Caboose wrote:zoraster wrote:No, we're trying to make a 26 player game playable. And I appreciate Mastin trying to pare it down a little. I don't mind long posts at all if they're written in such a way as I can follow it, and there's a reason for it being long.
I think it is time for some of our missing players to assert themselves though. RedCoyote, King, hewitt, ryan2754, killa seven, Knight of Cydonia, Empking’s Alt, Tarhalindur, Caboose, orangepenguin all need to read and tell us what they're thinking.
unvote
vote: hewitt
for lurking.
Mod: You might be aware King has not posted anywhere since April 3rd
Why did you single hewitt out?
Quotes Zoraster.
Javert wrote:Bonjour!
I read the game last night up until 3:20 am, so needless to say I did not read every word nor do I remember everything.
I did not like the attacks on Azhrei and Hewitt on Day One for their suggestions of saving Mastin for later. zoraster sticks out to me the most, although there were certainly others.
Slap: ryan2754
for Post 776, where he asks if Phoebus made a “cult slip.”
FoS: Amished
on gut. To try to put into words: his posts seem far too theoretical and detached. I don’t sense a townie motive. He sounds reasonable and level-headed, but he still reads like scum to me.
FoS: Kmd4390
for Maturin’s posts, which all struck me as being opportunistic and sheepish despite being so few. I think Kmd should just explain his Amished vote; withholding reasons is a good way to get discussion on D1, but by D3 who cares – your job is to convince people to vote with you, not to be cryptic.
There are many players I will need to read over again simply because they did not stand out to me due to lurking or not being memorable. In this game, there is simultaneously far too much posting and far too much lurking.
Opinions on the latest attention magnets:
zer0ph34r
: Unfortunately he reads slightly town to me, but I do hope he is nightkilled.
OrangePenguin
: I need to read him again, but his suggestion that zer0 was “scum gloating” has continually struck me as being ridiculous.cateraction
: I want to like him for his Nietzsche avatar. Other than that, his D1 posts seemed better to me than most (largely because I disagreed with the Mastin-wagon). To me, his D2 end-of-day posts were trying to assure a lynch as opposed to being opportunistic as others have claimed. If there was a more explicit case on him I'm not recalling it and would appreciate a link or reference.
Vote: zoraster
for now; my second choice is Amished. Hopefully I will be able to write up explanations soon. I will be away tonight and probably much of tomorrow, but I will post when I can.
Votes Zoraster in his first post, FOS Amished.
Javert wrote:Because I apparently do not value my eyesight, I read over the game a second time. I largely skimmed D1 and tried to focus on D2.
Unvote: zoraster
.
I disagree with his entire approach to Day One, but I think zoraster believed he was doing the “right thing.” My biggest concerns with him are (i) his D1 posts leave a bad aftertaste of fearmongering (i.e. “we can’t leave Mastin alive because X”), and (ii) his drastic drop-off in posting after D1, for which I do not see an explanation.
I want to see his opinions on other players,
as well as
an explanation for why he has dropped off. I still find him suspicious but I at the moment I want my vote elsewhere.
~
Random observations :
- I did not like Dust’s complaining of feeling bound to follow his meta, and I also think much of his phraseology sounds fake.
- I do not think OrangePenguin is Mafia with Tarhalindur.
- I am
really
starting to think there might be some players in those pages who are defending (largely via voting for Zer0ph34r) RedCoyote in pages 44-46 and beyond. Further, I do not much care for RedCoyote’s Post 1116 in particular: it seems sulkily written.
- I do not think Zer0ph34r is in the Hate Club with StevieT92.
- I do not think Hewitt is in the Hate Club with StevieT92.
- I think White Castle probably did not purposefully miscount at the end of D2, but he should have voted regardless. An “extra” vote after somebody is “lynched” is not going to
hurt
. White Castle, were you available to vote at the end of D2 and then choose not to post?
- I do not like Amished’s post 1497.
These observations are mostly bare-bone. I expect I will elaborate on a few of them as I find time or if there are requests to elaborate on particular observations.
I am actually going to
Vote: Red Coyote
, as there are a number of small things in his posts that rub me wrong, and additionally I am rather concerned about him being protected in pages 44-46+. I am going to say right off the bat that I do not think I can write a full-fledged "case" about him, because the things that struck me with him are largely subtle.
~
Zer0ph34r, please try to write a paragraph every post you make – it takes little effort on your part and helps the rest of us immensely. Now please explain what I said sounds like “something you’d say.”
Shortly unvotes.
Javert wrote:First off, I think it unlikely that any Masons are part of the Hate Club. I
still
think that RedCoyote was trying to get night-killing roles to kill of Masons with his continual complaints of "why aren't the Masons dead?" So, I am willing to accept that both ZazieR and Battle Mage are town, despite the confirmed presence of a Cult.
That said, I want to caution the town in two respects:
1.)
There may not be any more cultists in the game at all. Cults, in general, cannot recruit scum players, and sometimes they also cannot recruit specific townspeople either. I have actually played in a game where a Cult Leader failed to recruit a cultist at all by Day Four of a game.
2.)
As Amished mentioned, our
priority
today should not be to search for Cultists. We should be trying to lynch the mafia, or other scum killing roles if they exist
.
~
I will find time to reread everybody individually. I think we're definitely at the point where we need to demand active participation from players.
Amished flipped scum. If you're his scum buddy, #2 is pretty interesting.
Javert wrote:
Also, seriously, this is not the first time somebody has suggested the Cult Leaders die for trying to recruit scum.
Where
are people getting these ideas? I would really like links if somebody is seriously going to support this as being the "norm."
As scum, you would know about the scum dying if cult are recruited.
Javert wrote:
Amished, to be honest, I made my comment disparaging the play of any living Cult members on the off-chance that an actual cultist might take offense and have some sort of telling reaction to my comment. Assuming Hewitt is not a Cultist, then it is entirely possible that the Cult almost managed to get somebody else lynched without having to resort to drastic measures, which in all probability would be the safer line of play and quite reasonable (as opposed to "playing very poorly"). What I think is the best strategic thing to do (i.e. immediate action that virtually assured your Leader lives another night) does not discount other strategic options (i.e. simply pushing another lynch).
That said, I don't know if there are Cultists remaining, or who RedCoyote might have recruited. At the moment I am not really very interested in that question.
~
Amished, I am interested in you saying you have to look at my meta now that you know I am an alt. Did you look at Javert's meta while I was playing this game? Why does my being an alt make you suddenly interested in my meta? And furthermore, do you think a player is going to have the same meta under different accounts?
Hint: the purpose of my playing under an alt account is (i) to avoid being constantly harrassed by meta, and (ii) to have a little fun with subtle role-playing under my account.
Actually, would you mind explaining what you mean when you say you look at a players meta?
More interaction w/ Amished.
Javert wrote:I would vote Amished right now, but we might as well make sure everybody gets to the thread first.
Amished, you might as well claim.
Holds off on vote on Amished. Tells him to claim. Amish later fake claims.
Amished wrote:Ok, so I got the mod clarification that I was looking for. Either Ryan is lying, or Qwints is scum. (Both *could* be the case, but for different reasons, will explain at the end of the post).
I'm a pro-town hider.
N1 I hid behind OPengy (2nd leading vote getter on D1. I didn't feel he was all that scummy, so I hid behind him as I thought that the scum would leave him alone to possibly try to stir up a mislynch on D2).
N2 I didn't hide at all due to the fact that there were 4 NK's N1, and I thought I'd take my chances by myself as I didn't feel I really stood out on anything.
N3 I hid behind Zazier as on N2 the scum didn't go after the Masons, so I thought that they'd stick with that plan on the next night.
N4 I hid behind Qwints. Was wary of hiding behind the masons again because by now I thought that they were pretty much confirmed. Qwints was a lurker and therefore I figured wouldn't be NK'd.
I had initially thought that I would die if I hid behind scum (typical hider PM) but when I checked my PM again and talked with Jebus, I would only die if the person I hid behind was targeted for a kill. In this case, I'm assuming that ryan's target on me went to whoever I hid behind as it wasn't a kill.
If that's the case, I don't know if ryan was lying to manufacture a false claim on me (I would've thought he'd get no-result); or if he got Qwints alignment instead. Until I get more clarification, I shall
Unvote
Javert wrote:So let me get this straight.
If you are targeted for with a
kill
while hiding, the kill dissolves into nothingness. But if you are targeted by an
investigation
while hiding, it shifts to the person you hide behind rather than dissolving?
I disbelieve it.
I am not particularly interested in postulating framers, redirectors, etc. Chances are they don't exist, or if they do exist there is still only a slim chance they would targeted the right people for us to end up in this scenario. I side with Occam's Razor: most likely thing here is that Amished is scum who has been caught by an investigation, and after realizing that he probably can't get the claimed Cop lynched he will instead try to get a different player lynched.
Bussing.
Javert wrote:King has effectively claimed Townie (or at least a role that is "not exciting or dangerous to anyone"), and has not disputed RedCoyote's or others' characterizations the he claimed Townie.
~~~
Also, I think this needs to be said:
I am largely surprised how practically nobody besides me bothered to make a case on anybody today. The best effort today besides me appears to have been Lowell, who at least FoS'd a few people. But here is my point:
Towns do not win games by sitting idly by and doing nothing.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I would quite like to
win
this game. As such, I have taken the time to read through this
entire
thread multiple times -- every game day, I read the entire thread another time to see if it helps me find scum. I completely understand that this game is long and boring, and that Day One in particular is an atrocious read (suggestion: do not read Mastin's posts, since they will not help you). But you are still signed up to play this game, and I expect more than the apparent apathy I am seeing.
Although I am in a sense pleased that I am likely getting my top suspect lynched today, I am simultaneously very
displeased
that there has been very little discussion on the point (save for Battle Mage / Lowell giving an opposing viewpoint). It feels like people are voting solely on the fact that people are voting. This town lacks momentum, and I think we will lose because of it unless we take action to change it.
Obviously it is a bit late to change things today (it seems that even asking for prods has done nothing), but at the very least I will be expecting a good faith effort from everybody tomorrow. By any definition of "fun," today has
not been fun
. And if you are not playing for fun, and you are not playing to win, then I fail to see why you are playing.
The "the town .. we will lose" etc. just gives me a bad gut feeling. Trying way to hard to be the town's cheerleader.
Amished wrote:Cause following is easier than leading. That and Mastin looks like he knows what he's about.
Unvote
Vote: Dust
Votes Dust right away, who is now Lowell, if that means anything.
Amished wrote:I was elaborating on Javert's constant comparison between Hewitt's actions and what Javert has come across before, while also tying that in with Fonz's statement that he didn't know where Javert was coming from and applying that to Hewitt who I still think is scum. Through Javert's soft defense, I can see a tie between the two, and believe that one of their lynches will create even more information through ties to other players.
More bussing.
Amished wrote:@Javert: Hard defense is worse than a soft defense in my eyes, but ok.
.
More interaction!
Amished wrote:@Javert: I know I don't defend somebody that staunchly as town (like hewitt has), nor how you defended Hewitt. Primarily because I have no clue as to the alignment of who I'm defending. I defend as a cop, but that's due to having knowledge of their alignment. I believe that Hewitt will turn scum, and from that your chainsaw defense of Hewitt will lead me to another scum. However, I will admit to being wrong at times and if Hewitt does turn town, then I'm much more comfortable seeing you as more townie than I do currently.
Hah. Knows hewitt is town, cause he is scum, but "thinks" he is scum. But if he flips scum, he'll think his scum buddy is more townie looking. Hahaha. Wow.
Amished wrote:Well, for you maybe. For me it's either Qwints is scum or ryan said he got a result when he shouldn't have (making him scum).
Ryan wasn't scum. So according to Amished, Qwints is scum. This makes me believe Qwints is innocent.
Amished wrote:@Stark: That's correct.
@Javert: I don't know what went on, as the way I thought it should happen is that if Ryan investigated *me* he should've gotten no result. I don't know if the mod plays it different or if there was something else to affect his (ryan's) result.
