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