[Werewolf] Crusade on Castle Mengelberg, (Werewolves Win!)
- Thread starter CryoNomad
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
SootShade said:
I don't think you ****ed up. You were just too astute on Day 1
Venerable F. Sheep said:That's true enough, it did have its advantages as well. But it did hurt my pride a little bit too, being killed by my two packies.
I already apologised for that -__-
By the way, I told ya'll Adaham and I were too dumb to be packies.
ComingWinter
Baron
Venerable F. Sheep said:
Yeah no ****, frustrated the bejeezus out of me trying to see Adaham as innocent when he was practically dying for you.
Ok, I've made a promise: Adaham, you have played a ****ty game as an innocent 
I'm sorry if I went overboard and hurt you though, that wasn't my intention. No hard feelings on my part.
I'm sorry if I went overboard and hurt you though, that wasn't my intention. No hard feelings on my part.
Venerable F. Sheep said:If Vieira had voted Calodine within time like he was supposed to, you wouldn't have changed your vote on exactly the deadline.
I was going to be voting you anyway.
Sorry for my **** ups, errybody. I spent days debating to myself what was best. Especially since I never had taken part in discussion so it was difficult to gauge how people would react if me, as a suspicious player came in and voted an innocent over a (highly) suspected wolf at the time.
And then, because I already knew who the wolves were, well, it made it difficult. I put too much pressure on myself and well, it ****ed me up.
I'm sorry. 
As mentioned immediately following the night during discussions, it was really to try and provide cover for Llandy and myself. We eventually decided on Xardob, but in hindsight I'm not sure if that was the best choice.
Doesn't mean I don't feel bad.
As mentioned immediately following the night during discussions, it was really to try and provide cover for Llandy and myself. We eventually decided on Xardob, but in hindsight I'm not sure if that was the best choice.
SootShade said:Hey, you were a villain Vieira, you don't need to care. If your packies are scummy, lynch them for the greater/your good.
Doesn't mean I don't feel bad.
ComingWinter
Baron
Cativan said:
Yeah same here. Like I said before, this is just a game, I would expect you to pull out all the stops to win, and I would do the same. Doesn't mean I hate you as a person.
Even if you do play more wolfy than innocent.
Vieira said:
Dude, don't worry about it. We won in the end. Plus, your vote did add to the confusion. And Magorian managed to hang in there, so no real harm was done.
Well, except to Sheep
Pharaoh X Llandy said:
So... can we see what you had so far?
Meh, I think Magorian did more harm to himself than good, but Cado was being Mr. Grumpyhead.
ComingWinter
Baron
Can someone throw the link to the wolves discussion pretty please?
ComingWinter
Baron
Venerable F. Sheep said:
Just saying, if I was the alpha wolf, I would have actually used it.
Llandy said there wasn't one; just PMs.
Well, when I posted that it's very hard for me to sift through everything and come up with a post I wasn't lying. I was having serious headaches over this game, trying to think out scenarios and how people would respond to whatever I would say. Spent many hours thinking about **** before I'd finally be able to write a little bit up.
Edit: and then when I did post, it never actually worked out so well.
Edit: and then when I did post, it never actually worked out so well.
Nipplemelter said:So... can we see what you had so far?
If you like, though the intro is out of date as I started writing it yesterday before the storm hit.
Okay, here’s my look at Nipple vs Magorian. For the record, at the time I’m typing this, neither has posted a LoS on Day 4. Magorian’s said he will at some point, and Nipple’s given a brief overview of his thoughts but won’t have time to expand until at least Monday.
I’m going to try to keep this as objective as possible, but some of this will include vibes and gut-feelings. I have considerable bias against both players because they’ve both done some dodgy ****, but the majority of said dodgyness relates almost entirely to Day 2. And all I got out of Day 2 was that both of them were suspicious. I’m going to look at posts coming out of Day 2 following Sheep’s lynch, and then through CW’s lynch on Day 3, and what’s been done/said on Day 4 so far.
So, end of Day 2 was interesting for many reasons. Until five minutes before the deadline, the votes for lynching were tied. Here’s how they stood at the time:
Sheep (Calodine, Ativan, CW, Llandy)
Calodine (Adaham, Xardob, Nipple, Sheep)
Vieira (not voted)
Within the space of five seconds, both Nipple and Vieira voted for Sheep. In Nipple’s case it came as a last minute change of vote. In Vieira’s case, it was a matter of actually getting his act together to vote at all.
By the tone of Vieira’s post, it seemed obvious his intention was to vote for Sheep, even if he did it too late for it to matter. Given that Vieira had literally only just been subbed in and given some 36 hours or so to catch up on the thread, I think if he was a wolf, he would have had very little to lose by lynching an innocent. Or he could have knowingly lynched a wolf who was playing badly as a way of trying to win the trust of the village. Both scenarios are plausible.
However, given Vieira’s posts on Day 3 before he was replaced by Magorian, I’m not sure he’s the type of guy who would have taken that risk. His playstyle seemed very unsure and cautious. The vibe that I got from him wasn’t that he was purposely trying to avoid or deflect attention (as I thought his predecessor was), but rather he was in over his head. It was pretty obvious by the end of Day 2 that some heavy stuff had gone down, apparent camps were starting to form, there were some rather heated arguments, and Vieira seemed reluctant to (or unable to) grasp everything and make his own thoughts clear.
Nipple’s vote came as more of a surprise, but given how he’d been floating between votes on Day 2, in retrospect it doesn’t seem quite as surprising. Since Day 1, Nipple stated that no-lynches were bad and reiterated this reasoning when questioned about why he changed his vote at the very last second.
I do feel, though, that Nipple pulled himself out of a bad situation pretty fast and pretty conveniently (granted, the situation he wound up in wasn’t much better). If Nipple was a wolf, then pulling his vote off Cal and opting to lynch the alpha wolf was a risky thing to do. It left the wolves a player down and heavily weighted the Sheep voters against the non-Sheep-voters, especially given how Vieira finally voted. But then again, the same logic applies to Nipple as to Vieira; if a wolf, he could have used the last-minute vote chance to earn a bit of slack from the Sheep-voters.
It’s probably not very fair of me to bring the rest of Day 2 into this, but I’m trying to get past fairness and into the realm of practicality.
In Day 2, Pilgrim was almost entirely absent, made one poor excuse for a LoS that seemed more for show than a genuine attempt at hunting wolves, and then got replaced by Vieira. The vote came too late to matter even if ejnomad had allowed it.
In Day 2, Nipple was much more active than Pilgrim. He made a case for lynching Sheep to Xardob (here). He voted for Ativan, then for Cal, argued with me and had some suspicions about CW. But despite trying to convince Xardob of Sheep’s wolfishness, he didn’t actually follow through with his own suspicious about Sheep until it looked like we’d have a no-lynch (or Vieira might seal the vote one way or the other). He even contradicts his case later, here stating that, “I thought Sheep being a wolf was just too obvious.”
Of the two behaviours, I find Nipple’s more suspicious because he seemed willing to vote according to whim, or to his own flawed logic, and I truly do believe almost all of his play on Day 2 was either misguided or malicious. That doesn’t negate the fact that that Pilgrim’s LoS was pants (for reference, his LoS post is here and that his absence was detrimental to the game. But right now, it’s just the way the scales are tipping.
Up until the middle of Day 2, I had this the other way around, in that I thought Nipple was posting pretty solidly, logically and was making some good arguments (that whole quote war thing notwithstanding), whilst Pilgrim was posting more suspiciously.
Onto Day 3, following Xardob’s death. Again (unfortunately) Pilgrim (now Vieira) didn’t post nearly as much as Nipple. It gives me less to go on but I’ll try looking at as much as possible. Short points where I can
Nipple’s claim of not having an aggressive pursuit playing style kinda contradicts his earlier attempted lynch of Ativan (and the reasoning he aggressively pursued that either Ativan or Adaham has to be a wolf and that lynching one would give information about the other).
A little further on, I question Nipple about who he actually thinks IS innocent, since he seems to have made a case for lynching just about everybody. His response is:
Again, most of this relates to Day 2, but contains more examples of Nipples’ flawed logic. Firstly, the whole “too obvious” thing. I’m struggling to see how Sheep’s guilt was “too obvious”.
Second, the belief that 1 of 2 players must be a wolf. There’s no actual reasoning behind this, other than Nipple not being sure of either one at the time. But he wasn’t sure about anybody. It could have been, “Ativan or Calodine” or “Adaham or Llandy”, because the only player Nipple never thought of as a wolf was Soot, who selfishly died the first night.
Slightly more telling is the fact that Nipple pushed for a vote on Ativan, who’d done basically nothing to warrant suspicion. As opposed to Adaham, who was making friendly overtures towards Xardob on Day 1, and then tried voting for himself on Day 2 (to no effect).
The reason the logic here is flawed is because there was absolutely no reason to believe that proving the innocence of either Ativan or Adaham would prove the guilt of the other. The guilt of one was never (AND STILL IS NOT) dependent on the innocence of the other.
Meanwhile, a little later on, Vieira pops up here. A couple of things to note.
Here Vieira wonders why Cal though Vieira was going to lynch him. He mentioned that he dropped an indication (I checked back, it’s a very vague comment that could have meant anything at the time) that he would probably not be voting Cal. There’s nothing of real substance here, but it’s Vieira’s first meaningful interaction in Day 3 (his Day 2 posts were mostly after the lynch and almost entirely along the lines of agreeing with Ativan’s post which clearly demonstrated Sheep’s ****-up)
Vieira questions Nipple about his opinion. Again, nothing noteworthy except for the fact it’s one of the few fully coherent posts that Vieira made.
Here, Vieira responds to something Adaham said, and this is right around the time (or just before) Vieira’s posts started to make less and less sense (as in, I actually had trouble understanding what he was trying to say and just reading his posts). A couple of things which can be gathered here:
Vieira thinks Adaham made some good arguments but doesn’t particularly think Calodine is wolfish. At the same time, although he thinks the night actions (Xardob dying) casts suspicion on Adaham, he doesn’t think Adaham has played particularly suspiciously (at this point I have to wonder if Vieira has properly read Day 2).
So, despite feeling that the night actions have put Adaham in a more suspicious place, yet not believing Adaham has played particularly suspiciously, Vieira doesn’t entirely disagree with Adaham’s suspicions and is now in turn more suspicious of Nipple. The reason given being that Nipple’s been playing rather erratically (this, at least, seems to be an accurate statement at this stage and I have to agree with it).
Taken as a whole, this post comes across as something suspicious wedged between innocuous discussion. Other than his late vote, it’s the first concrete suspicious thing I’ve seen Vieira say since taking over Pilgrim.
Fast forward a little, some stuff that’s not overly relevant to this particular WoT, and Nipple posts a crude summary of the previous days here. The recap is useful and fairly accurate (despite Nipple putting his own interpretation on a couple of things -- but then, I’ve done the same in many of my posts as it’s hard to be entirely objective). The most interesting part of his post is his conclusions. These involve:
A brief, three-sentence paragraph on why Cal and Ativan are probably innocent.
A much lengthier speculation on my own status, particularly around my vote switch from Adaham to Sheep. Which I had explained about three times at this point, but Nipple clearly still thought it was suspicious.
Paragraph on how Nipple still believes Adaham is suspicious, but my own behaviour makes him feel torn. But Adaham’s a more likely suspect as there’s less guesswork involved in his posts than with mine.
Notes CW became fixated on Adaham, could see CW in any pack, but feels there are better people to lynch.
Indicates the differences between Pilgrim and Vieira (specifically that Pilgrim was reluctant to vote Sheep, but that it could be explained by Vieira trying to win brownie points, which Nipple was also accused of doing).
A little further on, and we have another Vieira post, this one of a decent enough length to pick a few things from.
First, Adaham asks Vieira to clarify why the night actions cast suspicion on Adaham, which Vieira does.
Vieira then goes on to explain how Xardob’s death is actually a good thing for Adaham (it prevents the village from becoming polarised against the only two players who didn’t vote Sheep). He also describes his increased suspicion of Nipple, due to a last minute switch, and suggested a hypothetical reason for his switch. The reason is one possibility, and seems to be an elaboration on one of Ativan’s points here.
Vieira then goes on to ask CW why she thought Xardob was spreading discord, as he (Vieira) felt trying to push the village into voting a certain way isn’t necessarily a bad thing if the village is lacking a leader. Given how much Xardob was following Adaham’s vote and co-ordinating his lynches (other than his push for Pilgrim on Day 2, which Adaham didn’t go with as he had Calodine in his sights at that time) I’m not sure I would have called what Xardob was doing ‘leadership.’ Vieira says that he doesn’t feel Xardob was promoting discord, which I suppose is relative. I do believe there was a bit of discord in Xardob’s arguments for his lynches, but it’s hard to judge them in detail because Xardob wasn’t big on giving in-depth reasons for his pushes.
After Vieira asks Nipple to explain his thoughts about Xardob’s lynch, Nipple says:
Meanwhile, on Day 4…
So, it’s not worth spending the time looking at reasons for Xardob’s death immediately after it happened, but it is worth spending the time looking at reasons for Xardob’s death now, a whole game Day and Night later. Why’s that? Do you no longer feel that there are no better things to look at?
How about CW’s wrongful lynching? How about ALL of Ativan’s posts before he died? These things are IMMEDIATE and RELEVANT to the actual game right now. Dissecting reasons for Xardob’s death was IMMEDIATE and RELEVANT for the whole of Day 3, but for some reason you didn’t want to do that. BUT NOW YOU DO.
I am trying really, really, REALLY hard to be objective here, but you are contradicting yourself so goddamn much that I just don’t know what to think other than you’re maliciously trying to obfuscate, misdirect and deceive.
I’m going to try to keep this as objective as possible, but some of this will include vibes and gut-feelings. I have considerable bias against both players because they’ve both done some dodgy ****, but the majority of said dodgyness relates almost entirely to Day 2. And all I got out of Day 2 was that both of them were suspicious. I’m going to look at posts coming out of Day 2 following Sheep’s lynch, and then through CW’s lynch on Day 3, and what’s been done/said on Day 4 so far.
So, end of Day 2 was interesting for many reasons. Until five minutes before the deadline, the votes for lynching were tied. Here’s how they stood at the time:
Sheep (Calodine, Ativan, CW, Llandy)
Calodine (Adaham, Xardob, Nipple, Sheep)
Vieira (not voted)
Within the space of five seconds, both Nipple and Vieira voted for Sheep. In Nipple’s case it came as a last minute change of vote. In Vieira’s case, it was a matter of actually getting his act together to vote at all.
By the tone of Vieira’s post, it seemed obvious his intention was to vote for Sheep, even if he did it too late for it to matter. Given that Vieira had literally only just been subbed in and given some 36 hours or so to catch up on the thread, I think if he was a wolf, he would have had very little to lose by lynching an innocent. Or he could have knowingly lynched a wolf who was playing badly as a way of trying to win the trust of the village. Both scenarios are plausible.
However, given Vieira’s posts on Day 3 before he was replaced by Magorian, I’m not sure he’s the type of guy who would have taken that risk. His playstyle seemed very unsure and cautious. The vibe that I got from him wasn’t that he was purposely trying to avoid or deflect attention (as I thought his predecessor was), but rather he was in over his head. It was pretty obvious by the end of Day 2 that some heavy stuff had gone down, apparent camps were starting to form, there were some rather heated arguments, and Vieira seemed reluctant to (or unable to) grasp everything and make his own thoughts clear.
Nipple’s vote came as more of a surprise, but given how he’d been floating between votes on Day 2, in retrospect it doesn’t seem quite as surprising. Since Day 1, Nipple stated that no-lynches were bad and reiterated this reasoning when questioned about why he changed his vote at the very last second.
I do feel, though, that Nipple pulled himself out of a bad situation pretty fast and pretty conveniently (granted, the situation he wound up in wasn’t much better). If Nipple was a wolf, then pulling his vote off Cal and opting to lynch the alpha wolf was a risky thing to do. It left the wolves a player down and heavily weighted the Sheep voters against the non-Sheep-voters, especially given how Vieira finally voted. But then again, the same logic applies to Nipple as to Vieira; if a wolf, he could have used the last-minute vote chance to earn a bit of slack from the Sheep-voters.
It’s probably not very fair of me to bring the rest of Day 2 into this, but I’m trying to get past fairness and into the realm of practicality.
In Day 2, Pilgrim was almost entirely absent, made one poor excuse for a LoS that seemed more for show than a genuine attempt at hunting wolves, and then got replaced by Vieira. The vote came too late to matter even if ejnomad had allowed it.
In Day 2, Nipple was much more active than Pilgrim. He made a case for lynching Sheep to Xardob (here). He voted for Ativan, then for Cal, argued with me and had some suspicions about CW. But despite trying to convince Xardob of Sheep’s wolfishness, he didn’t actually follow through with his own suspicious about Sheep until it looked like we’d have a no-lynch (or Vieira might seal the vote one way or the other). He even contradicts his case later, here stating that, “I thought Sheep being a wolf was just too obvious.”
Of the two behaviours, I find Nipple’s more suspicious because he seemed willing to vote according to whim, or to his own flawed logic, and I truly do believe almost all of his play on Day 2 was either misguided or malicious. That doesn’t negate the fact that that Pilgrim’s LoS was pants (for reference, his LoS post is here and that his absence was detrimental to the game. But right now, it’s just the way the scales are tipping.
Up until the middle of Day 2, I had this the other way around, in that I thought Nipple was posting pretty solidly, logically and was making some good arguments (that whole quote war thing notwithstanding), whilst Pilgrim was posting more suspiciously.
Onto Day 3, following Xardob’s death. Again (unfortunately) Pilgrim (now Vieira) didn’t post nearly as much as Nipple. It gives me less to go on but I’ll try looking at as much as possible. Short points where I can
Nipplemelter said:
Nipple’s claim of not having an aggressive pursuit playing style kinda contradicts his earlier attempted lynch of Ativan (and the reasoning he aggressively pursued that either Ativan or Adaham has to be a wolf and that lynching one would give information about the other).
A little further on, I question Nipple about who he actually thinks IS innocent, since he seems to have made a case for lynching just about everybody. His response is:
Nipplemelter said:
Again, most of this relates to Day 2, but contains more examples of Nipples’ flawed logic. Firstly, the whole “too obvious” thing. I’m struggling to see how Sheep’s guilt was “too obvious”.
Second, the belief that 1 of 2 players must be a wolf. There’s no actual reasoning behind this, other than Nipple not being sure of either one at the time. But he wasn’t sure about anybody. It could have been, “Ativan or Calodine” or “Adaham or Llandy”, because the only player Nipple never thought of as a wolf was Soot, who selfishly died the first night.
Slightly more telling is the fact that Nipple pushed for a vote on Ativan, who’d done basically nothing to warrant suspicion. As opposed to Adaham, who was making friendly overtures towards Xardob on Day 1, and then tried voting for himself on Day 2 (to no effect).
The reason the logic here is flawed is because there was absolutely no reason to believe that proving the innocence of either Ativan or Adaham would prove the guilt of the other. The guilt of one was never (AND STILL IS NOT) dependent on the innocence of the other.
Meanwhile, a little later on, Vieira pops up here. A couple of things to note.
Vieira said:
Here Vieira wonders why Cal though Vieira was going to lynch him. He mentioned that he dropped an indication (I checked back, it’s a very vague comment that could have meant anything at the time) that he would probably not be voting Cal. There’s nothing of real substance here, but it’s Vieira’s first meaningful interaction in Day 3 (his Day 2 posts were mostly after the lynch and almost entirely along the lines of agreeing with Ativan’s post which clearly demonstrated Sheep’s ****-up)
Vieira said:
Vieira questions Nipple about his opinion. Again, nothing noteworthy except for the fact it’s one of the few fully coherent posts that Vieira made.
Vieira said:
Here, Vieira responds to something Adaham said, and this is right around the time (or just before) Vieira’s posts started to make less and less sense (as in, I actually had trouble understanding what he was trying to say and just reading his posts). A couple of things which can be gathered here:
Vieira thinks Adaham made some good arguments but doesn’t particularly think Calodine is wolfish. At the same time, although he thinks the night actions (Xardob dying) casts suspicion on Adaham, he doesn’t think Adaham has played particularly suspiciously (at this point I have to wonder if Vieira has properly read Day 2).
So, despite feeling that the night actions have put Adaham in a more suspicious place, yet not believing Adaham has played particularly suspiciously, Vieira doesn’t entirely disagree with Adaham’s suspicions and is now in turn more suspicious of Nipple. The reason given being that Nipple’s been playing rather erratically (this, at least, seems to be an accurate statement at this stage and I have to agree with it).
Taken as a whole, this post comes across as something suspicious wedged between innocuous discussion. Other than his late vote, it’s the first concrete suspicious thing I’ve seen Vieira say since taking over Pilgrim.
Fast forward a little, some stuff that’s not overly relevant to this particular WoT, and Nipple posts a crude summary of the previous days here. The recap is useful and fairly accurate (despite Nipple putting his own interpretation on a couple of things -- but then, I’ve done the same in many of my posts as it’s hard to be entirely objective). The most interesting part of his post is his conclusions. These involve:
A brief, three-sentence paragraph on why Cal and Ativan are probably innocent.
A much lengthier speculation on my own status, particularly around my vote switch from Adaham to Sheep. Which I had explained about three times at this point, but Nipple clearly still thought it was suspicious.
Paragraph on how Nipple still believes Adaham is suspicious, but my own behaviour makes him feel torn. But Adaham’s a more likely suspect as there’s less guesswork involved in his posts than with mine.
Notes CW became fixated on Adaham, could see CW in any pack, but feels there are better people to lynch.
Indicates the differences between Pilgrim and Vieira (specifically that Pilgrim was reluctant to vote Sheep, but that it could be explained by Vieira trying to win brownie points, which Nipple was also accused of doing).
A little further on, and we have another Vieira post, this one of a decent enough length to pick a few things from.
First, Adaham asks Vieira to clarify why the night actions cast suspicion on Adaham, which Vieira does.
Vieira then goes on to explain how Xardob’s death is actually a good thing for Adaham (it prevents the village from becoming polarised against the only two players who didn’t vote Sheep). He also describes his increased suspicion of Nipple, due to a last minute switch, and suggested a hypothetical reason for his switch. The reason is one possibility, and seems to be an elaboration on one of Ativan’s points here.
Vieira then goes on to ask CW why she thought Xardob was spreading discord, as he (Vieira) felt trying to push the village into voting a certain way isn’t necessarily a bad thing if the village is lacking a leader. Given how much Xardob was following Adaham’s vote and co-ordinating his lynches (other than his push for Pilgrim on Day 2, which Adaham didn’t go with as he had Calodine in his sights at that time) I’m not sure I would have called what Xardob was doing ‘leadership.’ Vieira says that he doesn’t feel Xardob was promoting discord, which I suppose is relative. I do believe there was a bit of discord in Xardob’s arguments for his lynches, but it’s hard to judge them in detail because Xardob wasn’t big on giving in-depth reasons for his pushes.
After Vieira asks Nipple to explain his thoughts about Xardob’s lynch, Nipple says:
Nipplemelter said:
Meanwhile, on Day 4…
Nipplemelter said:
So, it’s not worth spending the time looking at reasons for Xardob’s death immediately after it happened, but it is worth spending the time looking at reasons for Xardob’s death now, a whole game Day and Night later. Why’s that? Do you no longer feel that there are no better things to look at?
How about CW’s wrongful lynching? How about ALL of Ativan’s posts before he died? These things are IMMEDIATE and RELEVANT to the actual game right now. Dissecting reasons for Xardob’s death was IMMEDIATE and RELEVANT for the whole of Day 3, but for some reason you didn’t want to do that. BUT NOW YOU DO.
I am trying really, really, REALLY hard to be objective here, but you are contradicting yourself so goddamn much that I just don’t know what to think other than you’re maliciously trying to obfuscate, misdirect and deceive.
"Hang in" is a relative term. I was barely here, and my contributions yesterday didn't actually affect the game...
Only if you don't know why I was doing them. It sure as hell was wolfish. But the point was just to force the issue. If I could speed along Cal's thoughts either way, he'd vote for Adaham sooner. I didn't care if he thought I was the other wolf, and nobody else mattered. Of course, he blazed ahead and voted before I could really make any case, but yeah...
Nipplemelter said:Pharaoh X Llandy said:
So... can we see what you had so far?
Meh, I think Magorian did more harm to himself than good, but Cado was being Mr. Grumpyhead.
Only if you don't know why I was doing them. It sure as hell was wolfish. But the point was just to force the issue. If I could speed along Cal's thoughts either way, he'd vote for Adaham sooner. I didn't care if he thought I was the other wolf, and nobody else mattered. Of course, he blazed ahead and voted before I could really make any case, but yeah...
