Werewolf 7 game thread

[Serdoa]

Is anyone else getting the "I'm pissed off at being wrongly accused of guilt" vibe from uberfish, rather than the "I'm pissed off that my gambit didn't work" vibe? Maybe I'm just too emotional, and that's what's causing me to potentially see sincerity behind his latest post - even if the content of it is a worthless defense. I've seen the same tactic in the past with Selrahc, and it was always so hollow. I've seen it in the past with others (Rowain? Someone else?) and though I didn't heed it then, in hindsight it turned out to be genuine, as well. I have to wonder if we're not seeing the same thing here.

Of course, with my track record I could be trying to talk us out of a guaranteed lynch on a probable 'Wolf - not like uberfish hasn't tricked me in the past. :neenernee I don't know, but we'll find out one way or another pretty soon.

Roland, I am rather getting the "I don't care"-vibe from uberfish. As a villager, I expect everyone to fight because that does help the village the most. But he does not fight, he didn't even try. He waited long to even reply at all (probably waiting as many bandwagons disappear sooner then later) and when he did, it was a post just telling us that we are not good enough players. And when you think about that, does it really make sense that a villager is stating that? I don't think so.

[Twinkletoes89]

Has anyone who's voting for me actually posted any kind of solid evidence why I'm suspicious?

I can't think of any.

Out of interest, I hope the vote isn't so close that a double voting wolf could swing it with enough other people to cover their tracks.

[Twinkletoes89]

By the way, I think that's time up!

[Roland]

You sound so pissed uberfish, that I am wondering what you had expected after your gambit? That people would not question your motives? That can't be it, you yourself said that it should not paint you as innocent. That people would not discuss how you would play as villager/wolf? I think it should have been obvious to you that it will happen (because in every game that question comes up).

I really try to come up with reasons not to vote for you, but you make it really hard as you don't even try to be helpful. Your gambit might or might not have been intended to help. But everything afterwards pretty much was not.

...And there's Serdoa to go the complete opposite way from me. :neenernee A fitting crosspost.

This is ever my problem: emotion clashing with logic. Logically, uberfish's arguments don't help his case, but emotionally they could carry weight - if they're not just more fluff from a 'Wolf. Urgh, I'm torn, so I guess the best thing for em to do is stay where I am. As I side before, we'll know soon enough which side uberfish is on, and I don't like flip-flopping, so yeah.

I don't know that I'll have a chance to come back before the day ends - been putting off work to be more active these last couple hours, so now I have to go into crunch mode - so I guess I'll see what happens when I get home.

[uberfish]

Roland, I am rather getting the "I don't care"-vibe from uberfish. As a villager, I expect everyone to fight because that does help the village the most. But he does not fight, he didn't even try. He waited long to even reply at all (probably waiting as many bandwagons disappear sooner then later) and when he did, it was a post just telling us that we are not good enough players. And when you think about that, does it really make sense that a villager is stating that? I don't think so.

Well, I really don't care - I win from my own metagame perspective even if I die since I'll have proven all the assumptions about what I'd do as a villager wrong.

[Twinkletoes89]

Hang on, I'm so used to GMT being my time that I forget its still BST. We may have another hour.

[Serdoa]

Not really close right now TT. You should have 4 I think and uberfish 10.

[Mr. Nice Guy]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now to the game.

From my one game in WW, I expressly stated my dislike for bandwagons and nothing has changed. I haven't casted my vote because I don't want to hop from target to target aimlessly. I want to be able to fully justify my vote.

I'm probably going to have to re-read all the stuff I've missed as I have rushed somewhat to make a response given all the comments on my silence and also being under threat of lynching.

I am a methodical player, I like to examine plenty of evidence before drawing conclusions while I know others like to jump on each new thing that comes up and start tying them together.

All the talk of 'if so & so is a wolf, then so must this guy' with just one day's worth of evidence is both risky and has the potential to be counter-productive. Blinkering ourselves early may yield one good result with a bit of luck, but could then lead us down a false trail of mislynches because of these assumptions.

One thing I would like to counter right now is some people seeming to suggest I was trying to minimise uberfish's early provocative comment. I was firmly critical of it, saying (as Zak later did) that it was either a stupid wolf move or a stupid villager move and so even a mislynch on him if he turned out to be innocent would not be a loss. I am still not convinced by his explanations, but I will not cast my vote early like others did as he deserves the right to try and dig himself out of the hole he dug, which would also be useful.

Now I shall look at your other complaints and see what I can do to counter them.

This post reads to me as you not wanting to join bandwagons. A short while later, you voted uberfish, after it had become a full and strong bandwagon.

Your ealiest posts commented no wanting quiet people to speak up. Then you yourself went unusually quiet. When people called you out for being quiet, you commented about being busy. You've since been very vocal.

The trend here is a series of contradictions. No bandwagon, bandwagon. Speak up, people, while TT is quiet. TT's busy, but very vocal...

That, sir, is why I am so suspicious of you. I can't tell you any more specific arguments to refute, on day 1 there aren't any. But I would ask more predictabbility and consistency. That's all.

That said, much as it irks me to vote with my #1 target, I feel more strongly now than ever about my uberfish vote, thanks to his couple of recent emo posts.

[Serdoa]

Well, I really don't care - I win from my own metagame perspective even if I die since I'll have proven all the assumptions about what I'd do as a villager wrong.

Better not to say more.

[Serdoa]

This post reads to me as you not wanting to join bandwagons. A short while later, you voted uberfish, after it had become a full and strong bandwagon.

He said he don't want to vote bandwagons all day long just for the sake of voting. Thats a difference. And honestly, you can't really play this game without voting on bandwagons.

Your ealiest posts commented no wanting quiet people to speak up. Then you yourself went unusually quiet. When people called you out for being quiet, you commented about being busy. You've since been very vocal.

He explained that he has work to do and has to leave early and comes back home late. It is late now so he is at home and instead of going to bed he is posting. Not particularly wise to do that but incriminating?

The trend here is a series of contradictions. No bandwagon, bandwagon. Speak up, people, while TT is quiet. TT's busy, but very vocal...

That, sir, is why I am so suspicious of you. I can't tell you any more specific arguments to refute, on day 1 there aren't any. But I would ask more predictabbility and consistency. That's all.

That said, much as it irks me to vote with my #1 target, I feel more strongly now than ever about my uberfish vote, thanks to his couple of recent emo posts.

I don't see the contradictions MNG. Maybe I misunderstood you somewhere?