Werewolf XVI - Star Trek

Necro

Ah listen, it's too early for this sh1te. I'm not arguing with P* all day about a point I discussed at length last night.
It's pointless and it's detracting from the wolf hunt. They must be loving what is clearly (in my eyes) 2 villagers tearing strips off each other.

I haven't a read on Lord TSC as of yet, for clarity. He might be a wolf, he might not. All I know is I'm not so I'm not wasting my time on this anymore.
Believe me or don't.

If you don't, lynch me.

patrickSTARR

mahamageehad wrote: »

@Patrick, just to widen the scope and make sure you're not tunnelling, could you give it a break on Necro and Lord for an hour or two and consider who else you find suspicious?

No Lynch – 3 Votes (MrsFlushdraw, Drumpot, Jayop)

That's whom I also suspect. Why waste your vote when others are clearly voting. Its as bad as not voting.

Wolves could easily adopt this plan of not voting for anyone, if they don't vote they try to make themselves appear impartial while those who voted for the posters whom were up for lynch (Mick or PJ) get implicated as a result.

mahamageehad

Necrominus wrote: »

Not gone on that to be honest if that's the case it's as well to have a blind vote.
To be honest I think I'll just say who I'm voting for tonight and leave it at that.

Well, we learn very little from a blind vote tbh.
I do think the FFA is useful in getting people to commit to a certain few names, and to be fair the top FFA suspect did get lynched so it does kinda work. A blind vote is a tad too dangerous imo because we could easily target good roles. It also lets the wolves away with not having to put forward an opinion or reason. Both you and QB seem to be pretty upset about how the vote/FFA went, any comment on why that is?

Necro

patrickSTARR wrote:

Lets say I went with the FFA, and voted Mick. Necro, by his narrow minded judgement, would be accussing me of being a wolf (like he is with other Mick Voters, who are all likely of voting for Mick because he looked the most wolfy rather than being wolves themselves.)

Last point on this. I find it highly amusing that you're accusing me of narrow mindedness when you've essentially attacked 2 posters since the start and done the sum total of **** all else until just now.

Pot - Kettle - Black.

Necro

mahamageehad wrote:

Well, we learn very little from a blind vote tbh. I do think the FFA is useful in getting people to commit to a certain few names, and to be fair the top FFA suspect did get lynched so it does kinda work. A blind vote is a tad too dangerous imo because we could easily target good roles. It also lets the wolves away with not having to put forward an opinion or reason. Both you and QB seem to be pretty upset about how the vote/FFA went, any comment on why that is?

Well in previous dimensions people generally stuck to the three inside of the FFA to vote for. It gives more of a focus on why they voted for X instead of convoluted reasons after the fact.
The data from yesterday is basically useless as the vote was quite widespread. That's my only issue tbh.

tritium

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

well perhaps people should give their reasons for not voting 1 of the 3 on the FFA.
but what i think we should focus is is why certain people were on peoples FFA.

most had mick and PJ (god speed guys) and they were proven good.

Bear with me what follows may seem hypocritical

So I've said before and still say that we need structure on the vote. Thats especially true after a bad start since we're playing catchup.

That said i didn't vote within the ffa last night. My reason is I felt we had a mix of village players and Q candidates there-something thats been at least partially borne out.

MrsFlushdraw

mahamageehad wrote: »

Unless he was trying to be a sacrificial lamb as I theorised above?


Boy are you right!
I'm not targeting low posters, I just said I'd like to hear a bit more from them. Pull up a pew. Tell me about that spanking. Are you all caught up? Who do you think is suspicious right now?

On the day he announced it, he would have been on no teams and not know who anyone are. So how can you be a sacrificial lamb? doesn't make sense Mahama. Surely only the wolf team are in a place to protect each other and they will all show evil on death. So we either got Q or we lost the village idiot as they basically asked to be killed!

patrickSTARR wrote: »

No Lynch – 3 Votes (MrsFlushdraw, Drumpot, Jayop)

That's whom I also suspect. Why waste your vote when others are clearly voting. Its as bad as not voting.

Wolves could easily adopt this plan of not voting for anyone, if they don't vote they try to make themselves appear impartial while those who voted for the posters whom were up for lynch (Mick or PJ) get implicated as a result.

Patrick, you talk such nonsense. You really do. You also hit most folks radar with all that

tritium

Necrominus wrote: »

Well in previous dimensions people generally stuck to the three inside of the FFA to vote for. It gives more of a focus on why they voted for X instead of convoluted reasons after the fact.
The data from yesterday is basically useless as the vote was quite widespread. That's my only issue tbh.

The data isnt useless, just a bit more work to interpret- wolves didn't know people would vote outside the ffa. If the classic wolf patterns are there then we still should have some wagoning on mick, a few scattered in the ffa and maybe a lone wolf or two

patrickSTARR

Necrominus wrote: »

Well in previous dimensions people generally stuck to the three inside of the FFA to vote for. It gives more of a focus on why they voted for X instead of convoluted reasons after the fact.
The data from yesterday is basically useless as the vote was quite widespread. That's my only issue tbh.

Ill ease off on you for now,

But you do say the data from yesterday is useless yet you wanna use that data anyway to go after Mick voters? You seem to be contradicting yourself

patrickSTARR

MrsFlushdraw wrote: »

Patrick, you talk such nonsense. You really do. You also hit most folks radar with all that

Explain why its nonsense? You seem spooked?

mahamageehad

patrickSTARR wrote: »

No Lynch – 3 Votes (MrsFlushdraw, Drumpot, Jayop)

That's whom I also suspect. Why waste your vote when others are clearly voting. Its as bad as not voting.

Wolves could easily adopt this plan of not voting for anyone, if they don't vote they try to make themselves appear impartial while those who voted for the posters whom were up for lynch (Mick or PJ) get implicated as a result.

So, of those, on the face of it they've all explain. Drumpot's answer is below, Jayop said it's a valid strategy he's seen used successfully and Flush put in the vote early before having to leave. Of those 3, Jayo is most suss to me, but there's not a lot to go on from his posts.

mahamageehad wrote: »

Drumpot, you said this earlier, then went and voted for no lynch. What changed?

Drumpot wrote: »

I got the vote time wrong (again) and thought I had until 10 to vote. I voted at 6.30 because I didn't have a target at that time (that I stated in a post but was afraid of missing the vote (in another universe I got a severe reprimand for missing a vote). I was reading posts casually at 9.10 thinking I had 50 mins to choose a target (that would of been PJ most likely) and got it wrong.

I wanted us to vote tonight and didn't see the benefit of publically asking for a vote only to try and "hide" in no lynch's.

The only note I had on Mick was that he foolishly (in my view) agreed with Barney's suggestion of a no vote. But he wasn't even on my radar to be honest . .

Necrominus wrote: »

Well in previous dimensions people generally stuck to the three inside of the FFA to vote for. It gives more of a focus on why they voted for X instead of convoluted reasons after the fact.
The data from yesterday is basically useless as the vote was quite widespread. That's my only issue tbh.

I actually think that the spread gives us a little more to work with. If it was a complete landslide on 2 posters, then we'd have two large groups to pick from whereas now it's a bit more interesting. That said, I'll be going through the Mick voters first, there's surely a wolf hiding there.

Ectoplasm

On the FFA thing, I don't think we should force people to vote any particular way. They're useful for collating information but if the top 3 at the end of the day aren't on my radar or I disagree strongly then I'm not going to vote for them

patrickSTARR

Mecro me aul pal, tell me, besides your idea for Mick posters, who outside of those do you suspect?

tritium

MrsFlushdraw wrote: »

On the day he announced it, he would have been on no teams and not know who anyone are. So how can you be a sacrificial lamb? doesn't make sense Mahama. Surely only the wolf team are in a place to protect each other and they will all show evil on death. So we either got Q or we lost the village idiot as they basically asked to be killed!

Patrick, you talk such nonsense. You really do. You also hit most folks radar with all that

Hey mrs FD, good to have you back, you'd gone a bit off the radar. Who are your suspects at the moment?

Jayop

His reasonable Johnson lol.

Damned by faint praise.

grumpylumpy

mahamageehad wrote: »

Unless he was trying to be a sacrificial lamb as I theorised above?


Boy are you right!
I'm not targeting low posters, I just said I'd like to hear a bit more from them. Pull up a pew. Tell me about that spanking. Are you all caught up? Who do you think is suspicious right now?

Flushy, for use of the term "m8"

Necro

patrickSTARR wrote:

But you do say the data from yesterday is useless yet you wanna use that data anyway to go after Mick voters? You seem to be contradicting yourself

It's what I'm used to. Inside an FFA, you will generally have a wolf or two who bandwagon onto a village target as trit said above. Because a good few people voted outside the FFA candidates yesterday it makes that harder to decipher.
I agree with you about the no lynch voter part actually. Seems a nice cop out but I'm convinced one of the 6 (now 5) voters on Mick is a wolf.

mahamageehad

MrsFlushdraw wrote: »

On the day he announced it, he would have been on no teams and not know who anyone are. So how can you be a sacrificial lamb? doesn't make sense Mahama. Surely only the wolf team are in a place to protect each other and they will all show evil on death. So we either got Q or we lost the village idiot as they basically asked to be killed!

Think outside the box slightly.
He may just have been a NRV. His best play (what I'm calling sacrificial lamb) was to get the wolves to focus on him and munch him. There's only 1 munch, and by trying to *be* that munch, he could have been trying to save a rolled player. It's a valid play, even if it didn't work out.

Morning all

In the over an hour there will be potentially 4 villagers dead. Definitely 3 anyway.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, we need to make wolf hunting our priority. The recruiter makes their selection after tomorrow nights lynch, is that correct? If we are close to lynching them the queen might act as a decoy so if we don't use the last bullet wisely, that would get the recruiter over the line.

Please, put Q more to the side for today. I'm not saying ignore completely but We don't know until the end who they are so play today and tomorrow as an us vs them (villagers vs wolves)

Necro

patrickSTARR wrote:

Mecro me aul pal, tell me, besides your idea for Mick posters, who outside of those do you suspect?

Most of my suspects are in the Mick voters tbh :pac:
I would be a little suss of Jayop as well truth be told but not enough to force the issue. I've been wrong a few times already this game.

grumpylumpy

mahamageehad wrote: »

Unless he was trying to be a sacrificial lamb as I theorised above?


Boy are you right!
I'm not targeting low posters, I just said I'd like to hear a bit more from them. Pull up a pew. Tell me about that spanking. Are you all caught up? Who do you think is suspicious right now?

I'm not caught up, just had a scan, not gonna have a chance to catch up before 6 with work so looking with fresh eyes lets say.

In all seriousness though, I think MrsFD doth protest too much

And i CANT BELIEVE there was support for no lynch. Really not sure how I feel about it. I'd say there's at least one wolf in there. If they were smart they'd make sure not to bandwagon on it. Wouldn't be surprised at all if one or two committed to it cos it seemed like a good idea at the time, and then couldn't back down

Baggly

Jayop wrote: »

His reasonable Johnson lol.

Damned by faint praise.

I hear it is, indeed, very reasonable though.

patrickSTARR

Necrominus wrote: »

Most of my suspects are in the Mick voters tbh :pac:
I would be a little suss of Jayop as well truth be told but not enough to force the issue. I've been wrong a few times already this game.

I think the non lynchers myself, 1 in 3 chance of hitting a wolf.

Out of the 3 groups I suspect, (mick, PJ and no lynch voters), the non lynchers have less. I think a wolf is in there and its a 1 in 3 chance as opposed to your 1 in 6.

I think all Wolves would vote different to each other.

MrsFlushdraw

patrickSTARR wrote: »

Explain why its nonsense? You seem spooked?

tritium wrote: »

Hey mrs FD, good to have you back, you'd gone a bit off the radar. Who are your suspects at the moment?

I was only out for a few hours, national duty support calls

I am a bit suss of Mahama, I had her firmly in my good pile but for some reason I am not 100% sure on her now.
Patrick seems to be bouncing off the walls, he is on my list.

There is something about our lil milkshake too.

Those are my three.

I know Jayop had a hangover but he would have been more up for posting last night. Nothing normal Jayop style coming from him and he is a capable player.

Other than than, not much.
Will be reading today and seeing if any of the above changes.

Nice to see I was missed

I am sure there might be some of you going missing on a similar trip tonight

patrickSTARR

grumpylumpy wrote: »

In all seriousness though, I think MrsFD doth protest too much

And i CANT BELIEVE there was support for no lynch. Really not sure how I feel about it. I'd say there's at least one wolf in there. If they were smart they'd make sure not to bandwagon on it. Wouldn't be surprised at all if one or two committed to it cos it seemed like a good idea at the time, and then couldn't back down

Me too, Id like to hear more from her. She seemed very defensive when I questioned her.

grumpylumpy

patrickSTARR wrote: »

Me too, Id like to hear more from her. She seemed very defensive when I questioned her.

And yet addressed nothing in her last post.

Curiouser and curiouser.

What about you Patrick, who you been accusing?

Barney92

patrickSTARR wrote: »

I think the non lynchers myself, 1 in 3 chance of hitting a wolf.

Out of the 3 groups I suspect, (mick, PJ and no lynch voters), the non lynchers have less. I think a wolf is in there and its a 1 in 3 chance as opposed to your 1 in 6.

I think all Wolves would vote different to each other.

I don't agree with this. I reckon there is a decent chance that 2 voted for the same person. The wolves probably would've wanted to follow the FFA so as not to stand out. I'd say 2 may have voted for mick and 2 for pj and one random. It wasn't clear from the thread that people weren't going to follow FFA

patrickSTARR

Ms Flush, would you agree that it would be a good wolf tactic to vote "no lynch"?

mahamageehad

MrsFlushdraw wrote: »

I am a bit suss of Mahama, I had her firmly in my good pile but for some reason I am not 100% sure on her now.

Seems a bit vague, any reasoning for that?
Actually all 3 of your reasonings are vague, nothing concrete after 2 days?

Drumpot

mahamageehad wrote: »

Think outside the box slightly.
He may just have been a NRV. His best play (what I'm calling sacrificial lamb) was to get the wolves to focus on him and munch him. There's only 1 munch, and by trying to *be* that munch, he could have been trying to save a rolled player. It's a valid play, even if it didn't work out.

I think PJ was an NRV . . . .

But I didn't think yesterday and don't think today should be about focusing on Q. If you think about it, the only time we should be worried about Q is if we have chosen somebody to Lynch, only then should we review the behaviour of a target, otherwise Q isn't a problem. .