[Eloth]

I also dislike a lot of the voting. People are voting without explaining their vote, saying they think a case is decent without explaining why they think that, or what part of the case they agree with. It's really under the radar play.

[Hanas]

Fanderay, on 03 February 2016 - 03:34 PM, said:

Hanas, on 03 February 2016 - 03:27 PM, said:

Well, at least you're not playing follow-the-leader and voting for Fanderay because he came up with an argument against someone.
The reason I see no reason not to vote is because in a faction game, you usually know yourself, the head of your faction, and maybe one or two other members if you're lucky. If there's an even split, then you have higher than even odds of taking out someone on the opposing team with a lynch, so it's most likely going to be beneficial.
We can play the game assuming there's independent factions at play, but that basically invokes an awful lot of guesswork and you end up playing very conservatively.

Finally.
After a painful trend of having to read stupid posts by stupid people somebody used FUCKING MATH. Assuming an even split between the two teams, you have a better chance of lynching the enemy team if you lynch anyone but yourself.

We don't even know if there are any independent btw, but if there are, it makes even more sense to lynch other people.

9 my team
9 enemy team

I know myself.

a lynch has 9/17 chance of lynching the enemy and an 8/17 chance of lynching my team.
If you know your faction leader as Hanas assumes it will be 9/16 to 7/16.

If there are 2 independents (big assumption), you will have an 11/16 chance of lynching someone other than your team mates.

Precisely.
The odds aren't immensely in favour of lynching someone on the opposite team, but they're more than good enough for it to be a worthwhile endeavour, especially when you consider there's the bonus possibility of taking out someone with an ability that could cause problems for your team down the line if they're left to their own devices.

Early bird gets the worm and all that.

[Hanas]

Eloth, on 03 February 2016 - 03:38 PM, said:

I also dislike a lot of the voting. People are voting without explaining their vote, saying they think a case is decent without explaining why they think that, or what part of the case they agree with. It's really under the radar play.

I voted for Anomandaris because he's not my leader and I lost nothing seeing how he would react.
I kept my vote on him because his behaviour got interesting after a few votes on him, as Fanderay said. That's a gut feeling, though, and you're welcome to disagree.
My vote is on him now because a OMGUS train has suddenly built up on a guy who made the initial case against his behaviour, and that's very interesting.

[Fanderay]

Hanas, on 03 February 2016 - 03:43 PM, said:

Eloth, on 03 February 2016 - 03:38 PM, said:

I also dislike a lot of the voting. People are voting without explaining their vote, saying they think a case is decent without explaining why they think that, or what part of the case they agree with. It's really under the radar play.

I voted for Anomandaris because he's not my leader and I lost nothing seeing how he would react.
I kept my vote on him because his behaviour got interesting after a few votes on him, as Fanderay said. That's a gut feeling, though, and you're welcome to disagree.
My vote is on him now because a OMGUS train has suddenly built up on a guy who made the initial case against his behaviour, and that's very interesting.

Honestly, I don't think it's an OMGUS case, because that assumes we were lucky enough to get a leader on our first try.

It's more like people being stupid and falling for Ano's indy case, which makes sense because people are stupid.

Edit: and by case I mean train

This post has been edited by Fanderay: 03 February 2016 - 03:47 PM

[Telas]

Fanderay, on 03 February 2016 - 03:34 PM, said:

Hanas, on 03 February 2016 - 03:27 PM, said:

Well, at least you're not playing follow-the-leader and voting for Fanderay because he came up with an argument against someone.
The reason I see no reason not to vote is because in a faction game, you usually know yourself, the head of your faction, and maybe one or two other members if you're lucky. If there's an even split, then you have higher than even odds of taking out someone on the opposing team with a lynch, so it's most likely going to be beneficial.
We can play the game assuming there's independent factions at play, but that basically invokes an awful lot of guesswork and you end up playing very conservatively.

Finally.
After a painful trend of having to read stupid posts by stupid people somebody used FUCKING MATH. Assuming an even split between the two teams, you have a better chance of lynching the enemy team if you lynch anyone but yourself.

We don't even know if there are any independent btw, but if there are, it makes even more sense to lynch other people.

9 my team
9 enemy team

I know myself.

a lynch has 9/17 chance of lynching the enemy and an 8/17 chance of lynching my team.
If you know your faction leader as Hanas assumes it will be 9/16 to 7/16.

If there are 2 independents (big assumption), you will have an 11/16 chance of lynching someone other than your team mates.

Can I fuck just irrational numbers? I heard they are crazy in bed.

I'm a conservative faction player. Always have been. If I see something that catches my eye I'll vote. Thus my statement last night about not voting for assholes. They might be MY asshole teammates.

[Denesmet]

Morning folks! Wow, go away for a night, come back and we're up to 4 pages! Love big games!

Have a few things to take care of here at work, then will give this thread the read through it deserves! Thoughts to follow!

[Eloth]

Telas, on 03 February 2016 - 03:49 PM, said:

Fanderay, on 03 February 2016 - 03:34 PM, said:

Hanas, on 03 February 2016 - 03:27 PM, said:

Well, at least you're not playing follow-the-leader and voting for Fanderay because he came up with an argument against someone.
The reason I see no reason not to vote is because in a faction game, you usually know yourself, the head of your faction, and maybe one or two other members if you're lucky. If there's an even split, then you have higher than even odds of taking out someone on the opposing team with a lynch, so it's most likely going to be beneficial.
We can play the game assuming there's independent factions at play, but that basically invokes an awful lot of guesswork and you end up playing very conservatively.

Finally.
After a painful trend of having to read stupid posts by stupid people somebody used FUCKING MATH. Assuming an even split between the two teams, you have a better chance of lynching the enemy team if you lynch anyone but yourself.

We don't even know if there are any independent btw, but if there are, it makes even more sense to lynch other people.

9 my team
9 enemy team

I know myself.

a lynch has 9/17 chance of lynching the enemy and an 8/17 chance of lynching my team.
If you know your faction leader as Hanas assumes it will be 9/16 to 7/16.

If there are 2 independents (big assumption), you will have an 11/16 chance of lynching someone other than your team mates.

Can I fuck just irrational numbers? I heard they are crazy in bed.

I'm a conservative faction player. Always have been. If I see something that catches my eye I'll vote. Thus my statement last night about not voting for assholes. They might be MY asshole teammates.

Someone is most likely going to be lynched anyhow though... this just seems like an excuse for lying low, boo hiss.

[Anomandaris]

Yes, obviously it's a weak argument to say Fandypants is indy, no shit. I thought it was obvious when I replied to Hanas saying my responses were biting satire that a lot of what I was saying was tongue-in-cheek. That being said, I DID NOT (capitalisation!) like Fandy's continued attempts to push votes onto me with weak-ass crap. Nor do I like the nonchalance displayed in the statement to lynch anyone other than themselves, so that vote stays for now.

[Hanas]

Fanderay, on 03 February 2016 - 03:47 PM, said:

Hanas, on 03 February 2016 - 03:43 PM, said:

Eloth, on 03 February 2016 - 03:38 PM, said:

I also dislike a lot of the voting. People are voting without explaining their vote, saying they think a case is decent without explaining why they think that, or what part of the case they agree with. It's really under the radar play.

I voted for Anomandaris because he's not my leader and I lost nothing seeing how he would react.
I kept my vote on him because his behaviour got interesting after a few votes on him, as Fanderay said. That's a gut feeling, though, and you're welcome to disagree.
My vote is on him now because a OMGUS train has suddenly built up on a guy who made the initial case against his behaviour, and that's very interesting.

Honestly, I don't think it's an OMGUS case, because that assumes we were lucky enough to get a leader on our first try.

It's more like people being stupid and falling for Ano's indy case, which makes sense because people are stupid.

Edit: and by case I mean train

I guess you're right there, Occam suggests he's probably just some dude.

[Telas]

Eloth, on 03 February 2016 - 03:51 PM, said:

Telas, on 03 February 2016 - 03:49 PM, said:

Fanderay, on 03 February 2016 - 03:34 PM, said:

Hanas, on 03 February 2016 - 03:27 PM, said:

Well, at least you're not playing follow-the-leader and voting for Fanderay because he came up with an argument against someone.
The reason I see no reason not to vote is because in a faction game, you usually know yourself, the head of your faction, and maybe one or two other members if you're lucky. If there's an even split, then you have higher than even odds of taking out someone on the opposing team with a lynch, so it's most likely going to be beneficial.
We can play the game assuming there's independent factions at play, but that basically invokes an awful lot of guesswork and you end up playing very conservatively.

Finally.
After a painful trend of having to read stupid posts by stupid people somebody used FUCKING MATH. Assuming an even split between the two teams, you have a better chance of lynching the enemy team if you lynch anyone but yourself.

We don't even know if there are any independent btw, but if there are, it makes even more sense to lynch other people.

9 my team
9 enemy team

I know myself.

a lynch has 9/17 chance of lynching the enemy and an 8/17 chance of lynching my team.
If you know your faction leader as Hanas assumes it will be 9/16 to 7/16.

If there are 2 independents (big assumption), you will have an 11/16 chance of lynching someone other than your team mates.

Can I fuck just irrational numbers? I heard they are crazy in bed.

I'm a conservative faction player. Always have been. If I see something that catches my eye I'll vote. Thus my statement last night about not voting for assholes. They might be MY asshole teammates.

Someone is most likely going to be lynched anyhow though... this just seems like an excuse for lying low, boo hiss.

But, not lying low. I'm plenty active even if half of it is stupid shit (which should raise hackles, I'd be watching me if I wasn't me, or something like that.)

If I had to vote someone right now, for faction reasons, there are only a couple candidates. Ano's quick vote gathering indicating a possible leader vote, or the sudden turn around, indicating a possible leader vote.

[Eloth]

Hanas, on 03 February 2016 - 03:35 PM, said:

I don't really see a problem with Merrid deciding to put down a vote: I do strongly think that Anomander's reaction was a bit much given the circumstance. It's certainly very interesting how voting has gone now that some pressure has been put on Anomander, too.

Yeah, if you're sold on Ano over-reacting I guess it makes more sense. It's just a difficult pattern to miss -- Merrid says he won't vote, someone accuses him of symping, and then he votes.

[Anomandaris]

Eloth, on 03 February 2016 - 03:56 PM, said:

Hanas, on 03 February 2016 - 03:35 PM, said:

I don't really see a problem with Merrid deciding to put down a vote: I do strongly think that Anomander's reaction was a bit much given the circumstance. It's certainly very interesting how voting has gone now that some pressure has been put on Anomander, too.

Yeah, if you're sold on Ano over-reacting I guess it makes more sense. It's just a difficult pattern to miss -- Merrid says he won't vote, someone accuses him of symping, and then he votes.

Mmm hmmm. <--- noise of agreement.

[Merrid]

I am going home, not around until tomorrow.

With regard to my vote: I still think Ano was a little jumpy initially, and didn't change this around in his scatter spray of four quick posts, which is the reason why I voted for him after he made them.

The Fanderay case seems somehow centred on them because they are not afraid to vote - with a little speculation on the side that they could be an independent, which as of now, with no evidence of it, seems far-fetched.

Like Eloth, I still don't really like that few of the votes for him contained much justification. The same seems to be happening, perhaps to a lesser extent, with Fanderay.

All that being said, I don't particularly care if we do achieve a lynch or not, to be honest - I would like it, but not to the extent that it is 'no lynch is a bad start'.
I do care that we have multiple trains on thread, and at the least some people giving opinions. As such, I don't see any use in removing or in jumping ship from Anomandaris to Fanderay.

[Eloth]

Telas, on 03 February 2016 - 03:55 PM, said:

Eloth, on 03 February 2016 - 03:51 PM, said:

Telas, on 03 February 2016 - 03:49 PM, said:

Fanderay, on 03 February 2016 - 03:34 PM, said:

Hanas, on 03 February 2016 - 03:27 PM, said:

Well, at least you're not playing follow-the-leader and voting for Fanderay because he came up with an argument against someone.
The reason I see no reason not to vote is because in a faction game, you usually know yourself, the head of your faction, and maybe one or two other members if you're lucky. If there's an even split, then you have higher than even odds of taking out someone on the opposing team with a lynch, so it's most likely going to be beneficial.
We can play the game assuming there's independent factions at play, but that basically invokes an awful lot of guesswork and you end up playing very conservatively.

Finally.
After a painful trend of having to read stupid posts by stupid people somebody used FUCKING MATH. Assuming an even split between the two teams, you have a better chance of lynching the enemy team if you lynch anyone but yourself.

We don't even know if there are any independent btw, but if there are, it makes even more sense to lynch other people.

9 my team
9 enemy team

I know myself.

a lynch has 9/17 chance of lynching the enemy and an 8/17 chance of lynching my team.
If you know your faction leader as Hanas assumes it will be 9/16 to 7/16.

If there are 2 independents (big assumption), you will have an 11/16 chance of lynching someone other than your team mates.

Can I fuck just irrational numbers? I heard they are crazy in bed.

I'm a conservative faction player. Always have been. If I see something that catches my eye I'll vote. Thus my statement last night about not voting for assholes. They might be MY asshole teammates.

Someone is most likely going to be lynched anyhow though... this just seems like an excuse for lying low, boo hiss.

But, not lying low. I'm plenty active even if half of it is stupid shit (which should raise hackles, I'd be watching me if I wasn't me, or something like that.)

If I had to vote someone right now, for faction reasons, there are only a couple candidates. Ano's quick vote gathering indicating a possible leader vote, or the sudden turn around, indicating a possible leader vote.

I was mostly just kidding. Day 1 is teh suck, usually even more so in faction games.

[Merrid]

Anomandaris, on 03 February 2016 - 03:59 PM, said:

Eloth, on 03 February 2016 - 03:56 PM, said:

Hanas, on 03 February 2016 - 03:35 PM, said:

I don't really see a problem with Merrid deciding to put down a vote: I do strongly think that Anomander's reaction was a bit much given the circumstance. It's certainly very interesting how voting has gone now that some pressure has been put on Anomander, too.

Yeah, if you're sold on Ano over-reacting I guess it makes more sense. It's just a difficult pattern to miss -- Merrid says he won't vote, someone accuses him of symping, and then he votes.

Mmm hmmm. <--- noise of agreement.

Tsk tsk. I said in my initial post (it's only a page back, not too hard to go and look at it) that I think the reason is okay, but I don't like the build-up and won't vote for now.
You come on, do little to dispel the issue in my eyes and in fact seem a little more jumpy, and I lay on my vote.

It seems pretty standard play to me, Ano.

[Hanas]

Eloth, on 03 February 2016 - 03:56 PM, said:

Hanas, on 03 February 2016 - 03:35 PM, said:

I don't really see a problem with Merrid deciding to put down a vote: I do strongly think that Anomander's reaction was a bit much given the circumstance. It's certainly very interesting how voting has gone now that some pressure has been put on Anomander, too.

Yeah, if you're sold on Ano over-reacting I guess it makes more sense. It's just a difficult pattern to miss -- Merrid says he won't vote, someone accuses him of symping, and then he votes.

I don't know; I can see a reason why he might have changed his vote, especially given the initial thrust of the argument being the way Ano reacted.
See:

Anomandaris, on 03 February 2016 - 08:45 AM, said:

Merrid, on 03 February 2016 - 08:16 AM, said:

As tempting as it is to put a vote down on Ano (for what is a fairly decent reason) and resume work, this train is going a teeny tiny bit too fast (compared to the post count) for my taste.

So, for now, I will hold my horses.

Oh yeah? And what is that fairly decent reason?

Ano attacks him for not even voting, just saying there's a reason for people voting.
This is then immediately followed by:

Anomandaris, on 03 February 2016 - 08:48 AM, said:

Vote Fanderay


For giving a bullshit reason for voting for me. At least the rest after them are completely blatant about voting because fuck it, why not, but Fandy has to come up with an explanations, because they're too insecure to just vote for the sake of voting on day 1.

Conclusion: They're an independent and therefore everyone can feel safe voting for Fanderay.

Cutting out the independent joke, he demands to know why someone votes for him, and then immediately after it says that someone else's reason is bullshit and puts a vote on them?
It's really aggro play, and it's a fairly strong reaction given that he just got some reinforcement that people weren't all going to just pile on and lynch him before he could say or do anything.

[Merrid]

And with that, I am out.

[Telas]

Yeah, but it is a valid point on the math, so I wanted my justification for a no vote, if thats how it goes, on thread. It's inexcusable in a m and p game, but here I think it is.

[Telas]

Hanas, on 03 February 2016 - 04:03 PM, said:

Eloth, on 03 February 2016 - 03:56 PM, said:

Hanas, on 03 February 2016 - 03:35 PM, said:

I don't really see a problem with Merrid deciding to put down a vote: I do strongly think that Anomander's reaction was a bit much given the circumstance. It's certainly very interesting how voting has gone now that some pressure has been put on Anomander, too.

Yeah, if you're sold on Ano over-reacting I guess it makes more sense. It's just a difficult pattern to miss -- Merrid says he won't vote, someone accuses him of symping, and then he votes.

I don't know; I can see a reason why he might have changed his vote, especially given the initial thrust of the argument being the way Ano reacted.
See:

Anomandaris, on 03 February 2016 - 08:45 AM, said:

Merrid, on 03 February 2016 - 08:16 AM, said:

As tempting as it is to put a vote down on Ano (for what is a fairly decent reason) and resume work, this train is going a teeny tiny bit too fast (compared to the post count) for my taste.

So, for now, I will hold my horses.

Oh yeah? And what is that fairly decent reason?

Ano attacks him for not even voting, just saying there's a reason for people voting.
This is then immediately followed by:

Anomandaris, on 03 February 2016 - 08:48 AM, said:

Vote Fanderay


For giving a bullshit reason for voting for me. At least the rest after them are completely blatant about voting because fuck it, why not, but Fandy has to come up with an explanations, because they're too insecure to just vote for the sake of voting on day 1.

Conclusion: They're an independent and therefore everyone can feel safe voting for Fanderay.

Cutting out the independent joke, he demands to know why someone votes for him, and then immediately after it says that someone else's reason is bullshit and puts a vote on them?
It's really aggro play, and it's a fairly strong reaction given that he just got some reinforcement that people weren't all going to just pile on and lynch him before he could say or do anything.

I didn't and still do not believe that to have been a joke.

[Eloth]

Figured I'd do a vote count, hopefully I've not missed anything.

Ano has 4 (Eloth, Fanderay, Hanas, Merrid)
Fanderay has 5 (Ano, Kadagar Fant, Grasp, Denul, Shadow)
Hanas has 1 (Korlat)

Going by the update at 12 hours, we we have about 7 hours left in the day? Though the timing doesn't seem totally consistent. By Gnaws post on page one (at 25 hours) the game should end in about 4 and a half. By the original 36 hour timer I make it about 6 and half. Maybe I just can't count.