-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
All those votes on KP were completely wasted. But hey, at least we avoided "chaos" and "purposeful sabotage" right?
Let's look over yesterday. Warning - this contains tamius-analysis.
I want to find out who is most suspicious out of those voting for me, as I thought there wasn't much reason given. Still, it's Day 1.
So it all kicks off with my vote. It was a random vote, in case you didn't notice.
However, snoop being snoop, he is somewhat of a revenge voter. He immediately votes me back.
This is typical of his play, in my experience.
I'm ignoring a large portion of what's going on outside the votes on me, but this interests me. Last time EURO acted like this (recently finished big) he was a baddy.
In all my months of playing werewolf at the feet of the great Capt. Kiwi, I've never known him use this excuse... tactic... whatever. I'd very much like for him to justify it.
Missing bits of Kingepyon's post here. But it doesn't matter. Here's where the bandwagon begins on me...
Oh, and did I mention: this is somewhat of a fallacy? no?
We've been run up now. A few people were quite eager to put snoop down again, I think. I'm still confused over the deadline sniping (there was a powercut here, so I wasn't around at the deadline...
o)
This is interesting. At this point Kiwi by his own votecount has me at a mere 1 vote. (even with the case on me completely non-existent) There are lots of people with 1.
...strangely he doesn't mention snoop even though he has 3 votes, in front at this point.
This confuses me. This is after Kingepyon voted me for "concentration". I'm still not sure what's up with the kiwi.
This is just bandwagoneering.
I think ese here is on the same wavelength as me. What I've been trying to say throughout this post, really.
I'll reread this post later and decide then. I have a list of baddies formulated in my head now but it's almost certainly wrong.
I want to find out who is most suspicious out of those voting for me, as I thought there wasn't much reason given. Still, it's Day 1.
So it all kicks off with my vote. It was a random vote, in case you didn't notice.
However, snoop being snoop, he is somewhat of a revenge voter. He immediately votes me back.
This is typical of his play, in my experience.
I'm ignoring a large portion of what's going on outside the votes on me, but this interests me. Last time EURO acted like this (recently finished big) he was a baddy.
In all my months of playing werewolf at the feet of the great Capt. Kiwi, I've never known him use this excuse... tactic... whatever. I'd very much like for him to justify it.
Missing bits of Kingepyon's post here. But it doesn't matter. Here's where the bandwagon begins on me...
Oh, and did I mention: this is somewhat of a fallacy? no?
We've been run up now. A few people were quite eager to put snoop down again, I think. I'm still confused over the deadline sniping (there was a powercut here, so I wasn't around at the deadline...
o)This is interesting. At this point Kiwi by his own votecount has me at a mere 1 vote. (even with the case on me completely non-existent) There are lots of people with 1.
...strangely he doesn't mention snoop even though he has 3 votes, in front at this point.
Concentration is always a worthy cause
Unvote drxav
Vote tamius
To get another candidate up to three. Let's see if there's anything in snoopdogg's "baddie tell" this time, and perhaps more importantly whether there's anything in the counter vote movement on snoopdogg.
This confuses me. This is after Kingepyon voted me for "concentration". I'm still not sure what's up with the kiwi.
This is just bandwagoneering.
I think ese here is on the same wavelength as me. What I've been trying to say throughout this post, really.
I'll reread this post later and decide then. I have a list of baddies formulated in my head now but it's almost certainly wrong.
Vote Snoop
Don't think I don't see you there! You won't get the jump on me. I know what you're up to! Having your packmates save you won't fool me. Oh no, not me!
Don't think I don't see you there! You won't get the jump on me. I know what you're up to! Having your packmates save you won't fool me. Oh no, not me!
*Looks out the window* Yep - That was really a pig flying over there...
Besides - Not enough horseblood in this! The Ghosts demands Blood, since we can't get brains...... BLOOOOOOOD!!!!!!!
If you want, then you can vote me.
I suspect Kiwi, EUR007 and those 2 who were trying to sabotage before deadline.
Vote esemesas.
Then we fundamentally disagree. I firmly believe that a) there are people you can eliminate as lynch candidates on day one based purely on fair play and that b) there are people who are more suspicious, even on day one, based on little quirks. I also believe that their reaction to being confronted with such is valuable information. All votes should be meaningful, and by sharing your thoughts you are providing the village with more information to look for inconsistancies in your actions.
Pretty much. Day one is over, it's open season.
Actions are meaningless out of context, and worthless if chaotic behaviour is permitted or even encouraged. If a person is allowed to vote without giving reason, then all you learn is that they don't want to talk. Which is information, but not good information if everyone is doing it. If instead you force people to talk, even the best players will make mistakes.
No. All those votes on Kingepyon, snoopdogg and tamius would have been wasted if and only if chaotic vote swings were permitted. By forcing wolves to pick from those three, you force their vote to have worth. If they could instead sit back and wait for someone to yell "let's lynch X", then they could vote without conscience, just like a villager. Instead, we can now start gathering information on the allegiances of players.
Except for the fact that the reasons for votes that you so love are on Day 1 usually "LSST", "RST", sign-up number-based or some other random reason that really tells us nothing. Why do you think I called it blatant revenge voting when I voted you? I could just as well have tried to pop in just after you for an LSST (if I had the time that is) or simply bullshited you back and used half the sign-up number as a reason.
In all my months of playing werewolf at the feet of the great Capt. Kiwi, I've never known him use this excuse... tactic... whatever. I'd very much like for him to justify it.
Missing bits of Kingepyon's post here. But it doesn't matter. Here's where the bandwagon begins on me...
Oh, and did I mention: this is somewhat of a fallacy? no?
We've been run up now. A few people were quite eager to put snoop down again, I think. I'm still confused over the deadline sniping (there was a powercut here, so I wasn't around at the deadline...
This is interesting. At this point Kiwi by his own votecount has me at a mere 1 vote. (even with the case on me completely non-existent) There are lots of people with 1.
...strangely he doesn't mention snoop even though he has 3 votes, in front at this point.
This confuses me. This is after Kingepyon voted me for "concentration". I'm still not sure what's up with the kiwi.
This is just bandwagoneering.
I think ese here is on the same wavelength as me. What I've been trying to say throughout this post, really.
I'll reread this post later and decide then. I have a list of baddies formulated in my head now but it's almost certainly wrong.
A little fragmented, so I'll crop it down to the parts concerning me if you don't mind
I believe you meant to say "I have never known Capt. Kiwi not to use this tactic". Fragmented votes harm the village, because they allow people to throw away votes. Concentrated votes force people to choose, and choices are some of the most valuable pieces of information.
No, it wasn't a fallacy that you and drxav were the only ones I could choose from of those on my suspicious list where my vote wouldn't be alone. And while you only had one vote, I was hoping to get someone to vote with me, on drxav, you or someone else, in order to get that person up to three votes. Was it Xeno? You can go back and check if you want. I initially left my vote on drxav as one of my candidates, but when Kingepyon chose you I joined him as that was what I said I'd do - join someone to help tidy up the votes a bit. The who didn't really matter, you were just unlucky.
And yes, snoopdogg already had three votes. That's why I wasn't voting him - we needed more people with three votes and less with one.
And yes, I'm glad you noticed reis' strange vote too. Kingepyon did as well, and told me so. In fact, Kingepyon told me why he chose you:
I accept LSST on day one (reluctantly), but I still want to see reasons given, to get people in the habit of talking. By day two or three they should be giving detailed explanations, which should start showing if they have preferences one way or another. It's all about inconsistancies. Is someone happy to LSST vote someone when they're in no danger, yet reluctant to vote them when there's real risk? Can they explain why they're suddenly not interested in this person? And so on. Before long you start to get an idea if they know things they shouldn't, based on whether their reasons are sensible for a villager with no secret knowledge.
Don't ask me, it was Kingepyon who said it. I would guess EURO and AOK were who he meant.
Day Two
(1) snoopdogg - XenomorphII (227)
(1) Adamus - snoopdogg (229)
(1) esemesas - enkhuush (230)
I'm not sure we'll get much out of running snoopdogg up again, eve if Kingepyon thought he had people protecting him. I'm going to
Vote Syber_sid
For being one of the two players with the lowest post count. Eternaly_Lost is the other, but he's had more voting action.
(1) snoopdogg - XenomorphII (227)
(1) Adamus - snoopdogg (229)
(1) esemesas - enkhuush (230)
I'm not sure we'll get much out of running snoopdogg up again, eve if Kingepyon thought he had people protecting him. I'm going to
Vote Syber_sid
For being one of the two players with the lowest post count. Eternaly_Lost is the other, but he's had more voting action.
If you want, then you can vote me.
I suspect Kiwi, EUR007 and those 2 who were trying to sabotage before deadline.
Vote esemesas.
Who would that be?
And I support the Kiwi. Adamus and syber should be in the running today.
1) That's not fairplay, that is meta.
2) If those people give themselves away based on quirks, it is in the village's best interest to avoid lynching them early, because they will be easier to identify as wolves.
3) As I told you, there are 3 rational causes for votes that can have meaning. One is pretty easy to identify, and the others are wolf reasons. If you say, on Day 1, without any information (no hunts, no scans, no anything), that we should not lynch x, but rather y and z, there's a better likelihood of you being a wolf than anyone else.