[Path-Shaper]

It is day 2. 24 hours remaining.

7 Players remaining: alt146, dktorode, Edrigan, Grief, HMQB, Mentalist, Silencer
4 votes to lynch, 4 to go to night.

No one has voted.

This post has been edited by Path-Shaper: 13 July 2010 - 03:32 PM

[Edrigan]

Two Night Kills?!?

That's what D'rek meant by a 'fast game'....
Damn.

Hindsight 20/20 , we should have double-lynched day 1.

So either we double-lynch today and hope to hit a bastage or we're pretty much toast?

[alt146]

Edrigan, on 13 July 2010 - 04:30 PM, said:

Two Night Kills?!?

That's what D'rek meant by a 'fast game'....
Damn.

Hindsight 20/20 , we should have double-lynched day 1.

So either we double-lynch today and hope to hit a bastage or we're pretty much toast?

Why do you assume it was two night kills? The first thing I thought when I read the scene was some idiot had used a vig on night one. I guess two NKs is possible, but I am very curious as to why that is the conclusion you jumped to.

[Grief]

Ok, 2 deaths. If they can double kill again, rather than it being a kill and a vig, then we have to hit scum today.

Assuming they can double kill again(WCS)


If we lynch once:

6 players left after the lynch. If we do hit scum, and there are two deaths, then we are 3v1.

If we lynch twice:

5 players left after lynch. If we hit one scum, and they can double kill again, then it's 2v1.

If we lynch 3-5 times:

Game ends today. The only benefit of 3 lynches is if there isn't a double kill tonight. If we found scum within the first 4 lynches, we could lynch 5 times.

Option one gives us 1 lynch to hit 1 scum.
Option two gives us 2 lynches to hit 1 scum.
Option three gives us 5 lynches to hit 2 scum.

Option one leaves us at 3v1 the next day. This gives us 2 lynches tommorow, rather than one.
Option two leaves us at 2v1 the next day. This only gives us 1 lynch tommorow.
Option three, game is decided today.

I don't like option 3. Option 3 means that we have to hit both scum today, without CFs. Finding the second scum, after you've got a CF, is definetely easier-so worth the extra night, imo.

The advantage of option 1 is that, if we do hit scum first time, we'll have a scum CF, and two lynches.

I think Option two is the best option though. I think this because I think it'll be harder to find scum today, than tommorow, since tommorow(if we are successful) we will have a scum CF.

So, I think we should lynch twice today.

[Path-Shaper]

Since someone asked so nicely, there are basically no useful hints in the scenes. But feel free to try and puzzle out the unhelpful stuff. I'll give you a cookie if you're right.

This post has been edited by Path-Shaper: 13 July 2010 - 05:36 PM

[Edrigan]

alt146, on 13 July 2010 - 04:53 PM, said:

Why do you assume it was two night kills? The first thing I thought when I read the scene was some idiot had used a vig on night one. I guess two NKs is possible, but I am very curious as to why that is the conclusion you jumped to.

Because I always assume the worse -
And because I was under the impression that vigs kill during the day , ie right in the open. Don't ask why, but thats what I always thought.

Don't try to bait me into admiting something, Alt. Its why this alt-less game makes things complicated.
There have been a lot of examples where people have clearly with-held their vig abilities, and even decided to die without using them - yet the first thought that comes into your mind is someone viging on Day 1? You -might- be right, but that is not the worse case senario here, is it?

[Edrigan]

alt146, on 13 July 2010 - 04:53 PM, said:

Why do you assume it was two night kills? The first thing I thought when I read the scene was some idiot had used a vig on night one. I guess two NKs is possible, but I am very curious as to why that is the conclusion you jumped to.

Path-Shaper, on 13 July 2010 - 05:15 PM, said:

Since someone asked so nicely, there are basically no useful hints in the scenes. But feel free to try and puzzle out the unhelpful stuff. I'll give you a cookie if you're right.

In case you still wonder if it crossed my mind, Alt-
Your answer is right there.



EDIT: You still rank high in my suspect list. Tried to bait me a couple times, asking subtle and vague questions and pointing out you're geting subtle and vague answers... I expect you pretty soon will try to 'build' up a case on me, and you need more fodder, right? Let's dance, partner, I'm right here, waiting.

This post has been edited by Edrigan: 13 July 2010 - 06:41 PM

[Tapper]

Path-Shaper, on 13 July 2010 - 05:15 PM, said:

Since someone asked so nicely, there are basically no useful hints in the scenes. But feel free to try and puzzle out the unhelpful stuff. I'll give you a cookie if you're right.

Oh, pick meeee, pick meeeeeee, pick me! * jumps up and down, waving *

[Tapper]

17 hours and 50 minutes or so remain, I'm off to bed, have fun!

This post has been edited by Tapper: 13 July 2010 - 09:41 PM

[hmqb]

I agree with Grief again here, where today we have a 2/7 chance of hitting scum. And a 5/7 chance of ending up tomorrow with 2 vs 2
Now we got a much better chance at hitting scum today, but if it so happens that we don't it will be game over.
So I think we gotta go with lynching twice and getting started soon, and either way its of vital importance that we hit at least one scum today, and our best chances for that is by lynching twice.

Now who I'm mainly suspicious of is Silencer, he just seems to be trying quite hard to protect himself.

Don't really have many other suspicions except maybe Edrigan since he seems like hes accusing a lot of people, but not really this is just a slight suspicion.

[hmqb]

Though about it a lot and I'm willing to take the chance.

Vote Silencer

[Silencer]

Edrigan, on 13 July 2010 - 06:35 PM, said:

alt146, on 13 July 2010 - 04:53 PM, said:

Why do you assume it was two night kills? The first thing I thought when I read the scene was some idiot had used a vig on night one. I guess two NKs is possible, but I am very curious as to why that is the conclusion you jumped to.

Path-Shaper, on 13 July 2010 - 05:15 PM, said:

Since someone asked so nicely, there are basically no useful hints in the scenes. But feel free to try and puzzle out the unhelpful stuff. I'll give you a cookie if you're right.

In case you still wonder if it crossed my mind, Alt-
Your answer is right there.



EDIT: You still rank high in my suspect list. Tried to bait me a couple times, asking subtle and vague questions and pointing out you're geting subtle and vague answers... I expect you pretty soon will try to 'build' up a case on me, and you need more fodder, right? Let's dance, partner, I'm right here, waiting.

Well, to be fair, "no useful hints in the scenes" actually lends credence to alt's point. Based on the scene, I figured two NK's, as it seemed very clear-cut that there was a betrayal and that, well, a huge fight leads to casualties, yes? But if there are no hints in the scene, it's up in the air as it could very well have been a vig.
I think drawing anything out of that is WIFOM however, especially with PS's statement.

Alright, as for me, this is an altless game, but most of you know me well enough by now to know that I'm a cautious bastard. I figure that, most of the time, the inno team is best served by my survival rather than by my death - unless I'm causing unncessary confusion, in which case not so much.
However, I'm well aware that when I posted my thoughts on Vengy, and didn't vote (because it was early enough in the day that voting then would have been a bit premature, giving scum a free ride, and the post I quoted was not exactly a case) I basically opened myself up to serious questioning if someone should vote Vengeance and I later also voted for him.
The problem here is that PB took advantage of that opening (intentionally or otherwise, I can't say) and so when I was leaving and wanted to drop a vote on the best 'case' around, his and dkt's vote basically made Vengy the only viable option anyway, I knew I'd get flack for sitting back and waiting for someone else to start the train. So I made a post pointing out that I knew this - which is perhaps rightly picked up as me covering my ass. Better that, I figure, than doing it with no explanation (indeed, even when I posted the explanation I was not sold on a Vengeance lynch) and then doing this post retroactively to explain my actions rather than my post.
Then, when time was literally up and I had no better candidate, I voted Vengeance and went to bed. Made the best of a bad situation, and if that gets me lynched, well, there was nothing more I could do expect throw down a reckless vote early in day one on a single-post 'case' which I wasn't sure of. Yeah, that sounds like a great alternative.

[Silencer]

Xpost with the vote - take the 'chance'? Being a bit dramatic there for a single vote, aren't you? >.<

[hmqb]

Silencer, on 13 July 2010 - 10:32 PM, said:

Xpost with the vote - take the 'chance'? Being a bit dramatic there for a single vote, aren't you? >.<

Ohh im all about dramaticness...
I get down on my knees and pronounce to the world "I still think he's guilty"
or might be guilty ;~

[Silencer]

Yes, well, I'm going to go back and have a look at the people who got NK'd to see if I can find some interactions - obviously I was chatting with PB yesterday, don't remember much from the Dude though...

Going to the shops first, so I'll catch you all later.

[Edrigan]

Silencer, on 13 July 2010 - 10:32 PM, said:

Well, to be fair, "no useful hints in the scenes" actually lends credence to alt's point. Based on the scene, I figured two NK's, as it seemed very clear-cut that there was a betrayal and that, well, a huge fight leads to casualties, yes? But if there are no hints in the scene, it's up in the air as it could very well have been a vig.
I think drawing anything out of that is WIFOM however, especially with PS's statement.

You missed the point. I wasn't refering to the underlined part of PSs post.It just made it more obvious.

Now...

Sigh...

I've been around for a while, and only now thats 01:20am people start to show up... I kinda feel like DKT when he's about to leave the office and the thread starts to come alive...

Anyway, before I go to bed, I'm gonna


vote HMQB

Because::::
-1: He missed the part where I told Alt not to put words in my mouth, and now comes up with me 'accusing' a lot of people, when the only thing I've done is offer my suspect list , and my point of view for pretty much everyone, something he has failed to do so as well.
-2: For a guy who couldn't wait for a game to start and being all hyped up, he's been relegiously low posting, and offering nothing significant, or shedding no light what so ever.
-3: Quoting Silencer and saying he's playing it 'safe' then admit he finds him suspicious but again agreeing with him and voting on Vengeance.
-4: Again saying Silencer is his main suspect, and only dropping a vote on him after half an hour of 'thought' with no other reason apart from him playing it 'too safe' when there are others around who are playing it -safer- than Silencer.



Who could be his partner? Can't say , at this point.
If its Ment, then there's trouble, since the only grounds we have right now to lynch him is for being Ment and low posting.
Could be Alt, due to his very very very carefull posts and choice of words on everything he says.
Could be DKT due to him not actually sticking his guns on someone at this point, but simply taking small stabs left and right, but not deep enough to draw blood.
Could be Silencer, due to distancing.
Could be Grief, but he gets the last spot, due to HMQB continuesly agreeing with everything he says- very very dangerous play if both are scum, so I find that the lowest likely pair.


Off to bed.
Honestly.
Seriously.

[Grief]

Kind of dislike that silencer is describing his own usualyl play-style. Meta arguments are weak, and I don't like that he's essentially justifying something people are calling him scummy for with the argument "I always do this".

He mentioned this earlier in passing. It seemed a bit off to me. One thing about altless games is that meta arguments like "I think that X is scum because he plays like Y when he is inno" are not uncommon. I don't like that he made the point of mentioning this is how he always plays, because it seems like he's given thought to it, and is making sure to try and fit in with how he is seen as playing when innocent, or at least, making sure we are aware of the fact that he is playing like he does when innocent.

[hmqb]

Edrigan, on 13 July 2010 - 11:07 PM, said:

Silencer, on 13 July 2010 - 10:32 PM, said:

Well, to be fair, "no useful hints in the scenes" actually lends credence to alt's point. Based on the scene, I figured two NK's, as it seemed very clear-cut that there was a betrayal and that, well, a huge fight leads to casualties, yes? But if there are no hints in the scene, it's up in the air as it could very well have been a vig.
I think drawing anything out of that is WIFOM however, especially with PS's statement.

You missed the point. I wasn't refering to the underlined part of PSs post.It just made it more obvious.

Now...

Sigh...

I've been around for a while, and only now thats 01:20am people start to show up... I kinda feel like DKT when he's about to leave the office and the thread starts to come alive...

Anyway, before I go to bed, I'm gonna


vote HMQB

Because::::
-1: He missed the part where I told Alt not to put words in my mouth, and now comes up with me 'accusing' a lot of people, when the only thing I've done is offer my suspect list , and my point of view for pretty much everyone, something he has failed to do so as well.
-2: For a guy who couldn't wait for a game to start and being all hyped up, he's been relegiously low posting, and offering nothing significant, or shedding no light what so ever.
-3: Quoting Silencer and saying he's playing it 'safe' then admit he finds him suspicious but again agreeing with him and voting on Vengeance.
-4: Again saying Silencer is his main suspect, and only dropping a vote on him after half an hour of 'thought' with no other reason apart from him playing it 'too safe' when there are others around who are playing it -safer- than Silencer.



Who could be his partner? Can't say , at this point.
If its Ment, then there's trouble, since the only grounds we have right now to lynch him is for being Ment and low posting.
Could be Alt, due to his very very very carefull posts and choice of words on everything he says.
Could be DKT due to him not actually sticking his guns on someone at this point, but simply taking small stabs left and right, but not deep enough to draw blood.
Could be Silencer, due to distancing.
Could be Grief, but he gets the last spot, due to HMQB continuesly agreeing with everything he says- very very dangerous play if both are scum, so I find that the lowest likely pair.


Off to bed.
Honestly.
Seriously.

Oh, and also #5 when I name you a suspect.

No but I just put it out there that theirs a chance you might be scum because I'm pretty sure I saw you being a little offensive (Exp. voting for me now)
I've been busy with conselouering (not a word) just started this week, been doing as much as I can.
As for the silencer thing, its just a vote, and you seem a little defensive of him (More then he was of himself, lolz)

But if you feel the need to vote for me go for it

[Grief]

Got to say, HMQB, although he accuses silencer of it, also seems to be playing safely. For one I'd like to see a bit of evidence to back up the opinions he expresses. Though I agree that Silencer is playing safely, he doesn't really explain he thinks this, or offer examples(though he mentioned suspecting Silencer yesterday, so is at least consistent). Kind of seems just to be coasting. I find it hard to get a read on him-he's pretty agreeable, but doesn't contribute anything really original, or give that much explanation to his feelings. Could be scum, but it's hard to tell with so little explanation, and there isn't really any evidence that he isn't just voicing opinions to be seen to be contributing, or acting solely on gut.

Please explain why you think Silencer is trying hard to protect himself, compared to anyone else-I agree, but would like to hear your reasons for it, because at the moment, you just seem ot be stating a general feeling without backing it up.

[hmqb]

ok grief, and since i suck at using quote I put Silencers stuff in red
"Yes, well, I'm going to go back and have a look at the people who got NK'd to see if I can find some interactions - obviously I was chatting with PB yesterday, don't remember much from the Dude though...

Going to the shops first, so I'll catch you all later."

He seems here not to stay on topic very long of him being scum and goes to look at some pretty obvious interactions, really nothing convincing here.

"Xpost with the vote - take the 'chance'? Being a bit dramatic there for a single vote, aren't you? >.<"

Ok, not much to say here just agian trying to make it not seem like a big deal, but hell I did that too, so...

"Well, to be fair, "no useful hints in the scenes" actually lends credence to alt's point. Based on the scene, I figured two NK's, as it seemed very clear-cut that there was a betrayal and that, well, a huge fight leads to casualties, yes? But if there are no hints in the scene, it's up in the air as it could very well have been a vig.
I think drawing anything out of that is WIFOM however, especially with PS's statement.

Alright, as for me, this is an altless game, but most of you know me well enough by now to know that I'm a cautious bastard. I figure that, most of the time, the inno team is best served by my survival rather than by my death - unless I'm causing unncessary confusion, in which case not so much.
However, I'm well aware that when I posted my thoughts on Vengy, and didn't vote (because it was early enough in the day that voting then would have been a bit premature, giving scum a free ride, and the post I quoted was not exactly a case) I basically opened myself up to serious questioning if someone should vote Vengeance and I later also voted for him.
The problem here is that PB took advantage of that opening (intentionally or otherwise, I can't say) and so when I was leaving and wanted to drop a vote on the best 'case' around, his and dkt's vote basically made Vengy the only viable option anyway, I knew I'd get flack for sitting back and waiting for someone else to start the train. So I made a post pointing out that I knew this - which is perhaps rightly picked up as me covering my ass. Better that, I figure, than doing it with no explanation (indeed, even when I posted the explanation I was not sold on a Vengeance lynch) and then doing this post retroactively to explain my actions rather than my post.
Then, when time was literally up and I had no better candidate, I voted Vengeance and went to bed. Made the best of a bad situation, and if that gets me lynched, well, there was nothing more I could do expect throw down a reckless vote early in day one on a single-post 'case' which I wasn't sure of. Yeah, that sounds like a great alternative. "

It seems like here he goes to say at first that, oh you guys know me I'm cautious, but If he was Innocent I'm not sure he would bring that part up. Next he says hes more valuable alive but throws in a modest statement saying "Oh but If I cause Confusion then maybe not" it seems like hes just trying to avoid notice maybe seem like a good guy. He then goes on to talk about veng that all makes sense, but one thing is I didn't vote for him because he voted for Veng and it seems like if hes defending himself from me he might just want to focus on what I think he's mostly scummy for. Then at the end states even more his reasons for Vengy maybe trying to get people to agree with him at the end of his post, so at the end there like "oh ya that makes sense" Just basically this whole segment only half a sentence covers his defense on him being too cautious, and this is almost like a uncertain defense.

"Well, as I said earlier, I'm off for the night, and won't be back before deadline. So I'm just gonna man up and vote with my gut (and damn the consequences!) before I leave:

Vote Vengeance

For earlier reasons, and the fact that my suspicions have been reinforced by others' reactions to Vengy's post. Here's hoping we can get it right for once! "

Seems like he prolonged the voting but its all understandable and he covers the reasons

"As I said, if I can't cope with the fallout from that mistake, assuming I vote Vengeance, I shouldn't be playing the game, should I? It's a self-serving sentiment, rather than a statement, anyway. The statement just points out why I'm not sold on voting Vengy, though I see where you're coming from.

And as I said, I don't think the one/two lynch thing at this point is a case of want, either way, but a case of time. XD"

A good humored post but I think here he might be hinting that he doesn't want us to focus too much on how many people to lynch, since he has offer practically nothing in this subject. It seems like hes trying to get us not to focus on it. Oh and this post was a responce to
"This is a rather self serving statement Silencer... well worthy *of dropping a vote-bomb on your ass!" Dktorode
This was a response to

"Lol, nice one. And yeah, you're normally a vocal bastard dkt, I admit.

I seriously doubt we will get two lynches today. Especially as I'm out before day ends (about 2 hours now, I believe, maybe 3) and I have no idea when the yanks/brits get on, but it's probably going to be (perhaps conveniently for some) after day times. One lynch we can manage, but the question of who still remains.

Voting for the sake of a lynch is what normally screws us over, I admit, but a lynch is still a lynch, and gives info no matter the reasons (even if it's info that x, y and z were all willing to vote to get a lynch just for the sake of a lynch ) and I think we can usually play from there on out. PB isn't really on my scope for lynching at this stage - he's said stuff that rings out as being distancing/symping (in the sense of setting people up for a fall), but he's generally made sense. But it's the sort of thing I'd rather follow up at a later stage rather than day one.

I guess I'm just conscious of the fact at the moment that if I participate in a Vengy lynch, then I brought his suspicious post up, and didn't vote immediately - it's a fairly typical scenario which often results in the player in my shoes getting lynched for jumping on the train later, even though I technically 'started' it, and something that I try to avoid at all times. But hey, if a man can't take a bit of heat, right? XD "

Right here is where he basically puts all his input on the how many people to lynch question. By mostly stating that we most likely won't get two lynches in. Now then he moves on to start being defensive and looks like hes being very careful. he puts in Oh well sometimes people in my situation get lynched so i'm going to post this to let you know not to lynch me.
Also he says that voting for the sake of a lynch is ok, but doesn't use that as one of his reasons for voting for Vengy and is determined to point out tiny little flaw in order to justify his vote.

"I'm seriously having doubts as to whether we'll get a lynch - unless Grief makes it back on and changes to Vengeance (as I highly doubt PB will vote for himself, even if he is online for timeout), and even if I vote for Vengeance before I go to bed, we'd still be L-2. Who else is likely to be on for day's end?

At this point in time, I can't see a vote going anywhere but Vengy, unless you switch up, dkt. Come out very strong all of sudden, ain't ya? "
Now again he states a little interest in voting for vengy but it truthfully doesn't seem like much, and at this point he seems to have no reason except that maybe other people voted for him. and magically he gets his reasons later.

"@Grief - so, I'm just doing what I normally do?

Anyway, we're at an interesting point now. Half the people are asleep, and have no vote down, with...6 hours to go. It would be ironic if we have no lynch on day one of a game where multiple lynches are possible. XD

I'll be on and fishing around people's posts for another two or three hours, then I'm out and will hopefully have someone to vote for. "
Makes a joke about not having a lynch means, pretty much nothing, but also says that he gonna search around for someone to vote for, but doesn't really seem to find anyone until vengy becomes an option, and if he was scum he acts well, giving some intrest then once a good amount of votes are on gives a well justified reason

"I agree, but it's altless games where everyone falls into vendetta-fighting and ignores the less experienced players, and everyone gets hoodwinked before they even know it! XD
My point is that, while we all may be capable of spotting a ploy, that doesn't mean we won't get railroaded by scum if we make a few bad lynches early on, yes? It doesn't mean we will, either, but dismissing the possibility out of hand is probably not a good move.
I'm curious though, as to Vengy's semi-fearmongering. It strikes me as a strange thing to do so early in the game, rather pushing towards less lynches. His post makes sense, but it was probably unnecessary to state that kind of doom-and-gloom. Iunno. "

This is really the last post where he hints at being suspious and all before are just start of the game "Blah"He starts here by mainly deflecting intrest but also saying, ahh we will be fine even if a bunch of innocents die, and that pretty much means nothing but I got wrapped up in commented on his posts, so I rest my case!,
Thats right ! then a comma, BOOM!

This post has been edited by High Mage Quick Ben: 14 July 2010 - 12:29 AM