Werewolf 3 Game Thread

[Bruindane]

Now, honestly, tell me that doesn't look suspicious to you - from an objective viewpoint.

I really don't think you can cast additional suspicion on the poor sacrificial villagers that were on the voting block until you get data about the people voting.

MJW being lynched is unfortunate, in that, the reasons for lynching him appear to be unrelated to this current game. To top it off, he posted a ton, and my read was that he was a villager, perhaps with a non-mason power-role.

All the other votes shifted pretty dynamic in their voting, switching several times, essentially randomly to my eyes. Yet MJW's voters, with the exception of Rowain, picked him and stayed on him.

[scooter]

Is it possible we're looking for something in nothing here? Why exactly are people on the Cull bandwagon suspicious? MJW was a villager. Why would the wolves pile on Cull then..? To save a villager? I don't get it. Honest question - am I missing something?

I honestly couldn't understand why MJW was being lynched. Sure he spouted a lot of nonsense, but he was SO ridiculous that I felt he had to be innocent, because the wolves wouldn't allow that kind of behavior if MJW was a wolf. Irgy made this comment early on, and I think he was spot on about it. Also someone said that no one defended Cull. The thing is - this bandwagon happened all in an hour or so. Why would someone jump to defend Cull? What has Cull done that could possibly make us think he might be innocent? I voted for Cull because out of the three viable choices (MJW, PB, Cull), he seemed to be the one with the least positive evidence, and I still feel that way about him. I felt we were making a bit of a mistake lynching MJW, because even though he said a lot of crazy stuff, I felt he was probably a crazy villager and we could just ignore him and hope the wolves kill him in the night (fat chance, I know).

I think we're looking for bad activity where there probably isn't any. If MJW was a wolf, then yeah, I'd agree that all the late Cull voters look odd, but he wasn't, so I seriously doubt the wolves were making some crazy attempt to save a villager. I think what's a lot more likely is that a few villagers (not many when you consider it's 3 or 4 out of 24) thought MJW was probably innocent, so let's go with someone else who seems mildly suspicious, because quite frankly, we didn't have much to go on today.

By the way, many people wanted there to be 3 candidates with a lot of votes at the wire... Which is fine... But just remember, when you have 3 major candidates and 23 people voting, that's just begging for a late game mass swap, as those who find themselves in the "3rd party" position scramble to make their vote count. It shouldn't be that surprising. Late swings like this will be less violent and more meaningful when there are less players.

[pocketbeetle]

I'm not saying you're a 'Wolf, nor that you had anything to do with the swing - after all, I highly doubt the 'Wolves would make such a glaringly brazen, coordinated move like that, especially this early in the game - but it does make you more suspicious. I don't think you can argue that, except to say it's "coincidence" - which may very well be true, but does very little to sway suspicion from you.

You have two possibilities.

• It was coincidence.
  Trying to anticipate the obvious answer and sticking it in inverted commas doesn't suddenly make it less likely Roland. All you're doing is biasing yourself.
  
• I'm a wolf and I decided to bring in two-three other wolves in order to avoid the possibility that I might suddenly gain two or more votes in the last half hour. (Frankly it's absurd as you yourself acknowledge)
  

What I particularly object to however, is your wording here:

If anything, I'd say pocketbeetle is the greater suspect out of all of this. He was the one approaching MJW in votes, and a careful staging of tying his name to Cull beforehand nicely set us up for what we had at the end of the day - an easy explainable swing to Cull.

At no point have I associated myself in any way shape or form with Cull.
The bolded section is an egregious falsification in an attempt to make me look manipulative and besmirch my excellent reputation, and in all seriousness, there's absolutely nothing I've written that you can refer to back up your claim.
Don't do the above again please.

[Ichabod]

What I particularly object to however, is your wording here:

At no point have I associated myself in any way shape or form with Cull.
The bolded section is an egregious falsification in an attempt to make me look manipulative and besmirch my excellent reputation, and in all seriousness, there's absolutely nothing I've written that you can refer to back up your claim.
Don't do the above again please.

Haha,

Seriously, I was going to quote the exact same sentence, underlining the exact same thing. But since i'm not the one being accused, I won't be so harsh in my questioning :neenernee

I didn't understand what you were trying to say with that sentence, Roland. Could you elaborate on it a bit, please?

[Ichabod]

If anything, I'd say pocketbeetle is the greater suspect out of all of this. He was the one approaching MJW in votes, and a careful staging of tying his name to Cull beforehand nicely set us up for what we had at the end of the day - an easy explainable swing to Cull.

Just to make it clearer, that's the sentence I'm referring to with the above post.

[Roland]

At no point have I associated myself in any way shape or form with Cull.
The bolded section is an egregious falsification in an attempt to make me look manipulative and besmirch my excellent reputation, and in all seriousness, there's absolutely nothing I've written that you can refer to back up your claim.
Don't do the above again please.

Well, technically speaking I never said you did that, nor do I believe you did that. It wasn't my intent to infer that you had anything to do with the swing directly, just that it was rather convenient. Nothing more, nothing less. I believe I already stated that it would be a rather bold (and obvious) move by the 'Wolves, if that were the case.

As for me falsifying anything, that simply isn't true. That you read it as such may be a fault of my relaying my point, or your own overly defensive nature showing through. In any case, I have to laugh at the idea of your "excellent reputation" - frankly, you've done nothing in this game to earn you anything even remotely approaching such an attribute. Your increasing hostility is not helping that, either. I digress, though - this isn't getting us anywhere, merely proving to me that you'd rather get into a fistfight with anyone who so much as looks at you in a way you dislike than actively try to do something constructive.

Scooter, OTOH, made probably his best post that I can recall in either game - commendable. I'm starting to get the impression you make a better Villager than 'Wolf - either that, or you've learned from last time. In any case, my feelings mirror your own regarding MJW - he's almost assuredly a Villager, so what's the harm in letting him live, truly? 'Course, I still say you have NO idea what you're talking about when you mention the 'Wolves putting a leash on him were they on the same team. I can honestly tell you you're wrong, flat-out, no arguing. There is no leashing MJW - period. The only way to tame him is to put him down, as was demonstrated today - for reasons we can only speculate upon.

I, too, voted for Cull because he seemed (of the 3 main candidates) to be the least contributory. Although, I'm pretty sure I voted for him before pocketbeetle was safe, which looking back on it seems almost strange. I'm pretty sure I was trying not to be biased (despite whatever he may think), and so went with Cull over him. Also, I didn't expect anyone else to follow me, truth be told. I didn't get to check back until after the end of the voting, and I was as surprised as anyone to find such a swing - I was actually afraid Cull was lynched, since I didn't count the votes.

In any case, you're probably right regarding the way the Cull swing went down. Human nature, and all that, and I am heavily inclined to believe the 'Wolves would not make such a noticeable swing, especially last-minute. It still seems odd that 3 people would swing from pocketbeetle to Cull with hardly a word as to why, though. I honestly can see nothing that he's done in this thread to make him more worthwhile than Cull thus far. At least Cull has a more even temperament.

[Roland]

Haha,

Seriously, I was going to quote the exact same sentence, underlining the exact same thing. But since i'm not the one being accused, I won't be so harsh in my questioning :neenernee

I didn't understand what you were trying to say with that sentence, Roland. Could you elaborate on it a bit, please?

Merely that certain people tried to turn others away from pocketbeetle and onto Cull, at various points and in subtle manners. Uberfish's post in particular struck me, not least because scooter immediately followed it up with his usual "me too!" vote of confidence (sorry scooter, but your insightful gems aren't quite as common as your echoes). Aside from both players being rather inactive during Day 1 (each having their own reasons), the tone that some were trying to set seemed to be that pocketbeetle is inherently more valuable than Cull. Being that I believe this is based entirely on actions outside of this thread, and my agreement with... someone (was it Uberfish?) who said it'd be best to judge people on their actions within this thread rather than try to introduce what amounts to meta-gaming (actions in other threads, etc.), it just seemed odd. It was just one of those things that subtly gained traction without any real discussion about it, and that bothers me in a game such as this, what with no PMs and all. Not to mention my natural inclination to resist the idea that anything anyone says is gospel, and thus everyone should follow it (applying to my own comments as much as everyone else's, mind you).

I'll freely admit my comment was more offhand than it came across (apparently). I wasn't intentionally trying to paint pocketbeetle as the mastermind behind some late shift or anything, just that an effort was made and an effect was produced, all revolving around pocketbeetle. Nothing more than that.

[Ichabod]

If anything, I'd say pocketbeetle is the greater suspect out of all of this. He was the one approaching MJW in votes, and a careful staging of tying his name to Cull beforehand nicely set us up for what we had at the end of the day - an easy explainable swing to Cull.

Well, technically speaking I never said you did that, nor do I believe you did that. It wasn't my intent to infer that you had anything to do with the swing directly, just that it was rather convenient. Nothing more, nothing less. I believe I already stated that it would be a rather bold (and obvious) move by the 'Wolves, if that were the case.

Sorry Roland, but I still can't understand. Technically speaking you never said pocketbeetle did that?

"He was the one approaching MJW in votes, and a careful staging of tying his name to Cull beforehand nicely set us up for what we had at the end of the day - an easy explainable swing to Cull."

But that's exactly what you are saying here.

Don't get me wrong. I don't think of this as a wolfish behaviour in your part. The problem is that since post 278 you have a little bit of tunnel vision on PB. And that's not a good thing for the discussion.

I don't trust PB in this game too. Maybe he's saving his thoughts for when we get more information, but he seems to be too quiet (almost all his posts were jokes, for instance).

What I'm trying to say is that any arguments you make against PB after post 278 will be tainted, in my opinion, by your tunnel vision (again, my opinion). Of course, if you make a strong enough case, I'd have no problem in voting for PB. Just saying it so you try to look at things with a fresh perspective.

[Roland]

For what it's worth pocketbeetle, in re-reading my statement that you took such great offense to a few more times I can see why it would have struck you the way it did, to an extent. My comment, in one sentence, was actually two seperate but related comments. Poor formatting on my part. I should have done a better job of proof-reading my work. I'll try to be more explicit in my statements next time to avoid such confusion, as it's not in my nor the Village's best interests for me (nor anyone else) to be causing confusion.

Pint at the pub on me, as a show of good faith moving forward?

[Ichabod]

Merely that certain people tried to turn others away from pocketbeetle and onto Cull, at various points and in subtle manners. Uberfish's post in particular struck me, not least because scooter immediately followed it up with his usual "me too!" vote of confidence (sorry scooter, but your insightful gems aren't quite as common as your echoes). Aside from both players being rather inactive during Day 1 (each having their own reasons), the tone that some were trying to set seemed to be that pocketbeetle is inherently more valuable than Cull. Being that I believe this is based entirely on actions outside of this thread, and my agreement with... someone (was it Uberfish?) who said it'd be best to judge people on their actions within this thread rather than try to introduce what amounts to meta-gaming (actions in other threads, etc.), it just seemed odd. It was just one of those things that subtly gained traction without any real discussion about it, and that bothers me in a game such as this, what with no PMs and all. Not to mention my natural inclination to resist the idea that anything anyone says is gospel, and thus everyone should follow it (applying to my own comments as much as everyone else's, mind you).

I'll freely admit my comment was more offhand than it came across (apparently). I wasn't intentionally trying to paint pocketbeetle as the mastermind behind some late shift or anything, just that an effort was made and an effect was produced, all revolving around pocketbeetle. Nothing more than that.

I crossposted with this post. So my previous post doesn't take this in consideration.

So your sentence was referring to a wider perspective of things than I ended up understanding. I was under the impression that you somehow saw some kind of direct connection between Cull and PB and I never seen such a thing.

But since you meant that maybe there was a wider conspiracy, involving third parties, it's more reasonable.

Not saying that I agree with it. But at least it's comprehensible, while my previous understanding of the sentence wasn't.