WW 18 Siege of the Dragon! (Game Thread)

[Ichabod]

I wasn't planning on breaking my silence yet, but I'm quite annoyed with Serdoa.

re: novice: since the wagon mostly disbanded, I voted azza mainly to start a bandwagon and see how people reacted. Azza's a good target for pressure because he has played the same lurky style both as village and scum in the 2 games he's played and it's hard to read. I expect that most of the village would think the same way due to what happened in 17.

Brilliant. Azza is enigmatic and difficult for a lot of people to read - mostly because he doesnt give the village a lot of info to work with. we've read him wrong twice now, lynching him when he was innocent and letting him survive when he was scum. He's the perfect target to put pressure on early when there's not a lot to go on and see what shakes out.

Serdoa, you recognized what we were doing, you even mentioned in your vote analysis that you understood the votes by me, Zak, and Uber. As well you should - I spelled it out to you in our mason thread when I was doing the same thing to thestick in ww16. That worked out pretty damn well for the village. If you understood what we were doing, why did you feel it necessary to white knight Azza? Why not keep your mouth shut and see what develops? The dogpile completely dissipated thanks to you coming to his rescue, before we could get any information at all from Azza. I can't think of any pro-town motivation you could possibly have for helping Azza out.

Does this mean that you think Azza is a wolf? What other interest wolf Serdoa would have in saving a villlager? So, shouldn't you be voting Azza.

And thats exactly what zak is doing, making a case up.

Actually I'm trying to get you to engage in a discussion about potential other suspects, if you've noticed. But you just keep brushing everything off with angry dismissals.

I'm saying: Hey Serdoa, let's talk about other suspects.
You're saying: OMG YOU'RE THE SCUM BECAUSE YOU ONLY WANT TO TALK ABOUT ME

Do you see where I'm coming from?

Just to add a bit to this: in WW16 when I was under constant pressure, it was very hard to do anything other than defending and I was a villager back then. Sometimes you just don't ahev the time to both defend and try to find cases and sometimes defending may be better for the village than trying to find suspects (of course, in one particular moment of the game - sometime you'll ahve to try and catch scum). I don't think this kind of behaviour points for villager or wolf, it's pretty neutral (not so much the revenge accusation that I think you are implying, but mostly the "not-having-time-to-find-other-suspects" thing).

[novice]

The feeling I get from reading Q's handy posts is that his device must be a royal pain to type on, and that he's going through a lot of effort just to post what he does post. And his content isn't spam either, he's responding to a lot of stuff directed at him and also doing independent scumhunting. I guess this is not so apparent though if people are just skimming his posts.

I summary, while I don't have any town tells as such on Q, I think he's an odd choice for a day 1 lynch.

[Rowain]

I have to say that I quite honestly don’t see how I attacked Q unfairly when I told him that I don’t understand why I have to read his handy-posts.

The unfairly in my post stems from the fact that he had the same problems (and the same posting style) during the last 2 games too. So his 'restriction' is well known and not a surprise.

Lastly, you didn’t take my sentence there about most of the time being right serious, did you Rowain? I mean I know you have a low opinion of me, but I thought it was obvious that this was an exaggeration meant to be understood as a joke. Guess I really don’t understand the English language or rather how to use it. Sorry.

Honestly I wasn't sure if you meant it as joke or not. But if I misunderstood it it could well be my fault. Afterall English isn't my first language either.

[Ichabod]

I'm actually still voting Uberfish. Here's my "case" against him.

I don't know that I'm much wiser from day 1 so far. On rereading, I guess these posts from Uberfish give me a slight scum lean, so I'll go with that.

I'll also blatantly sheep Zakalwe on Azza

Being blatant and admitting it, and not giving any followup explanation when asked to.

and random.org says Qgqqqq for now.

What if I don't believe that vote was actually random?

Unnamed insinuations.

For the record, I dislike all this vote-disclaiming "oh my vote is meaningless and random" and "oh I'm going to be a good villager and not revenge vote you". You can't all be scum but any villagers doing this should stop because it makes it easy for the scum to hide if people are playing in deliberately neutral fashion.

Playing the good villager with general advice.

So, Uberfish, and since that means I need a new mayor vote, Ichabod.

Here's a response from him, I'm not sure how much is actually in response to my post.

re: novice: since the wagon mostly disbanded, I voted azza mainly to start a bandwagon and see how people reacted. Azza's a good target for pressure because he has played the same lurky style both as village and scum in the 2 games he's played and it's hard to read. I expect that most of the village would think the same way due to what happened in 17.

Note that I still think Q's vote on me is scummy due to the reasoning outlined above. I expected people voting for azza to have a similar mindset that azza votes were a good early move. If Q had voted someone else then I could understand attacking me.

I'm ok with waterbat's explanation of his vote.

Ichabod feels off and his vote for Pind over the mayor vote seemed rather contrived. If I were to switch it'd probably be there. Not buying the case against serdoa, he seems to be playing in his usual style.

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

On another note, Serdoa, please accept my aplogies. It should be possible to play this game without being needlessly offensive.

Also, if you're wondering why Qgqqqqq is so angry it's unhealthy, maybe you should reread this post of yours:

Serdoa, could you respond to my responses?
I'd like to hear your thoughtss on the case now that i'vee refuted it.

I'm not seeing it refuted, but honestly, half of your posts are making no sense for me due to the immense amount of typing errors and incoherent sentences, so I might very well not even have read it. Yes, I know, the phone, but why has that to be my problem? Why do I need to invest absurd amounts of time to figure out what you might have meant? Call me old fashioned but there is something called courtesy. And obviously you are able to type correctly (or remotely so) even on your phone, so it is not a language barrier. You just decided that you don't want to invest the time necessary to correct the errors - and again, why should I invest in that case the time to decipher it?

Ichabod's disappeared too, maybe he fled from the rancor, here's his last post:

A good point. Coupled with what I said in my above post and that I found strange.

Serdoa

Ok, honestly, I give MJW the benefit of the doubt as he hasn't played for quite some time with us. But you have Ichabod. You agreeing with MJWs "point" (that I am full of myself and that would be not normal... um, I am always full of myself, thats because most of the time I am right) does not make sense. Especially given that your own argument against me is just bad. Maybe you should take a step back and re-read what was posted by everyone, instead of trying to live up to your self proclaimed "I'm the best wolf-hunter and I will show it"-fanatism?

Sorry if I offended you, but I don't see what I did wrong. I'm just trying to have fun and that's impossible to do in WW without a bit of confidence that you are right. I think you are being unfair here.

No, I didn't flee from the rancor. I think I and Serdoa reached an agreement that none of us meant any bad feelings towards the other. I just had internet problems at home due to a storm. I'm here now and trying to catch up between things to do at work. But I have to say that I don't like to see what the thread has become.

Regarding your Uberfish suspicion, I think you have a point. Especially the general advice thing. I can add that the reason he gave for voting for me is a pretty easy one (I know that I use teh "gut-feeling" argument for lynching people a lot of time and there's quite some times where it was indeed right -> it still is an easy reason to make, though). I still prefer Waterbat for now, though.

[Mattimeo]

You do realize that only two people are voting for you? And while Zak has voted for you before, you've never had more than two people on you? I have even said that we likely won't lynch you today, but I'm willing to stick on you for now and see what happens. And what happens is you fly off the handle. I do feel bad that you seem to get lynched early in these games, but you WERE scum in 16, in 17 you got RailRoaded by scum on day 2. I don't see it as you being persecuted unfairly in every game.

When every time I check the thread there's a new post commenting negatively on what I've said, I'm less likely to take note of the actual vote tally before getting annoyed at this.


Randomness:

Qgqqqqq and Serdoa posting in circles is not actually all that great a spectator sport, to be honest.
Similar reaction to zak / Serdoa, but at least that interaction has some new / elaborated info every post or two.
I'm liking that Bigger is talking now. He generally seems useful when he's talking.

People talking lurkers seem to have settled on Azza, what seems in part due to lurking working so well for him last game. Interesting how no-one is pointing fingers at Selrahc for keeping his play style consistent with regard to post quantity (though I'll not dispute the quality is rather higher), or slowcheetah (whose posts have been, if anything, even less related to actual content than Azza's).

Whole day has seemed to revolve around Qgqqqqq and related issues. Feels like we're being funneled that way rather than attempting to explore other options. Though that might just be due to those involved being so loud that I haven't noticed anything else.

waterbat hasn't done anything to assuage my suspicions of him since I voted. A couple of posts that look to be intended to inspire sympathy, followed by making himself useful with the thread skimmer.

Hopefully I can get myself awake a little while before lynch. Been running on 4 hours sleep the last week or so, one more day shouldn't hurt, right?

[Mattimeo]

Oh, and since he's posting now:
Bigger

[Ichabod]

Well, I'll vote waterbat. I think those posts I quoted before (they were nest-quoted ina Rowain post) were very filler and strange. There was little content there, but talking about the "main show" that was going on in the thread (Qgqqqq, Serdoa and Zak discussions). It seemed to me like Waterbat was dragged to spotlight by that discussion and had to post something about it. Those two posts (for reference, 172 and 173) feel forced, much more something of an obligation to post something rather than posting to contribute. And this is a wolf tell, in my opinion.

I also found the case that Bigger made against Serdoa a bit strange, since he should just vote for Azza, if he thought Azza was a wolf. He's now voting for Azza, so I guess that fits. But the timing of the post still seems a bit strange and the content too. it seemed to imply that it was pretty obvious that the votes on Azza were just for reasons of pression, but if it was that obvious (that serdoa would obviously have seen it and come to the help of Azza), why would Azza feel pressured? If the case is not real, just for pressure, there's no pressure involved. (BTW, Azza reads blank for me, I always end up ignoring people that post very little and this is no exception).

I don't understand why I'm being voted, but I have 3 votes against me already. I think I already adressed MJW, since he voiced his reasons, but from what I can tell, Uber and Slowcheetah are voting for me because I'm off/gut feeling. I don't know what to say about that other than my playing in WW is really framed by what I'm feeling at the moment, so I can be very present or more absent. So, the way I react to the game vary from game to game.

[Serdoa]

This was what drew my interest to Q in the first place. His first vote goes to Azza, Azza responds to it and conveniently Q finds something “non-random” to confirm his useless early vote.

Now, I got fire for this from zakalwe, because of my argument being bad. Lets see, what was his reasoning for his vote on Mattimeo:

and random.org says Qgqqqq for now.

1. I don't like how you randomly select someone to vote for, and then immediately find something non-random to confirm your vote. A bit too convenient.

Bolded by me. And it seems for me zak that you accused Mattimeo of exactly the same thing I accused Q of, making a pointless throw-away vote and immediately afterwards conveniently finding something to confirm it.

Serdoa, you say that's what "drew your interest to Q". Did you actually share this sentiment with us before, though? I imagine that your statement here is rephrased from what you wrote earlier, so I'd be interested to see a quote of how you originally justified your Q vote. Your case against Zak is kind of dependent on that.

novice, I made my long post (page 7) and maybe one couldn't read it from there. But Q answered my post - in a way I disliked. So I explained myself in more detail. Direct quote:

I just want to make something clear here: I really dislike this behaviour Qgqqqqq. You have not in the least explained why you did call your vote useless despite it having an effect that should be notable (and you yourself state that you get obsessed with these games, so I expect you to not overlook it). Instead you just try to discount it as if we are exaggerating. We don't. If you'd have just voted without stating anything, I wouldn't look a second time on it. But you didn't. You felt it necessary to add that it is a useless vote. But then you tried to engage with Azza. If I give you the benefit of the doubt and believe you that you didn't realize that your vote wasn't useless then I have to assume that you only voted jokingly for Azza. In that case you engaging with him doesn't make sense.

Care to explain why you did vote for Azza and called it useless? And why you did engage with him afterwards? I mean, you stated your vote is for last game - the only one to give any reason for his vote on him at all and a bad one, considering it puts him up top. He replied to that with telling you that he wouldn't revenge vote you because all you do feels suspicious to him (so basically the same Lewwyn stated, but with actually acting upon what he said). And that is for you reason to hit on him... I don't get it. You don't have a reason to vote him but because he calls you on it (and you specifically because your vote puts him in front) he suddenly is a prime target for you? How does that work?

Bolded by me now. Whats the difference to zaks accusation of Mattimeo? There is none, it is pratically identical. Both voted jokingly at first. Both suddenly found something suspicious about their joke-target. Both pointed it out and for both it seemed very convenient to happen just like that.

Btw: Below is the last part of my first post in the thread

Lastly, to get away from that topic: Mattimeo

He first sated that he rolled a dice for his lynch vote. And then he stated that he is not married to his vote. That makes no sense. If you rolled a dice, you obviously are not married to your vote. Mattimeo let it sound like it would something necessary to point out when in reality it should be obvious. Why? I think he really just wanted to make clear that he can be swayed still as he found Qgqqqqs behaviour slightly suspicious (Qgqqqq inquired about the passive roles in a slightly off way). But the way he did it doesn't sit well with me. I'd not put it into "scum-camp" already, but something to look out for.

Hey, thats zak accusation against Mattimeo! But no, I wrote that long before he made his accusation. He just added the part about putting words in peoples mouths. Which I could show isn't true. He just copied what I had already posted, added a little bit of his own and took it from there. So, we know now that

- he accused me despite us both making the exact same argument (just me doing it for both Q and Mattimeo and he only doing it for Mattimeo)
- he added obvious wrong "evidence" to his case
- he voted the whole first day only for people voting for Q and always with the reason that they vote for Q

Still no one interested in joining me on him?

[Bigger]

Serdoa - I'll respond the same others did to me trying to lynch you over Azza. If you're right, doesnt that mean Zak and Q are teammates? So why not just vote Q?

[Serdoa]

Well, interesting question Bigger. See, the thing is, I don't know why zak acts like he does. I don't know if he is a wolf or if Q is his teammate. But looking back at D1, I certainly can't understand his play. Qs on the other hand I can understand. Not agree maybe, but understand. I still don't like how he reacted to Azza and some other stuff, but it fits his whole other game so far. Thats why I vote zak. Not because I have an overarching theory that he and Q are partners, but because his play is the one making the least sense for me if he is a villager. So, he probably isn't.

Now, let me ask you: Do you see a fault in my theory about zak? Do you agree with it? If you do, wouldn't that be the better vote? If not, what would you tell me, why should I vote for Azza instead?