I have been sort of skimming through the posts rather than reading them thoroughly so far.
Today I'll have some more time to read through the posts, so I'll be doing that.
I'll just go down the players one by one, so I don't forget the more under the radar people.
1. Xardob
2. Marowit
Has said absolutely nothing, but making some random votes. I would count this as very much under the radar, for either wolf-reasons or other reasons to be inactive. I am leaning towards wolf here.
3. Dago Wolfrider
I am leaning towards innocent here, but it is not an easy call. The votes made seem to be jumping on a Xardob / Biggie bandwagon (or trying to create it), which is easy as they're the most vocal. But aside from this there is active participation and no fear of making accusations, which makes me lean to innocence.
4. Jock
5. Arch3r
6. MaHuD
7. TheFlyingFishy
Eh, well, tough one. At least there's a big post trying to stir up some discussion. If anything, it will gives on some more data to work with (like who defends whom), but it doesn't seem like this really was the point. Still, if I ask myself: would a wolf do this? My answer is: probably not, so despite disagreeing I see no reason to vote on TheFlyingFishy.
8. The Doge of Benis
I found nothing of real substance in the posts here.
9. Big McLarge-Huge
So far, I find:
Marowit, Jock and The Doge the most suspicious, which leaves me in a bit of a pickle.
Saturday to Monday I will have very very little time to read through the thread and change my vote. Hopefully I get a chance on Tuesday though, as I am sure this is likely to change based on replies.
1. Xardob
I don't see how Jock hasn't been not cautious so far. He has had 5 posts and not much in substance in any of them, yet he accuses me of the exact same thing. If he turns out to be a wolf, I will point back at this. I'm 50-50 right now on innocent / wolf, mostly because of the link with Jock, so perhaps that changes.Xardob said:
2. Marowit
Has said absolutely nothing, but making some random votes. I would count this as very much under the radar, for either wolf-reasons or other reasons to be inactive. I am leaning towards wolf here.
3. Dago Wolfrider
I am leaning towards innocent here, but it is not an easy call. The votes made seem to be jumping on a Xardob / Biggie bandwagon (or trying to create it), which is easy as they're the most vocal. But aside from this there is active participation and no fear of making accusations, which makes me lean to innocence.
4. Jock
So you're defending Xardob and he is defending you? I agree with your assessment though that I would not lynch Biggie right now, as he is stirring discussion, and the same would go for Xardob. But tell me where you have been giving relevant arguments - other than against me perhaps, which may be simply because I voted for you? It seems like you're not trying to piss anyone off, thus playing defensive, as your only post accusing anyone (mildly) so far is:Jock said:
This hardly has any good argumentation as Xardob and Biggie are doing the same thing (stirring up discussion) and just tries to bandwagon onto people in the 'spotlights' in my opinion. So far, my read here is Wolf. To clarify: placing my vote on Jock originally did not have any reason, but now I have no reason to remove it.Jock said:
6. MaHuD
MaHuD's logic seems a bit similar to mine. I simply do not think there's anything standing out about MaHuD's posts, but it seems to go against the bandwagon, so I am leaning towards innocent.MaHuD said:
7. TheFlyingFishy
Eh, well, tough one. At least there's a big post trying to stir up some discussion. If anything, it will gives on some more data to work with (like who defends whom), but it doesn't seem like this really was the point. Still, if I ask myself: would a wolf do this? My answer is: probably not, so despite disagreeing I see no reason to vote on TheFlyingFishy.
8. The Doge of Benis
I found nothing of real substance in the posts here.
Why not vote for Dago? I don't disagree, but at least give a reasoning. Same with your comment on Jock. "I don't like this" is also rather simple as a reply, isn't it? It could just be a wolf, trying to do the minimum not to be a target. Which appears to be working so far.The Doge of Benis said:
9. Big McLarge-Huge
So, I find this rather suspicious. You are saying your tactic is just campaigning very hard on someone, without real reason? As a wolf this would be convenient as you choose the target, and you're saying it has been reliable for 2 out of 3 times to be a target you choose. I don't really see any real reason of going for Xardob, aside from claiming he is a vet and it would be a nice change to string up a veteran on the first day? I still find it to be more likely to be an innocent move to find the bandwagoners though, which I find the most suspicious to be wolves.Big McLarge-Huge said:Congratz, you found us. We're packies. Soot randomly rolled the two most awesome players as packies in a small game without specials and thought..."you know what? A smashing victory by those guys is EXACTLY what's gonna revive WW on this forum. Everybody will be like...woah, that was fun being eaten, let's do that again right away". So yeah, that's totally what happened. But don't tell dem others, ok?MaHuD said:
On a more serious note...I don't think Xardob really suspects me, his vote on me is still from the "joke stage". I, however, am pretty convinced of Xardob being a wolf, almost all the indicators are there. Don't bother me into explaining them, I really don't feel like it. If you claim not knowing what they are, that puts you into first spot as his packie, even in front of Da Lupo.
Other than that, nothing much to say, the discussion about vets or not is rather silly and boring. Let's face it, day 1 knows two outcomes:
1) We lynch who I campaign for (srsly, happens at least 2 out of 3 times)
2) We lynch an absent guy or noob (100% of cases when that coincides with point 1)
Never ever have we lynched a vet on day 1, unless I campaigned really hard for it. So there you go, save yourself some time and breath, and consider whether you want to lynch Xardob, or whether you want to sacrifice a noob/absentee. Right now that would be a coin toss between Lupo and Fishy.
Keep the train rollin, team!
Reasons. I've got them, but I'd much more prefer you made them up yourselfXardob said:
So far, I find:
Marowit, Jock and The Doge the most suspicious, which leaves me in a bit of a pickle.
Saturday to Monday I will have very very little time to read through the thread and change my vote. Hopefully I get a chance on Tuesday though, as I am sure this is likely to change based on replies.
NotAdaham
Knight
Just finished season 1 today. Really don't think this should be called Star Trek anymore. As for the rest...nowadays each TV series thinks it has to jump on the long-form-storytelling bandwagon, and frankly 9 out of 10 times it sucks balls and turns into a glorified telenovela. "I've been dead, but I'm back from the dead (or borrowed from the parallel universe)", "Look at me, I'm good...and now I'm bad...and now I'm good again", blabla. All these scriptwriters trying to stretch material for 6 Episodes out over 6 seasons, it's just not good and I stop caring.Arch3r said:
As to the captains...well there's a lot of wiminz-powaah going on, china-lady is ok, but they should really stop including a mirror universe to explain why someone acts like a cartoonish villain. In TOS that worked, because it was the 60s and it was all campy, but every iteration of the mirror universe than has been trying to take itself far too serious. Mirror universe stuff works when your protagonists are prototypical characters. Once you try and make them nuanced (like DS9 did first), the whole point of mirroring them becomes obsolete. If someone is nuanced in one universe, why would they be all-out bad in another? So yeah, china-lady as the evil empress felt kinda childish and ruined her for me.
Lorca would have been good, because I kinda like Jason Isaacs, but he was one of the many "oh no, now he's a baddie" twists that depreciate interest. As a "normal universe" guy with a dark side to him, he was interesting. As a mirror universe spy he was actually a bit of a weakling, compared to the levels of ruthlessness common over there. So yeah, the most interesting guy of season 1 was first written into a dead end, and finally killed off. Great.
Leaves us with Admiral psycho-babble. She's actually kinda ok. But totally against the lore. She's an admiral, she should be the evil one. That would have made sense. But alas.
Michael "is Michelle" Burnham is rightfully hated by everyone. Gay Nazi is probably the most interesting guy on the crew together with Saru3PO. Tilly should have been played by Amy Schumer, as the character is clearly written for her. Never was a fan of the "oopsie, I'm awkward" characters in Star Trek (Barclay, et al).
I've already read that season 2 will make Pike the new captain, and supposedly he's the best thing about the show. Also he leaves at the end of season 2, so yeah, not really going well.
Also they f***ed up the Klingons big time. Now they're basically Orcs voting for Brexit and Baudet, while in the TNG-DS9 era they were space vikings with some of the most interesting storylines.
To everybody else...this was a relevant post, don't even think about questioning it
Nice LoS, btw...
@Archer
I know I've been flying a bit under the radar and am probably coming off a tad hypocritical when mentioning other inactive people, no excuses there.
You can call me saying Xardob not being suspicious 'defending'... then again you could refrain from framing it like that and give some actual reasoning as to why he IS suspicious?
Are you only commenting on that single post from MaHuD? What do you think about him generally? I think he has been quite non-committal and flown rather under the radar (just like me as you said).
I know I've been flying a bit under the radar and am probably coming off a tad hypocritical when mentioning other inactive people, no excuses there.
You can call me saying Xardob not being suspicious 'defending'... then again you could refrain from framing it like that and give some actual reasoning as to why he IS suspicious?
Are you only commenting on that single post from MaHuD? What do you think about him generally? I think he has been quite non-committal and flown rather under the radar (just like me as you said
).