• The forum has been updated. For an explanation of some of the changes, head over here.

Recent content by Catholic

  1. Catholic

    Were Trek: Q-re - Game over, INNOCENTS WIN :iamamoron:

    I think we have a case of Day 1 repeating itself all over again. Moose! puts down his vote on the most suspicious innocent, then the wolves jump on his wagon. I'm not convinced by the case on Jock.
  2. Catholic

    Were Trek: Q-re - Game over, INNOCENTS WIN :iamamoron:

    SootShade said:
    Huh. So I went from a mild innocent read on Crassius to deep in the red by the end of day 1, but properly reading day 2 has him slowly climbing back into the blue. Notably, an adjustment for the better happens very easily for a wolf between days, but on the other hand everything he says seems to check out, and there isn't actually a particular qualitative difference in his play for each day, that I can see. The opposite of what I was reading, he's not focused on defending himself, but rather explaining himself in the process objecting to other players.

    I kinda feel like flopping right back to an Eternal vote now, but I should get to doing the Jock reread first as well.

    Flippity floppity.
  3. Catholic

    Were Trek: Q-re - Game over, INNOCENTS WIN :iamamoron:

    Moose! said:
    Brutus, would you say it's normal behavior for wolves to consistently and vocally protect each other as much as Rocco and I have done?

    Dude we get it you're a special and know that Rocco is innocent. Can we lynch Curio now?
  4. Catholic

    Were Trek: Q-re - Game over, INNOCENTS WIN :iamamoron:

    Alright, I'm back from my date. So many people asking me so many questions.

    SootShade said:
    What the actual ****. I was bracing myself for some complete horse**** when I saw you looking at the thread, and then you just come out with entirely reasonable reads all around? Is this how you try to buddy up with me, making sense? Got to admit, it's a pretty good way. :lol:
    Uhhhh

    Crassius "Biggus Dickus" Curio said:
    Literally the opposite of an "I told you so", when i talk about how I considered him suspicious and he came up as innocent. And you may notice that this post is directed at the accusation that I lazily jumped on the Arch3r bandwagon (same accusation that you also made) which I did, yes, because 1. I thought he was a wolf, duh, and 2. because I thought it was a fun way to join the vote, apparently everyone disagrees witht that though  :lol:

    So if you vote me, please for a better reason than that, or you'll make me sad :iamamoron:

    But... Moose! started the Arch3r wagon? Why did you lazy join a wagon started by someone you were the most suspicious of?

    Moose! said:
    Eternal if you think it’s not me and it is Rocco your dumb.

    no u

    Moose! said:
    Why do you guys have such a strong innocent read on Dago again?

    Re-read the middle part of the first day. Nothing is happening. The wolves have an easy time flying under the radar. Dago is the only one making significant noise and trying to rally a hunt. It's incredibly village behavior.

    Moose! said:
    The odds that both Curio and jock are wolves seems totally low. If dago isn’t a wolf as well then both Soot and Eternal are probably wolves. If Dago is a wolf than it’s probably Soot or eternal.

    Literally none of those are true.

    Dago Wolfrider said:
    Both SootShade and Marowit being traitors would be rather strange. I mean Arch3r was lynched mostly because of his flip flopping. At least that's what mostly made him suspicious to me. And then what do you do? You try to start a bandwagon on your teammate to then change your vote midair once he show up with a LoS? Moreover you forgot that Marowit parked a vote on me last day. You do not vote one of your teammates if you know that you may be unable to change it and while he is under pressure. All in all I am not denying the possibility that SootShade or Marowit or both may be wolves, yet that's quite unlikely to me. I do not trust them, but their posts are reasonable and well thought, unlike many others.

    Okay guys, I realize it's funny for me to say this, but there's been a lot of "oh if it's X then it can't be Y" arguments this game. Almost all of those arguments are worthless. Wolves go after each other all the time. Wolves frequently vote together, especially if they can get on a bandwagon lead by an innocent (Arch3r, anyone?). Wolves are also cautious of being caught on the same wagon, because it makes them look suspicious and associated. My past experience with analyzing packs is that it's usually not very successful and in my last few games where I used it as my primary criterion I ended up being dead wrong on a lot of people. I don't think it's a scummy argument, I just think it's a bad one. I'm much more confident in lynching Curio and/or Rocco because of their incredibly scummy behavior than I am about lynching Curio because of his associations to any other scummy people.

    Lastly, I did not expect to be completely useless Day 1 - I very genuinely promised an LoS I was intending to deliver before life became busy. I wouldn't use it as evidence of me being innocent and/or somehow tied in your innocence.

    Moose! said:
    Marowit said:
    I lurked last game I played in and I was innocent. I am lurking now. My lurking behavior has everything to do with how much time I have and nothing to do with my alignment. I love Werewolf. If I'm an innocent, I like thinking of what packs exist and how dynamics between players can give away who is evil. If I'm a wolf, I like to pretend to do the same. I'm sure there's things that give me away as a wolf in the games where I am a wolf, but lurkishness is not one of them.

    Shouldn't you know whether you're an innocent or a wolf?

    This kind of defense falls totally flat for me, and is totally akin to Adaham's defense of himself in the last game when he was scum and I rightly called it out (albeit an uninformed scum)

    I'm saying that across all Werewolf games, regardless of which affiliation I am my lurking behavior does not influence how I play. I'm not saying that in this particular game I could be either.

    Jock said:
    Marowit said:
    Xardob's post on page 15 is so flimsy... So is Jock's...

    Bunch of "do we vote lurkers or not" discussion. I think it's an interesting talk; I think trying to draw allegiances based on where people fall on this argument is useless. Sootshade and I seem to be in agreement here.
    Marowit said:
    Jock posts some wishy-washy garbage.
    What does this mean? Do you have any actual reasons or are you just trying to fill the space to look like you're actually doing something?

    No, that's what I'm accusing you of doing. You make posts that defend yourself or make some half-assed "maybe wolf maybe not" arguments without ever committing to anything. My stream of consciousness was wishy-washy, because that's what posting while reading is, but I'm committed to a Curio lynch. So far you've made no efforts to start or support a train and have just jumped on a bandwagon to lynch an innocent.

    Moose! said:
    I know for a fact that two innocents are voting for Jock right now.

    Spicy.

    Moose! said:
    Smart players like Arch3r and Xardob and Soot (I think?) have floated the stupid idea that I am in a cupid role with Rocco, and that one of us is innocent and the other one is a wolf.

    I concur with you that this is a stupid idea, and therefore think Rocco being a wolf and you being innocent (or vice versa) is entirely plausible.

    Crassius "Biggus Dickus" Curio said:
    @Eternal my previous comment on the "told you so" accusation in case you missed it. I really want to see where you got that from, because if you really just pulled those accusations out of your arse, I know who I'm gonna change my vote to.

    I read thirty pages at 2am. Forgive my misinterpretation. You're still scummy.

    Moose! said:
    Eternal in your first post you were like “Moose is obviously scum” and I your second you were like “well maybe not and I have tunnel vision.” Why the change of heart?

    Because I read the other two-thirds of the game after I said "Moose is obviously scum."

    Crassius "Biggus Dickus" Curio said:
    We are currently 9 players, so 5 required to lynch, Jock has already 2 so the 3 wolves count now instantly lynch him. I assume you know that, just clarifying.
    Now, my second explanation why they don't do that would be that Jock is a wolf, because they wouldn't push a vote on their own of course.
    The third explanation is that one of the 2 votes on Jock (Moose and Rocco) is already from a wolf, so if the two other wolves voted there would only be 4 votes on him, which is not enough.
    Quick Maffs!

    There's four days to lynch. Really not a rush for the wolves to hop on that train. Wolves lynched Arch3r in the span of a few hours day 1.

    Lord Brutus said:
    Of course with Marowit's misinterpretation of my assessment of Xardob, possibly deliberate, he may be wolf no. 3.

    I pretty much skimmed through the first Day 2 pages because role analysis makes a boring game. Not much sense in me doing it deliberately since I really don't care for lynching you.
  5. Catholic

    Were Trek: Q-re - Game over, INNOCENTS WIN :iamamoron:

    I'm going to a coffee date in ten minutes, and I don't have a shirt on yet.

    Moose! said:
    If just one of us is a wolf (and thus, we're trying to somehow win the game together ahead of our respective innocent teams) I would not have been so eager to call out our obvious relationship.

    Please explain this.
  6. Catholic

    Were Trek: Q-re - Game over, INNOCENTS WIN :iamamoron:

    Didn't adaham say he randomly generated allegiances?
  7. Catholic

    Were Trek: Q-re - Game over, INNOCENTS WIN :iamamoron:

    The big read I have on this game is that Moose! is probably a very misguided innocent and Curio/Rocco are using his reasoning as a wagon to get innocents lynched, with Jock as a buddy helping out in that regard.
  8. Catholic

    Were Trek: Q-re - Game over, INNOCENTS WIN :iamamoron:

    CONCLUSIONS

    Curio - BLATANT WOLF. Jumped on Arch3r bandwagon. Pretended to regret it. Had a bunch of flip flops and largely nonsensical arguments Day 1. I do not think I've ever had as strong wolf vibes from someone as I have this game.

    Jock (Spock) - Boring posts for the most part that are fairly standard for Jock. Dove on the Arch3r bandwagon earlier than I'm comfortable with.

    Dago Wolfrider (Captain Jean-Luc Picard) - Incredibly innocent. Without a doubt. Hunted the entire game and did it genuinely. Posts are logical and make sense.

    SootShade (Lt. Commander Data) - Almost as innocent as Dago. Good posts. Genuine hunting.

    Lord Brutus (Lt. Commander Worf) - Uncomfortable with his flip-floppiness without any sensible reasoning. Uncomfortable with his engagement in useless arguments. Does not feel like a net contributor to the team (though obviously I'm not one to talk).

    Xardob (Captain Janeway) - Hard to read, but ballsy shot on Brutus makes me think innocent.

    Roccoflipside (Seven of Nine) - Nonsense votes. Completely broken reasoning. Jumped on the Arch3r wagon super early. I might be biased because my reads of people is so different than Rocco's, but I'm not a fan.

    Moose! (EMH) - I've been very critical of Moose! in my read-through above, and he started the Arch3r wagon, but I can't help but feel like there's a lot of genuine effort involved. Moose! feels like a person an old Eternal would dive after and get tunnel vision in lynching, and turn out to be completely wrong. I want to leave him alone and see what happens.



    Vote: Curio

    Come on. Read his posts.
  9. Catholic

    Were Trek: Q-re - Game over, INNOCENTS WIN :iamamoron:

    Have my comments as I re-read the thread.

    Up to page 10: I have very strong innocent vibes from SootShade and Dago. They're sparring but I think it is two innocents wasting their time on each other.

    @Soot comment on me being a lurker wolf: I lurked last game I played in and I was innocent. I am lurking now. My lurking behavior has everything to do with how much time I have and nothing to do with my alignment. I love Werewolf. If I'm an innocent, I like thinking of what packs exist and how dynamics between players can give away who is evil. If I'm a wolf, I like to pretend to do the same. I'm sure there's things that give me away as a wolf in the games where I am a wolf, but lurkishness is not one of them.

    Moose! said:
    Boo Soot and archer, you both know nothing and one of you is probably a wolf. I’d bet archer.

    Scummy post. Setting up dichotomies makes it very easy for wolves to narrow down two innocents to lynch. Especially when there is no sensible reason for them.

    Moose! said:
    Soot why don’t we compromise and lynch Brutus?

    Moose! wolf confirmed. Thanks for sticking up for me on my birthday, but it makes you no less hairy.

    Roccoflipside said:
    Alright, I'll bite. Soot calls me out for wanting to wait to hear from the lurkers, Daho calls me out for not doing any hunting. I provide a basic los, and some ideas as to where the wolves might be, and yet I'm the wolf? My votes, other than my joke vote on jock, were for Marowit (which I screwed up), Xardob, and Doge, who have all been lurking, in an attempt to draw them into the game.

    I said that I don't yet have a read on any of the vocal players besides moose, whom I still have as innocent, but I know y'all will give me more to go on in the later game than a lurker will. It's easier for a vocal wolf to get away if there's a bunch of lurkers in late game, or at least that's how I see it.

    Other than me, which non-lurkers do you have a read on? If you answer none, than I'm going o have to move you (soot) up my list.

    Trademark wolf post - "I am voting on pointless people who are barely reading the thread so they play" makes ****all sense but at the same time I'm getting serious innocent vibes.

    @Soot on lynching lurkers: Stop making so much sense.

    Vieira's post on page 14 is scummy as hell, but I think Vieira is a wolf every game and I'm always wrong.

    Xardob's post on page 15 is so flimsy... So is Jock's...

    Bunch of "do we vote lurkers or not" discussion. I think it's an interesting talk; I think trying to draw allegiances based on where people fall on this argument is useless. Sootshade and I seem to be in agreement here.

    Rocco is giving me villainous vibes. Nonsense posts with low-effort hunting when the pressure is on is not an indicator of being innocent.

    Moose!'s LoS makes no sense. Would vote Brutus for being scummy? For what? Roleplaying? The arguments just don't make sense at any point. It feels like he's pretending so hard.

    Crassius's post is even worse. Xardob as the most likely spy? Based on what evidence? The fact Rocco agrees with it does not help the point at all..

    Eternal blatantly lying about posting an LoS is terrible.

    Dago *****ing about nobody hunting makes me fairly certain he's an innocent. Arch3r makes some very strange accusations against him.

    Brutus dives on Xardob. Again, none of these anti-Xardob posts make sense to me. He's made one post where he seemed worn out. Really not worth the lynch. Brutus then dives on me, despite the fact he seemed to approve of the one post I've made up to this point. What the hell?

    Rocco thinks Dago is a good "compromise vote".... aghhh! He's trying the hardest in the entire game! Why would wolves stick their necks out when nothing is going on?

    Rocco posts an LoS and I think I have the exact opposite read on every single player.

    Jock posts some wishy-washy garbage.

    Haha what the **** did Xardob do? Why shoot Brutus of all people? I guess it makes sense - I would've done the same since I have no read on Brutus at all. But ballsy.

    Moose! and Dago start to lock horns, interesting.

    Arch3r thinking everyone is a special is BIG. Means he's a special.

    Bunch of stats talk. I can only get so aroused.

    Rocco really wants me dead, alright alright.

    Moose! wanting Arch3r dead... ugh...

    Rocco and Jock jumping on that wagon makes me suspicious too.

    Holy **** that Crassius low-effort "I agree with Moose" bandwagon vote.

    Soot reluctantly dove on it..

    **** I feel so bad for not existing last turn. There's no chance I would have voted for Arch3r after his "I think everyone is a special" comment. Goddamnit. I know it sounds like horse**** since I'm posting day 2 after knowing the outcome, but gah.

    People seem to want to lynch me day 2. I don't even blame you.

    Vieira is a strange night kill. There's no information there. Vieira just kind of did ****all.

    Moose! turns on Soot, interesting.

    Crassius's "I told you so" after jumping on the wagon... ooooof. So scummy.

    Bunch of meaningless Brutus back-and-forth.

    Mostly nonsense speculation after that. Arch3r already gave away the 'everyone is specials' top secret. No point in going on about it.

    Good post by Sootshade with a bizarre conclusion. You can't make up logic to support your gut feeling of wanting to lynch me lol.

  10. Catholic

    Were Trek: Q-re - Game over, INNOCENTS WIN :iamamoron:

    Okok trash posting phase is over so expect analysis by tonight.
  11. Catholic

    Were Trek: Q-re - Game over, INNOCENTS WIN :iamamoron:

    Dago Wolfrider said:
    Xardob said:
    Jock said:
    It is, but we actually run the risk of hammering a guy on literally the first day. Would it be fun? Yeah. Would it be informative? About as much as my death on day two.  :wink:
    Careful now, some people might accuse you of being too cautious.  :iamamoron:

    Not me. There are two lurkers and two traitors, right?

    Let's put some pression on them.

    Unvote; Vote Arch3r

    NO BALLS

    Vote: Dago Wolfrider
  12. Catholic

    WW Sign-up...hosted by the Ace of Fangs

    I'm in. No more road trips this time and my girlfriend broke up with me, so I have plenty of time to give.
  13. Catholic

    [Werewolf] - Rediscovery - Wolf Victory!

    I gave up the driving shift. In a car on phone so expect lousy formatting.

    I'm not going to defend myself - the bandwagon on me is the laziest bandwagon I've seen. I don't lurk - I'm on a road trip. I'm not half assing my vote on fishy - I'm keeping it there until he hangs. I'm not a 'noob lynch' - I've been here for half a decade.

    Fishy has actions that don't match his rationale. Voting me after suggesting lynching boobs makes little sense, and even separating myself the "let's lynch boobs" argument doesn't hold up. My pet theory is that he and Adaham are pack mates, so he posted that to get pressure off Adaham since he had most votes at that point. After that it's been many words but little substance posts.
Top Bottom