TWG XIII - Dark Matters: Crow's Best (Game Over)

[nforcer06164]

Sorry to double-post, but does anyone know exactly when this days ends? I know Kilga said 72 hours, but he never gave a definite time.

[evilbutterfly]

Tomorrow at 7 PM, I think. Unless my FFR clock is wrong, then it's at 6. Whatever, we have another day to vote. Speaking of voting, I have no idea right now. I always forget how we come to lynch anybody Day 1. Hopefully this ridiculously long amount of time will make it easier to get evidence, but I doubt it at the slow rate we're posting. Seriously, more people need to say stuff, even if there's nothing to say, just so we can see how people are talking. That's one great way to get together a list of suspects. Please, if everybody talks, it makes this game a lot easier.

Of course, some of you will be inactive regardless, but you people who are often inactive, think about this: if everybody posts a bunch, we will see if they look suspicious. If you are human, you have nothing to worry about, so you won't look suspicious. Wolves may look susupicious, however, so they may refrain from posting and try to hide. If we can all just agree to post a lot, 2 things could happen. 1) The wolves also post a lot (to seem human) but they will slip up and we're able to catch them more easily. 2) The wolves, scared to let #1 happen, don't post at all. This makes them ridiculously obvious to us. Now, I'm not one to vote for people just because of inactivity, but maybe if we all agree to be active that could work?

C'mon guys, I'm just trying to get things moving.

[nforcer06164]

eb, there's a few flaws in your plan. Getting people to post as much as possible is a good idea under the right circumstances. But, when there's nothing to say pertaining to the game thus far, we'll all will be posting stuff that looks odd. A supposed "slip-up" could be a post that looks funny just because the poster was reaching for something to carry on with your plan. Plus, remember, we can't all be expected to be incredibly active. People have things going on in their lives that take precedence over TWG, so under your plan, they're suspected as wolf when in reality, they had real-world issues to attend to. It's a good idea, but I doubt we'll have to right circumstances to make it effective.

[Kilgamayan]

The day will end at 8:00 PM EST on Monday.

[Lupin_the_3rd]

Quite frankly, at this rate, we're likely lynching a human by tomorrow. I don't know whether it's just me, but aim pms are few and far between and the chat room is usually home to 7 or 8 people at peak times, with a maximum of 4 people talking at once. I just feel that there is just piercing silence. The majority of what people even have to talk about in the chat room is "people need to start talking more". Whatever the problem is, be it easter weekend, or the beginning of spring break for some, let's just hope we can solve this soon.

As for me, I have been neglecting to talk on aim (albeit there isn't much to talk about), which is not only hurting me, but the entire human team. I realize day one is tough to decipher, and yes, we are likely going to lynch a human, but if we all talk, we'll at least be able to use posts for future evidence. I'm sure that it'll be a lot harder to pin a wolf if all the posts consist of "we need to be talking more"

Personally, I think we're looking at a veteran wolf. I disagree with your list of 5, however, blah. I believe that a good majority was capable of that, though I must say that chances are one of you is a wolf. This being said, we're obviously not going to start lynching the best players on that, but I'm sure the seer should know what their job is right now.

What's really going to be a nuisance is inactives later in the game. I don't care if you post once, just post something of substance we can work with. Also, if there is a slight chance you don't think you'll be able to vote by tomorrow, vote now. Vote anyone, but just make sure you vote.

[QreepyBORIS]

Originally Posted by Tps222

Well then, not to over-analyze the kill, I'm voting QreepyBoris . My innactive strategy, he has been around the forums long enough to know tass, but not the recent events of the game.

O_o?

I'm not even going to try to understand that, sorry. :P


Sorry about the absence, too. I forgot I was playing. -_- We had guests over and I was basically really busy, and so I did not realize the game was on by now. :P


My gut says Flux_ is the guardian. Juist cause ANYONE less new to the game might have protevted Tass. Yes, yes, I know, there is very little chance that that is actually TRUE, but...It's just my gut.


As for wolves? I don't know. I'm going to wait it out a while before voting definitively.

[HansSky]

Originally Posted by QreepyBORIS

O_o?

I'm not even going to try to understand that, sorry. :P

He means that he's going to try and vote off inactive people who won't help any, to put it bluntly.


At least that's what I think he meant by his "innactive strategy". Anyone, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

[evilbutterfly]

Yeah, TPS was in the chat and tried to explain the reasoning to me, but it didn't make any sense. Then he got offended and said I was an elitist jerk and thought I was super awesome at the game and I shouldn't call him stupid, or something like that. I guess I won't criticize him anymore o-O;;

And Qreepy, for future reference, it's not good to point out who the guardian may be, as this may tip off the wolves who hadn't noticed and get a special role killed. That said, you may be right or wrong. Tass isn't the only top tier player that we'd want to keep alive. The guardian may have been experienced enough to know that blah and Tass are both pretty damn good, and they just happened to pick blah when the wolves picked Tass.

And yeah, my thing I posted before really wouldn't work, it was just my way of doing what I said in that post by just posting anything I could. And thinking about it, I see that it would only generate false suspicion. After all, I do what I suggested, and people always suspect me (yet I've only been a wolf once). So yeah...scratch that plan.

[stretchypanda]

Okay, I hate to do this, but at this point, I would have expected much more from Alain. I've seen you online, and I've seen you post in other threads, so you can't tell me you're too busy to check TWG (especially as slow as this thread has been). You've also posted once, so you can't say you forgot you were playing.

I really don't want to use a person's inactivity as a reason to vote, but I'm trying to get something going here. You are usually all kinds of helpful in this game, and this time around we've heard narry a peep from you.

So, let's go. Prove me wrong.

[lightdarkness]

Voting chart please!

[QreepyBORIS]

I donno, I think voting off people who are SPORADICALLY inactive is stupid. And even highly inactive does not get you very far, either, since statistically you are lynching a human.

[Lupin_the_3rd]

since statistically you are lynching a human.

Considering it is night one, I'd say either way, chances are we're lynching a human. This is what they are getting at- it is a lot easier to get a read from an active human than an inactive one. This is where the question comes- Would you rather lynch an active or inactive human. Granted, we still have time to find enough evidence to incriminate someone as wolf, but complete inactivity is almost as bad as an extra wolf.

Voting for inactives can work wonders, as we've seen in your case, qreepy.

[flypie743]

The only thing that has caught my eye is in the chat. Alain said something like "I hope I get wolfed tonight". I don't know his exact wording, but yeah. And Hans and I both asked him why...I never heard him say anything besides "because" or something weird like that. So what's your explanation Alain?

[evilbutterfly]

Voting just for inactivity is bad, but voting for uncharacteristic inactivity isn't so terrible. It's pretty common that you act different, just slightly strange, when you're a wolf. If someone is always active then suddenly drops off the charts one game, they must be hiding something. Of course, I'd like to think Alain knows better. The comment flypie just said about hoping he is wolfed may mean that he doesn't want to play again. As such, may be he isn't being as active. Praps the game isn't as interesting to him anymore? We should wait for an explaination though, I guess.

[stretchypanda]

I'm only voting for him in hopes of drawing out an explanation. If he wants to be removed from the game, he need only ask.

[stretchypanda]

DOUBLE POST!

I present a totally ripped off voting chart:
AlainBryden (2): lightdarkness, stretchypanda
evilbutterfly (1): deltronumbernumber
BlahBlahnumber (1): flux_

EDIT: Forgot Qreepy (1): Tps

[QreepyBORIS]

Originally Posted by Lupin_the_3rd

Voting for inactives can work wonders, as we've seen in your case, qreepy.

Wait, what'd it do in my case? Bring me in the game? Nah, that was actually coincidence. :P

But I do agree that round one has generally terrible chances of getting wolves. But still, It's better to go off on a limb than to kill someone useless.

On the other hand, killing deadweights in round 1 has its advantages--namely, you can't really get away with it in any other round.

But, still. I'd rather have evidence than this.

[Tps222]

Ok, going wit the statistics, we lynch a human on day one most of the time. Much doesn't usually come out of day 1. So, I think it would be a good idea to lynch an innactive player because

1. They aren't contributing to the conversation
2. The more active people we keep, the more conversation and the chance of a wolf slipping up there is.

I voted for Qreepy mainly because

1. At the time, he hadn'y posted. (obviously I'm changing it now)
2. Qreepy knew that Tass was a power player. He wasnt around the last few games, so he wouldn't know the change in guarding/wolfing patterns. If he had some newb wolfs around him, he could easily persuade them.
3. So, to try and incorporate some idea's in my innactive vote, I included that theory.

Thus, since Qreepy has posted, and I have reconsidered my view on that idea, mainly because of thinking over what EB said, and some doubts in my own mind, I am sticking to my above stated innactive strategy, I'm not going for a wolf on day 1, like most of you are, I'm waiting for the game to develop more, with more evidence, seerings, and slip-ups for voting seriously on someone. Thus, my vote goes to Flux. He onlu has 1 post, and in that post, he gave no credible information for voting for Blah. He is the least active, so nothing personal.

[stretchypanda]

Tps, you are a freaking idiot.

You do not WANT to go for humans, no matter what.

[Lupin_the_3rd]

Originally Posted by stretchypanda

Tps, you are a freaking idiot.

You do not WANT to go for humans, no matter what.

How do you know for sure that flux is human? How many day one wolf lynches have there been? Not too many, that's for sure. Since statistically we're lynching a human tomorrow, why not vote off the weakest link? Because there's still a 3 in 14 chance we're lynching a wolf, why not run with those odds. I'm not condemning flux in any way, it's just that if no better evidence is brought to the table, then that is probably the best course of action.