Werewolf LXXII: Now There's the Truth of It! (Game Thread)

[Gwathagor]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

And that's the ingenuinity of this game! If this works (remains to be seen), I'll be suggesting we make this kind of games more often as now it seems that one really needs to post to stay on with the game.

Blast. There goes my usual strategy of saying as little as possible. It will be interesting to see how this affects folks' playing styles, since it behooves us all, to some extent, to TRY to attract attention. Even though I know meta-game reasoning is a bad idea, I'm going to be tempted to compare how players are playing in this game with their ordinary playing styles.

It also occurs to me, on another note, that it will be much easier for the wolves to get someone lynched during the day without attracting attention, and much, much harder to assign blame for a player's lynch to any one or two other players. All the wolves have to do is ignore the intended victim. So - time to reassess how we analyze votes. Who are people trying to keep around? Who are they not mentioning in their posts? Et cetera.

EDIT: Crossed since post #58.

[Pitchwife]

Originally Posted by the late Gwathagor

It also occurs to me, on another note, that it will be much easier for the wolves to get someone lynched during the day without attracting attention, and much, much harder to assign blame for a player's lynch to any one or two other players. All the wolves have to do is ignore the intended victim. So - time to reassess how we analyze votes. Who are people trying to keep around? Who are they not mentioning in their posts? Et cetera.

A very good point, I think, and one that bears some thinking about. What would be the consequences of this game's dynamics for wolvish voting behaviour? Would they actively vote to keep their packmates around? Not as long as none of them is in serious danger of getting lynched, of course, but otherwise? Also, is wolf-on-wolf more or less likely in this game, or would there be no difference? Thoughts, anybody?

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Pitchwife

I don't quite get where all this wave of trust in Nog comes from. As Nerwen just said concerning Form, it's not like our deceased innocents knew anything, they could have been just as mistaken as everybody else.

Lottie's suggestion at #213

Originally Posted by Lottie

You'd almost think she was a seer and dreamed him...maybe that's why the wolves killed her, thinking she *was* the seer.

is more logical. Still highly speculative though– they could have killed Nienna for a completely different reason. After all, she was a good player who also wasn't likely to be Ranger–protected.

Originally Posted by Pitchwife

And I don't at all like the way he acts like he knows what is best for us all and everybody who dares to disagree is working against the common good, hence wolvish.

*shrugs* Nogrod does that whatever he is, Pitch. Had you really not noticed before?

Originally Posted by Pitchwife

A very good point, I think, and one that bears some thinking about. What would be the consequences of this game's dynamics for wolvish voting behaviour? Would they actively vote to keep their packmates around? Not as long as none of them is in serious danger of getting lynched, of course, but otherwise? Also, is wolf-on-wolf more or less likely in this game, or would there be no difference? Thoughts, anybody?

What does wolf-on-wolf even mean in this game? If it's just stating suspicions, then I think it's more likely, because it doesn't cost the wolves quite as much as if they were expected to back said suspicions up with a lynch-vote. (Still might result in getting a packmate lynched by default, though).

[Pitchwife]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

*shrugs* Nogrod does that whatever he is, Pitch. Had you really not noticed before?

No, how could I? That's why I said it wasn't really new, I suppose...
I agree, however, that Lottie has a point there. It also speaks for him that he was the only one who voted for our poor deceased Gwath quite early on.
Which reminds me...

Votes for the dead

Gwath (known innocent):
- Nog

Nienna (known innocent, Hunter):
- Nog (1)
- Lottie (2)
- Izzy (3)

Mira (known wolf):
- Form (1)
- Izzy (2)
- Fea (3)

Votes by the dead
(just summing up for Mira and Nienna, who have been analysed by Lottie and Glirdan above)

Gwath (known innocent):
- Eonwe (2)
- Nog (3)
- Brinn (2)
- Form (-)

Nienna (known innocent, Hunter):
- Rune (2)
- wilwa (5)
- Form (4)
- Nog (5)

Mira (known wolf):
- Glirdan (3)
- Fea (2)
- Form (2)
- Lottie (3)

Mira's stated reasons for her votes:

++Glirdan Also don't want him to get lynched Day 1. Poor kid never gets to play this game anymore.

Understandable, I think.

++Fea She's much too amusing to kill off this early.

I absolutely concur.

++Form I really don't think a wolf would slip up and post before they were supposed to. Especially one as experienced as Form.

This is interesting - a defense of Form that also just happens to work as a self-defense. Now, of course, we know that one of the Wolves did slip up exactly like that. It's also interesting that Form gave a similar reason for his vote for Mira.

++Lottie No real reason, just have an okay feeling about her.

Nothing suspicious there, as far as I can tell - but again, looking for connections, it's interesting that Form also voted for Lottie. From a wolf, it might be a smart move to vote confidence for someone who has suspected you just a wee bit but not seemed terribly eager to lynch you - makes you look more innocentish, like "See? I've got no reason to fear you".

EDIT: x-ed with Steve

[Pitchwife]

Now please, people, don't go talking all at the same time! It's too much action for my poor old nerves...
Might as well go walk the dogs. See you later.

[Eönwë]

OK, before I do anything else:

Originally Posted by Loslote

#54: Doesn't really commit to Pitchie's suggestion to kill crazy and confusing people;

Firstly, as Pitch has already said, it's the other way around. Also, I don't think any of our two posts were meant totally seriously. Next you'll suggest that Pitchwife was going to create a craziness scale and vote (wait, no, lynch ) people higher up.

#60, #65, #69, #72, #77,#82, and #85 are all debating with Nog about suspecting vs. trusting. I don't know about anyone else, but I found that annoying to read through the first time (when I thought dl was fast approaching and was trying to get caught up) and extremely suspicious the next few times. Steve explains his earlier posts; qualifies his earlier posts; and flip-flops a lot, all the while arguing with Nog.
Firstly, the last of those posts was made when there were three hours until the planned DL. Three hours! If you miscalculated the time then you shouldn't attack me just because you were in a bad mood. Anyway, all I was saying in all of those posts is that in this game we're given a new weapon against the wolves. Why waste it and try to turn this into a normal game when
(a) We haven't yet explored this new style of voting; and
(b) We can't turn this into a normal game anyway because we're voting for the opposite thing?

That's not to say that no-one should post their suspicions (as I have said countless times before now). That's what a large proportion of posts are anyway. That's what needs to be done in order to do anything in this game. It's just that I don't think these fake votes are necessary.

And then everyone assumes that I'm trying to stifle people's opinions?

And since when did Nogrod become He Who Only Speaks The Truth? It seems that everyone has just blindly followed him, because he suggested that we should mention who we find suspicious, which is what we do anyway.

However, I will say this- Yesterday there were quite a few people who didn't mention who they thought was suspicious and in this way maybe Nogrod had the right idea. It was just that I thought a fake vote was going too far.

Originally Posted by Loslote

He suspects Nienna because she "seems to be agreeing lot rather than making any new points." <-*coughdidyoureadherpostsatallcough*.

Have you? A lot of her posts are just agreeing with people. Look at this. #51 is a good point, but #61 is just the obvious (which I'll admit I did neglect to mention in my post just before). Then she comes in with a post count which isn't really that useful. The she does make quite good point in the next post (#90), but I don't think I read that at the time (and she basically just continuing along #51's line of thought anyway). The rest of her posts were after my list.

Originally Posted by Loslote

He says that Pitchie looks "innocent who just overdid it a bit on the non-"Nog-quasi-voting" front." <- HE overdid it?

Ok, I admit it, not only was I hypocritical there, but wrong. Happy now?

Originally Posted by Loslote

And finally, in #190: votes Izzy "because Gwath seems more suspicious."

Well, if you look at my list, Izzy was on the innocent side. On my vote post, I seem to have said "x-ed with Fea" rather than "since Fea". Seeing that Pitch (who I thought more innocent) had got Fea's vote, I wanted to save Izzy too, as it didn't seem like anyone would be voting Gwath (on my suspicious list, by the way). Anything wrong with that?



Now to actually start the Day...