Werewolf LXXII: Chess (Checkmate!)

[Neon_Chaos]

Sorry but according to how I'm reading the rules, you can't. You don't scan a piece, you scan a person. You can't "clear" a piece directly, only through a process of elimination.

Say you're a knight, my understanding of the rules is that you send in an order, "Scan Narcizo" for example. Then if I control a piece that winds up next to your knight you get a message that says that I'm a villager. If I'm not in range you'll get a message saying your scan failed. Now if you do get a successful result then you know that the piece that I control must be visible to you so if I'm the only piece you can see, then
a) you're incredibly lucky :) , and
b) you know I control that piece.

Gotcha.

[Narcizo]

no lynch (6) - path12 (161), KWhit (170), Barkeep49 (175), The Jackal (217), Lathum (225), Neon Chaos (245)
hoopsguy (3) - mccollins (177), PurdueBrad (193), RendeR (197)
The Jackal (2) - claphamsa (179), Narcizo (232)
Qwikshot (1) - jeheinz72 (159)
mccollins (1) - hoopsguy (180)
KWhit (1) - ntndeacon (226)
Barkeep49 (1) - Chief Rum (237)
RendeR (1) - Anxiety (238)

Not voted: Sonic Youth, Qwikshot, oliegirl, st.cronin

Why the hell couldn't the vote have gone like this last game? We'd have been in clover by this stage.

[Sonic Youth]

I'm just leaving work, and will have to catch a bus home. Lucky for me I've got some reading material. The rules for this game. I'll leave a vote though.

Vote No Lynch.

[Passacaglia]

no lynch (6) - path12 (161), KWhit (170), Barkeep49 (175), The Jackal (217), Lathum (225), Neon Chaos (245)
hoopsguy (3) - mccollins (177), PurdueBrad (193), RendeR (197)
The Jackal (2) - claphamsa (179), Narcizo (232)
Qwikshot (1) - jeheinz72 (159)
mccollins (1) - hoopsguy (180)
KWhit (1) - ntndeacon (226)
Barkeep49 (1) - Chief Rum (237)
RendeR (1) - Anxiety (238)

Not voted: Sonic Youth, Qwikshot, oliegirl, st.cronin

Why the hell couldn't the vote have gone like this last game? We'd have been in clover by this stage.

This is what I have as well. Plus SY's vote.

[Narcizo]

OK, at the risk of flogging a dead horse I'd like to point out that in this game there is actually less reason to vote "No Lynch" than in a standard game. What other game are you ever going to play where a villager has over 50% chance of voting to lynch an opponent on day one? If you don't think it's the correct tactic to follow in terms of nailing a wolf then at least see it from the point of view of helping your own team.

[hoopsguy]

Narcizo, frankly I'm just glad someone else sees the same thing I'm seeing on the "No Lynch". But I'm also done with that argument for Day 1; I've said my piece. If the same arguments appear on Day 2, and I'm still around, I'll probably go off the deep end.

[PurdueBrad]

Hoops, I'm not locked in on you but am amazed at the number of no lynches here. I went with you out of respect to your abilities both as a wolf and as an opponent (if we're opposite). I figure the same thing, that there is a greater than a 50% chance we're not on the same team and therefore we would be taking out a good player.

However, that being said, wtf is with all the no lynches. There is probably some fear out there of knocking off an important role but again, the odds of taking out wolves or even just an opponent are the strongest of any game I've played.

I may end up moving my vote but I don't know if it'll do any good anywhere else either at this point.

[PurdueBrad]

http://etc.usf.edu/clipart/17800/17890/chessboard_17890_md.gif

If noone moves, the Knights already have a clear view of everyone (if all the knights are good).

The Knights can see one space away (does this mean 360 degrees?), and any space where they can move.

Each Knight can see their adjacent Rook, Bishop, the three pawns in front of him, and the pawn in front of the Queen/King (depending on which side the knight is on).

Essentially, if noone moves the Knights can scan everyone.

So then the decision needs to be made, nobody move on turn one and knights use your scan on turn one. Moves should start on turn two, with the pawns moving in order to give the back lines the opportunity to move if they choose.

[PurdueBrad]

Damn no edit, by turn one I mean of the several night turns there are, not nobody move at all day one. Hopefully this is clearer.

[PurdueBrad]

Holy Christ it is early and I need an edit button. Try this:

Hopefully this is more clear.

[Narcizo]

:D

[Barkeep49]

I'm fine with not moving, but I think there's no way, at this late date, that we'll be able to coordinate that and the knights should not count on that happening.

[Neon_Chaos]

OK, at the risk of flogging a dead horse I'd like to point out that in this game there is actually less reason to vote "No Lynch" than in a standard game. What other game are you ever going to play where a villager has over 50% chance of voting to lynch an opponent on day one? If you don't think it's the correct tactic to follow in terms of nailing a wolf then at least see it from the point of view of helping your own team.

The objective for both teams is not to eliminate everyone from the other team. It's to kill the opposing King, not eliminate all the other team members.

Sure, it could be easier to to win by killing off the other team's members, but when it comes down to it, it's a chess match... only the King needs to die, and he can't be lynched or killed by wolves.

Voting for no lynch ensures that the Wolves are going to have a harder time killing everyone off, without exactly jeopardizing the objectives of both sides.

[Lathum]

If I have learned anything playing WW it's that there is no way possible to coordinate anything in a game with this many people.

I predict a fustercluck.

[Narcizo]

:D

Actually Chief Rum managed it in the Rome game with about 20 people still alive. Unfortunately it played right into the hands of the wolves.

[Narcizo]

Voting for no lynch ensures that the Wolves are going to have a harder time killing everyone off, without exactly jeopardizing the objectives of both sides.

Fair enough if you believe that one or other side can organise themselves effectively enough (or be lucky enough) to take out the opponent's king when the wolves will be seeking to prevent it from happening. Otherwise the wolves just chip away at us.

And you know that no-one is going to be voting no lynch tomorrow, when, if we're to follow this rationale, we should be voting no lynch every day.

[Lathum]

You know what's funny?

Hoops pulled up a bunch of posts from the hero's game about no lynch's and I was the one driving the no lynch day one that game, and I was a wolf.

Just sayin'

[claphamsa]

Lathum, ever helpfull.....

[Lathum]

Lathum, ever helpfull.....

yeah, I got nothing. I have no clue whats happening. Just trying to make it look like I am somewhat involved.

[Narcizo]

Holy Christ it is early and I need an edit button. Try this:

Hopefully this is more clear.

Problems with expression aside I don't think the knights can decide when they scan. I presume they do so at the end of the turn (phase 8) after everyone has moved and when it's decided who they can see.

And I hope I've also shown that the knights scanning when no-one has moved is far from ideal anyway and that the knights want to be trying to adopt a more centralised position on the board.

[mccollins]

Sorry but according to how I'm reading the rules, you can't. You don't scan a piece, you scan a person. You can't "clear" a piece directly, only through a process of elimination.

Say you're a knight, my understanding of the rules is that you send in an order, "Scan Narcizo" for example. Then if I control a piece that winds up next to your knight you get a message that says that I'm a villager. If I'm not in range you'll get a message saying your scan failed. Now if you do get a successful result then you know that the piece that I control must be visible to you so if I'm the only piece you can see, then
a) you're incredibly lucky :) , and
b) you know I control that piece.

This is how I understand the knights to work as well. Very hit and miss. You only have a chance at less than a quarter of the participants being around you.

If we moved to where all the knights could see each piece as Narcizo originally suggested, all 4 knights would need to scan the same player name to be sure that one of them found the person.

[Narcizo]

Which isn't practicle and probably not ideal anyway as there would be a 90% chance of getting at least one right and, erm, some lesser chance of getting two or more if the knights check up on different people. In fact I'd suggest that the knight pairs agree to scan different people.

This is all by the by anyway as Lathum has pointed out, it's nigh on impossible to get people organised enough to try to implement any sort of plan. I actually though I had a chance with the neutral zone thingy but I doubt it now. All I can say is that I recommend that the knights get themselves in a position where there's likely to be a lot of friendly pieces and that other villagers make an effort to be within range of the knights. And that people don't trust their PM partners.

[st.cronin]

I'm with Narc and hoopsguy, hate the no lynch in this game. I'll be voting for one of the no-lynchers:

VOTE KWHIT

[st.cronin]

Narc, for now, I'm sticking with your plan. Not because I trust you, just because I'm not willing to move out yet.

[KWhit]

My original No Lynch vote was assuming that we could move around the board and know who was who. Pass dispelled that notion which killed my initial thoughts on a strategy. Now, honestly, I'm not sure what the right course of action is.

I do know that the bishops are EXTREMELY important pieces as they will be able to find out the color of the players - a fact much more important than finding out who the wolves are, IMO.

I'm going to change my vote and actually lynch someone. Of the two top candidates, I think I'll vote for The Jackal. I'd like to keep hoops around a little while to help discuss and formulate a strategy as I can't really come up with a good one yet and I usually like the analysis he brings to the table.

Unvote No Lynch
Vote The Jackal

[jeheinz72]

Anyone have a count?

And anyone know why we're letting people who haven't even checked in continue to live?

[Lathum]

unvote NoLynch
VOte The Jackyl

I hate no lynch

[st.cronin]

Anyone have a count?

And anyone know why we're letting people who haven't even checked in continue to live?

Who hasn't checked in yet?

[jeheinz72]

Who hasn't checked in yet?

I don't think Qwik has that's why I picked him yesterday before I split (1 post in the thread)

I'm definitely not voting No Lynch, I don't like that option in this game one bit.

But I'd way prefer killing an inactive person and risking a mistake with someone who isn't posting anyways then risking it with someone who might/will contribute.

[hoopsguy]

I would think scanning different people is the way to go, barring one of the knight pairs being particularly intent on getting a scan in on a particular player.

Even if they do want to scan the same guy, there is a 50% chance he is on the other side of the board to start. Potentially it might make sense to flip-flop scans from D1 to D2 - if he isn't close to one of the pair, then he is mathematically more likely to be close to the other one (assuming that the target starts on the same side of the board).

[jeheinz72]

no lynch (5) - path12 (161), Barkeep49 (175), The Jackal (217), Neon Chaos (245), Sonic Youth (253)

The Jackal (4) - claphamsa (179), Narcizo (232), KWhit (275), Lathum (277)

hoopsguy (3) - mccollins (177), PurdueBrad (193), RendeR (197)

KWhit (2) - ntndeacon (226), st.cronin (273)

Qwikshot (1) - jeheinz72 (159)
mccollins (1) - hoopsguy (180)
Barkeep49 (1) - Chief Rum (237)
RendeR (1) - Anxiety (238)

Not voted: Qwikshot, oliegirl

[jeheinz72]

Can someone recap for me the case against Jackal? I know clap's vote was random, Narcizo's was due to his quote on game mechanic but KWhit's and Lathum's votes seem strange to me

I think I get the case against hoops, the whole anti-no-lynch thing. Is that it? I can't say I'd vote there since I tend to agree No Lynch is a bad idea made even worse in this game.

[hoopsguy]

Case on Jackal - appears to be looking for the vote that makes the fewest waves.

Case on me - I'll let someone else give it as I'm a little biased in my interpretation of the facts.

Just as fair warning - I'll look to move my vote (provided I'm around to do it, which isn't a lock) in self-defense if I need to do that. And I'm also willing to reveal my role, if required, to try and ensure that we make a good decision. Hopefully my "chat buddy" will be around in order to vouch for my reveal if I'm put in that position.

[st.cronin]

I think people are voting Jackal because they don't want no-lynch, and are either not crazy about the case against hoopsguy, or would like more than one candidate in play.

[st.cronin]

I just want to say that voting no lynch in this particular game seems incredibly stupid to me.

[Sonic Youth]

Having now read through the thread, phew, this games looks to be involved. It's definitely not going to be a straight forward game. Having two boards is going to make things interesting too. Having lots of people being able to 'see' so far I'm not sure how that's going to pan out. Does that mean they can see anyone in those directions that they can move in? Maybe. It could also mean that they can only see the spaces in the direction they move down. Hmm. Or I could just be thick.

I'm changing my vote to Hoops too, as this then balances teh votes. It'll then be interesting to see how things stay one way or another too after mine.

Unvote No Lynch.
Vote Hoops.

[KWhit]

Can someone recap for me the case against Jackal? I know clap's vote was random, Narcizo's was due to his quote on game mechanic but KWhit's and Lathum's votes seem strange to me

I think I get the case against hoops, the whole anti-no-lynch thing. Is that it? I can't say I'd vote there since I tend to agree No Lynch is a bad idea made even worse in this game.


It's day one. There's no real case for anybody. I don't know why my vote would seem strange to you.

[hoopsguy]

Color me less than thrilled to be the "bait" in a "lets see where they move" gambit. I get the logic, but if Jackal is a wolf then I'm in a nasty spot here between him and "No Lynch".

If Jackal isn't a wolf then we've got two villagers lined up and the wolves are enjoying a very relaxing Day 1.

[Neon_Chaos]

Well, seems like the No Lynch option is gone now. It still makes sense to me that we should have been ableto not kill each other off and played the chess game instead of playing to the wolves' hands.Might as well create a close game. I guess this will force hoops to move his vote.

Unvote No Lynch.
Vote Hoops.

[hoopsguy]

Neon, I'll move it to Jackal because that is the only option available to me.

UNVOTE MCCOLLINS
VOTE JACKAL

[Lathum]

hmmm, SY's vote seems designed to save Jackyl

[jeheinz72]

It's day one. There's no real case for anybody. I don't know why my vote would seem strange to you.

It kinda smells of "well everyone else is going here so I'll just fit in"

[jeheinz72]

The Jackal (5) - claphamsa (179), Narcizo (232), KWhit (275), Lathum (277), hoopsguy (290)

hoopsguy (5) - mccollins (177), PurdueBrad (193), RendeR (197), Sonic Youth (286), Neon Chaos (289)

no lynch (3) - path12 (161), Barkeep49 (175), The Jackal (217)

KWhit (2) - ntndeacon (226), st.cronin (273)

Qwikshot (1) - jeheinz72 (159)
Barkeep49 (1) - Chief Rum (237)
RendeR (1) - Anxiety (238)

Not voted: Qwikshot, oliegirl

[hoopsguy]

Lathum, I'm honestly not sure what to make of the runs we are seeing here. I know that there isn't any good reason for a "wolf-driven" run to save me (I would expect the opposite) but the momentum swung pretty heavily towards Jackal this morning and now it seems to be evening out.

There is lots of time left, but if this was fifteen minutes to deadline I would be guessing that we've got two villagers up for vote and that the wolves are doing their best to stay low profile right now.

[Sonic Youth]

hmmm, SY's vote seems designed to save JackylJust evening out the overall vote, though I easily could have voted Jackyl. No preference this early in the game.

[KWhit]

It kinda smells of "well everyone else is going here so I'll just fit in"

To me it just makes sense that if I'm going to vote for someone, I should vote for one of the two top vote getters. It's dumb to throw a vote away on a third candidate when it's all just guesswork at this point.

[jeheinz72]

To me it just makes sense that if I'm going to vote for someone, I should vote for one of the two top vote getters. It's dumb to throw a vote away on a third candidate when it's all just guesswork at this point.

I'd agree with that, I'm just saying that I worry we're just taking the first two candidates and not the best two candidates, ya know?

[st.cronin]

To me it just makes sense that if I'm going to vote for someone, I should vote for one of the two top vote getters. It's dumb to throw a vote away on a third candidate when it's all just guesswork at this point.

I hate this reasoning. Vote for the guy you want to see get lynched, not somebody that other people want to see get lynched. There's several hours til deadline, we could see all sorts of movement.

[jeheinz72]

I'd have to ask the folks who are just voting for one of the two lead vote getters: "What is your plan come tomorrow when Qwik quite possibly still hasn't checked in?"

Maybe I'm making a mountain out of a molehill here, I dunno, I've just been burned by this in the past and I was so pissed about it that I look for the no-check-in folks.

[path12]

Looks like no lynch is off the table. I'll switch to my default day 1 vote.

UNVOTE NO LYNCH
VOTE QWIKSHOT

[KWhit]

I hate this reasoning.

Oh well.

Vote for the guy you want to see get lynched, not somebody that other people want to see get lynched. There's several hours til deadline, we could see all sorts of movement.

It's day one. It's a total crapshoot. I don't know why that's so hard to understand.

Of the two candidates that are likely to be lynched, I'd rather vote for Jackal. If something drastic happens between now and then, I will change my vote.

[hoopsguy]

Heinz, there are several people who fit the bill as low-content posters in this game. I don't think it is just a Qwikshot issue.

Don't get me wrong - I'm all for alternate candidates. But is Qwik's non-check-in a much bigger issue than NTN's one post vote?

If I'm getting to pick my alternate candidate I would probably go with Sonic Youth right now. One, because Jackal is in position to switch his vote onto me so I'm not going on the war path trying to antagonize a guy that I have no real position on. Two, because Sonic + Neon put me back in the lead, but I feel better about Neon than I do Sonic.

[KWhit]

I'd have to ask the folks who are just voting for one of the two lead vote getters: "What is your plan come tomorrow when Qwik quite possibly still hasn't checked in?"

Maybe I'm making a mountain out of a molehill here, I dunno, I've just been burned by this in the past and I was so pissed about it that I look for the no-check-in folks.


I typically vote for the non-checker-in people also. I'd be happy to go in that direction if there's support for it.

[st.cronin]

I am ok voting for Qwikshot. I may move my vote.

[jeheinz72]

Heinz, there are several people who fit the bill as low-content posters in this game. I don't think it is just a Qwikshot issue.

Don't get me wrong - I'm all for alternate candidates. But is Qwik's non-check-in a much bigger issue than NTN's one post vote?

If I'm getting to pick my alternate candidate I would probably go with Sonic Youth right now. One, because Jackal is in position to switch his vote onto me so I'm not going on the war path trying to antagonize a guy that I have no real position on. Two, because Sonic + Neon put me back in the lead, but I feel better about Neon than I do Sonic.

Well I'm not saying I trust you either there hoops :D

As far as Qwik vs NTN, it may be minute, but I do see a difference. I don't ask for hyper-activity in the game, but someone who doesn't check in over a day plus is a big knock. Plus I see that pace as NTN's regular pace whereas I thought Qwik was more active in the Cruise game and hence I think he's just not paying attention

[hoopsguy]

And not paying attention = wolf? Usually they pay more attention, not less.

[KWhit]

Since Path made a vote and others seem open to getting Quik some votes (therefore I won't just be throwing this vote away)...

Unvote The Jackal
Vote Quikshot

[st.cronin]

KWhit strikes me as trying very hard to make sure his vote doesn't mean anything.

[jeheinz72]

And not paying attention = wolf? Usually they pay more attention, not less.

I've seen it. And it could be from outside forces.

I guess I just look at the non-active people as thus:

- If I'm potentially making a mistake, I'd rather make it on someone who isn't active

- If they are indeed a wolf the longer the game goes (and the more offshoots of ideas that get bounced around) the harder it is for people to go for them since they aren't actually contributing.

Hence I like to take care of them early so it's a worry that is "crossed off" in my mind.

With that said hoops, to put it gently, it may not be in your best interests regarding my vote should Qwik check in. :D

[mccollins]

Since Path made a vote and others seem open to getting Quik some votes (therefore I won't just be throwing this vote away)...

Unvote The Jackal
Vote Quikshot

Can you please explain how your vote on The Jackal would have been a throw away when Jackal was tied for the lead?

[jeheinz72]

hoopsguy (5) - mccollins (177), PurdueBrad (193), RendeR (197), Sonic Youth (286), Neon Chaos (289)

The Jackal (4) - claphamsa (179), Narcizo (232), Lathum (277), hoopsguy (290)

Qwikshot (3) - jeheinz72 (159), path (300), KWhit (307)

no lynch (2) - Barkeep49 (175), The Jackal (217)

KWhit (2) - ntndeacon (226), st.cronin (273)

Barkeep49 (1) - Chief Rum (237)
RendeR (1) - Anxiety (238)

Not voted: Qwikshot, oliegirl

[path12]

Heinz, there are several people who fit the bill as low-content posters in this game. I don't think it is just a Qwikshot issue.

Don't get me wrong - I'm all for alternate candidates. But is Qwik's non-check-in a much bigger issue than NTN's one post vote?


So you're unhappy about a no lynch vote and unhappy about a vote on someone who hasn't checked in? And I presume unhappy on a vote for you.......you sound depressed, hoops. ;)

[path12]

Can you please explain how your vote on The Jackal would have been a throw away when Jackal was tied for the lead?

Solid question right there.

[Barkeep49]

I liked no lynch in this game but I also like voting against those who haven't checked in, even if they're entertaining players.

Unvote no lynch
Vote Qwik

[st.cronin]

I'm also confused about who hoops sees as a good candidate.

[Lathum]

I hate this reasoning. Vote for the guy you want to see get lynched, not somebody that other people want to see get lynched. There's several hours til deadline, we could see all sorts of movement.

KWhit strikes me as trying very hard to make sure his vote doesn't mean anything.

so maybe it's me but Cronin is completely contradicting himself here.

[st.cronin]

How is that a contradiction? I think villagers should vote their convictions, but KWhit has been all over the map, with excuses about why he's voting a certain way that have nothing at all to do with convictions, and everything to do with making sure he has an excuse for voting for somebody.

[KWhit]

Can you please explain how your vote on The Jackal would have been a throw away when Jackal was tied for the lead?

You misunderstand. Did you not read my other previous posts?

My point was that I usually vote for the non-check-in people, but it's getting close to deadline and I originally decided to vote for one of the 2 top vote getters (so I wouldn't be throwing away my vote). So I voted The Jackal. Since then, Path, JeHeinze, and st.cronin have all talked about voting for Qwik and Path actually voted for him.

So my statement was that it looked like a vote for Qwik had a chance to actually mean something and not be a throwaway vote. So I voted for him. I wasn't saying that my vote on Jackal was a throwaway - that's the whole reason I made it in the first place. And I made quite a few statements about that fact.

[Lathum]

How is that a contradiction? I think villagers should vote their convictions, but KWhit has been all over the map, with excuses about why he's voting a certain way that have nothing at all to do with convictions, and everything to do with making sure he has an excuse for voting for somebody.

CONTRADICTOR!!!!

[st.cronin]

Well, I can't argue with that font.

[jeheinz72]

Since then, Path, JeHeinze, and st.cronin have all talked about voting for Qwik and Path actually voted for him.



FYI, I actually voted for him yesterday and haven't moved.

[Lathum]

Well, I can't argue with that font.

INSTIGATOR!!!!

[KWhit]

How is that a contradiction? I think villagers should vote their convictions, but KWhit has been all over the map, with excuses about why he's voting a certain way that have nothing at all to do with convictions, and everything to do with making sure he has an excuse for voting for somebody.

Huh? Excuses? More like explaining my vote(s). That's pretty common practice around here.

It's day 1. I pretty much don't have a read on anything or anybody. I don't particularly CARE where my vote goes today. I just want it to mean something and not throw it away on a candidate that's not in the running.

So when I saw that a Quik vote possibly had some legs, I decided I'd rather my vote be there since he's not contributing AT ALL. How is that strange?

[The Jackal]

OK I think that we need to counter-act the no lynch vote. That leaves me picking between hoops and Jackal. Hoops is giving off a far more believable villager vibe at the moment. (blah blah blah cunning wolf etc etc ad nauseum).



This is probably just an innocent comment but another interpretation is that could potential seen as premptive blame placing for a villager hoops lynch (placing blame with either Render or myself) and adds 5% on my wolfometer. Jackal also seemed to be flip-flopping between a lynch and no-lynch vote, which makes it seem like he's trying to gauge which is the winning horse. I get pretty suspicious of "I'm leaning towards ..." comments on day one.

Vote Jackal

Catching up on the thread, wanted to respond to this before I get lost. I never really flip flopped, I had no intention of keeping my vote on clap. I normally vote no lynch on day 1 when it's allowed, not as a wolfish move, but as a "we don't have much information at all move". I realize the counter-argument is that you don't get information with a no lynch, but there's a lot of useful roles in this game.

[KWhit]

KWhit strikes me as trying very hard to make sure his vote doesn't mean anything.

I don't understand what you're talking about here. I'm trying to do the exact opposite.

[mccollins]

You misunderstand. Did you not read my other previous posts?

Yep, I stay quite up to date.

My point was that I usually vote for the non-check-in people, but it's getting close to deadline and I originally decided to vote for one of the 2 top vote getters (so I wouldn't be throwing away my vote). So I voted The Jackal. Since then, Path, JeHeinze, and st.cronin have all talked about voting for Qwik and Path actually voted for him.

So my statement was that it looked like a vote for Qwik had a chance to actually mean something and not be a throwaway vote. So I voted for him. I wasn't saying that my vote on Jackal was a throwaway - that's the whole reason I made it in the first place. And I made quite a few statements about that fact.

That doesn't change the fact that your vote had meaning when it was holding a tie for a leading vote getter.

By moving it off, it puts hoopsguy in the lead.

My vote is actually on hoops, but you're making me reconsider...

[Passacaglia]

I think the vicodin is having an effect on Lathum.

[jeheinz72]

I think the vicodin is having an effect on Lathum.

Is Lathum on drugs? Don't we lynch people on drugs when they don't talk? :D

[mccollins]

I just want it to mean something and not throw it away on a candidate that's not in the running.

But Jackal was not only in the running, he was in the lead!

[Abe Sargent]

Morning all. Let me get caught up.

[st.cronin]

Is Lathum on drugs? Don't we lynch people on drugs when they don't talk? :D

zing

[Lathum]

I think the vicodin is having an effect on Lathum.

I am so high rite now

[The Jackal]

and first of all

unvote no lynch

[hoopsguy]

I don't consider a guy who hasn't shown up to be the most likely candidate for a wolf. People who get roles of wolves generally play them more intensely than people who get villager roles.

I'm not sure what to make of the votes on Jackal. I'll leave my vote on him over Qwik.

I know what I think of the votes on me and any remaining votes on No Lynch.

I've posted on people I consider good candidates - Sonic Youth and Mccollins. I'm not seeing a whole heck of a lot of support for either of those two, so I'll just make my self-defense move where I need to make it today.

Also, I'm disappointed that I haven't seen the person who can vouch for my reveal in the thread up to this point. He can't clear me of being a wolf, but they can absolutely confirm I'm not bluffing on my role (which would likely be considered more helpful than the average role).

[The Jackal]

Right now I'm going with the inactive person, seems a better bet.

Vote Qwikshot

[hoopsguy]

BTW, does anyone have a current vote count? It is starting to get close enough to deadline that I care a little bit :)

[The Jackal]

Qwikshot (5) - jeheinz72 (159), path12 (300), KWhit (307), Barkeep49 (314), The Jackal (335)
hoopsguy (5) - mccollins (177), PurdueBrad (193), RendeR (197), Sonic Youth (286), Neon Chaos (289)
The Jackal (4) - claphamsa (179), Narcizo (233), KWhit (275), Lathum (277), hoopsguy (290)
KWhit (2) - ntndeacon (226), st.cronin (273)
mccollins (1) - hoopsguy (180)
Barkeep49 (1) - Chief Rum (237)
Render (1) - Anxiety (238)

Not voted: Qwikshot, oliegirl

[The Jackal]

Gotta fix that, hold on.

[st.cronin]

KWhit,

Your first vote was No Lynch. When the anti-No Lynch movement grew strong, you moved your vote to The Jackal, and explained that vote in a way that I translate as: "Because of the vote count, I feel like there is nobody else I could vote for that would be reasonable." I don't think that was an honest assessment of your options, or, if it was an honest assessment, I very strongly disagree with that way of thinking. The village benefits when people vote for WHO THEY ACTUALLY WANT TO SEE GET LYNCHED.

[The Jackal]

Qwikshot (5) - jeheinz72 (159), path12 (300), KWhit (307), Barkeep49 (314), The Jackal (335)
hoopsguy (5) - mccollins (177), PurdueBrad (193), RendeR (197), Sonic Youth (286), Neon Chaos (289)
The Jackal (4) - claphamsa (179), Narcizo (233), KWhit (275), Lathum (277), hoopsguy (290)
KWhit (2) - ntndeacon (226), st.cronin (273)
Barkeep49 (1) - Chief Rum (237)
Render (1) - Anxiety (238)

Not voted: Qwikshot, oliegirl

[The Jackal]

-sigh- I screwed it up again.

[The Jackal]

Qwikshot (5) - jeheinz72 (159), path12 (300), KWhit (307), Barkeep49 (314), The Jackal (335)
hoopsguy (5) - mccollins (177), PurdueBrad (193), RendeR (197), Sonic Youth (286), Neon Chaos (289)
The Jackal (4) - claphamsa (179), Narcizo (233), Lathum (277), hoopsguy (290)
KWhit (2) - ntndeacon (226), st.cronin (273)
Barkeep49 (1) - Chief Rum (237)
Render (1) - Anxiety (238)

Not voted: Qwikshot, oliegirl

If that's not right I give up.

[KWhit]

But Jackal was not only in the running, he was in the lead!


You're clearly not understanding. I'll try again.

I had originally voted No Lynch because I thought the game mechanics would allow us to explore and find out identities of people we saw on the board. Pass clarified and said that's not how it works. So my initial strategy was invalid.

So I decide to change my vote and see two ways to go.

1) Vote for one of the top vote getters to put pressure on them and see what happens.
2) Vote for one of the people who aren't contributing (usually my preferred day 1 vote).

It was starting to get late in the morning and there was no real push for voting for a quiet one so I felt that going in that direction was going to result in a wasted vote. So I didn't go with option 2 (which I really would have preferred slightly).

But later on, that possibility got legs as Path voted for Qwik and st.cronin mentioned he was thinking about it. All of a sudden, option 2 got a chance at actually meaning something. So I decided it was worthwhile to move my vote to Qwik because he'd be in the running for lynch.

So my statement that seems to be giving you such heartburn could be restated as, "Now that voting for Qwik does not seem to be a throw-away vote, I think that I will move my vote to him as I think it makes more sense to vote for someone who is not contributing on day one."

[Lathum]

KWhit,

Your first vote was No Lynch. When the anti-No Lynch movement grew strong, you moved your vote to The Jackal, and explained that vote in a way that I translate as: "Because of the vote count, I feel like there is nobody else I could vote for that would be reasonable." I don't think that was an honest assessment of your options, or, if it was an honest assessment, I very strongly disagree with that way of thinking. The village benefits when people vote for WHO THEY ACTUALLY WANT TO SEE GET LYNCHED.

so he cant change his mind?

[Abe Sargent]

Has oliegirl checkied in? I see she hasn;t voted.

[KWhit]

KWhit,

Your first vote was No Lynch. When the anti-No Lynch movement grew strong, you moved your vote to The Jackal, and explained that vote in a way that I translate as: "Because of the vote count, I feel like there is nobody else I could vote for that would be reasonable." I don't think that was an honest assessment of your options, or, if it was an honest assessment, I very strongly disagree with that way of thinking. The village benefits when people vote for WHO THEY ACTUALLY WANT TO SEE GET LYNCHED.

Thanks. Now I know how you would vote. I appreciate your assistance.

[Qwikshot]

Sheesh, one busy day with migraine and I'm being singled out...

[Abe Sargent]

Heya Qwik!

[Lathum]

Is it bad to mix scotch with Vicoden on an empty stomach?

[mccollins]

Has oliegirl checkied in? I see she hasn;t voted.

Here ya go:

Last check in for the night, I'm going to wait until tomorrow to cast my vote, I'm working at 10:15 so I'll be around in the morning.

Nothing to say right now, been a typical day 1 with no information out there.

[Abe Sargent]

Here ya go:

Thanks buddy.

[The Jackal]

I have a feeling the pawns are going to decide who gets lynched today.

[Qwikshot]

This game has a lot of layers, I'm still trying to understand the rule set.

A) You can move independently to the role you are assigned with
B) The higher more valuable roles know who they are

Kind of like a general locked in his castle hoping his army can follow through till he escapes.

So you can potentially lose the game if the king is lost, but the king being the most valuable role is unknown to most, save for high valued roles, and probably will be that way for the bulk of the game.

Oh, and as an added bonus, there are wolves in the game, out to kill...

Charming...

I got until 3pm to vote.

[Abe Sargent]

Is it bad to mix scotch with Vicoden on an empty stomach?

Not as long as you add some vitamins.

I have expected you to say:



UNMUTUAL

But that's an old Prisoner joke.

[The Jackal]

unvote Qwik

Him checking in and commenting is enough to get me off that vote. Can someone remind me of the case against hoops? I didn't really see any.

[KWhit]

KWhit,

Your first vote was No Lynch. When the anti-No Lynch movement grew strong, you moved your vote to The Jackal, and explained that vote in a way that I translate as: "Because of the vote count, I feel like there is nobody else I could vote for that would be reasonable." I don't think that was an honest assessment of your options, or, if it was an honest assessment, I very strongly disagree with that way of thinking. The village benefits when people vote for WHO THEY ACTUALLY WANT TO SEE GET LYNCHED.

Actually, if I switched to anyone at this point, it would e you or mccollins as you guys seem to be doing anything you can do to discredit my moves, and not listening to my explanations for my logical actions. That just looks like wolves trying to jump on something to sway opinion against someone. I don't think you're both wolves, but it's very conceivable that one of you is.

[st.cronin]

so he cant change his mind?

No, of course he can. I just mean his explanation of why he voted for The Jackal either stinks, or goes completely contrary to what I consider optimal villager play.

[Qwikshot]

As an added bonus, we could be voting off valuable pieces, seems kind of hasty to be finding someone to vote and eliminate because in this game, the bigger goal should be finding the enemy king and eliminating it...so you should know or at least be confident that who you eliminate isn't too valuable.

That's just me...the greater good, the noble deed and the ultimate shot of victory is the vanquishing of the evil king and his army...

[Lathum]

I have a feeling the pawns are going to decide who gets lynched today.

WE ARE ALL PAWNS IN PASS' SICK GAME

[jeheinz72]

Unvote Qwikshot

I'm satisfied now that he's checked in.

Unsure where to look next. I'm thinking from the group of hoops, Jackal, KWhit are the best bets

[The Jackal]

WE ARE ALL PAWNS IN PASS' SICK GAME

Can I have some drugs please? :)

[KWhit]

No, of course he can. I just mean his explanation of why he voted for The Jackal either stinks, or goes completely contrary to what I consider optimal villager play.

We can't all be as perfect as you, I guess.

[The Jackal]

Unvote Qwikshot

I'm satisfied now that he's checked in.

Unsure where to look next. I'm thinking from the group of hoops, Jackal, KWhit are the best bets

All I did was vote no lynch, and since it's been made clear that's an abhorrent option at this point, I removed my vote immediately. I mean when I went to sleep last night everyone seemed fine with no lynch .. I wake up and I'm almost leading the vote count!

I still want to hear what the case against hoops is. I see the case against KWhit is being made by cronin right now.

[Lathum]

We can't all be as perfect as you, I guess.

PWNED

[Lathum]

dola


!

[KWhit]

I see the case against KWhit is being made by cronin right now.

Maybe you can explain it to me, as I still don't get it.

It's BAD to make sure you vote for someone that has a shot at getting lynched? I thought it was bad to throw your vote away (that's usually the consensus in ww games - especially this early in the game).

[KWhit]

I have a feeling the pawns are going to decide who gets lynched today.

Good point. Since we don't know who the pawns are we have no idea of the real vote count right now.

[Abe Sargent]

PWNED

I believe you mean PAWNED - CHESS STYLE!

[KWhit]

I believe you mean PAWNED - CHESS STYLE!

:)

[The Jackal]

Maybe you can explain it to me, as I still don't get it.

It's BAD to make sure you vote for someone that has a shot at getting lynched? I thought it was bad to throw your vote away (that's usually the consensus in ww games - especially this early in the game).

I'm not saying I agreed with the case, just that cronin was making the pitch.

I guess he was perplexed by the timing of the vote and your wording? Donno. Could've been a wolf trying to tack on a vote on me without raising suspicion, or you could just be an innocent that phrased/timed your vote in a way that pinged certain people's wolfdar.

[mccollins]

1) Vote for one of the top vote getters to put pressure on them and see what happens.
2) Vote for one of the people who aren't contributing (usually my preferred day 1 vote).

It was starting to get late in the morning and there was no real push for voting for a quiet one so I felt that going in that direction was going to result in a wasted vote. So I didn't go with option 2 (which I really would have preferred slightly).

But later on, that possibility got legs as Path voted for Qwik and st.cronin mentioned he was thinking about it. All of a sudden, option 2 got a chance at actually meaning something. So I decided it was worthwhile to move my vote to Qwik because he'd be in the running for lynch.

So my statement that seems to be giving you such heartburn could be restated as, "Now that voting for Qwik does not seem to be a throw-away vote, I think that I will move my vote to him as I think it makes more sense to vote for someone who is not contributing on day one."

That makes more sense.

Do you still not understand my original understanding of the plain meaning of your words?

You know, the one where Path agreed that it was a solid point to question?

[hoopsguy]

We've got two hours to try and make a good vote today. However, at this point I'm pretty sure that no matter who bites it that we'll have voting record information that will be of use.

[KWhit]

That makes more sense.

Do you still not understand my original understanding of the plain meaning of your words?

You know, the one where Path agreed that it was a solid point to question?

What does Path know?!

:)

I'm just frustrated at basically being called a stupid player (by cronin) because I don't want to throw away my vote.

[oliegirl]

Finally caught up - damn phones kept ringing at work this morning...

Definitely against a no lynch vote, as I always am. I don't think Hoops being against a no lynch is suspicious at all, I think he's just speaking his mind, and I don't think a tie vote is a good idea in this game b/c we lose both vote getters, which could really cripple the village, especially early on....

VOTE THE JACKAL

[hoopsguy]

KWhit, anyone who has played a couple of games with you knows that you are not a stupid player.

Now, that is a different matter than "are you playing fast and loose with your vote?" which was the same thing that was suggested about Jackal earlier. Which is why I find it pretty ironic that he is now working towards a case for you.

For now, my vote stays where it is at - on Jackal.

[The Jackal]

Finally caught up - damn phones kept ringing at work this morning...

Definitely against a no lynch vote, as I always am. I don't think Hoops being against a no lynch is suspicious at all, I think he's just speaking his mind, and I don't think a tie vote is a good idea in this game b/c we lose both vote getters, which could really cripple the village, especially early on....

VOTE THE JACKAL

Do you realize you just tied the vote?

[st.cronin]

I'm not saying I agreed with the case, just that cronin was making the pitch.

I guess he was perplexed by the timing of the vote and your wording? Donno. Could've been a wolf trying to tack on a vote on me without raising suspicion, or you could just be an innocent that phrased/timed your vote in a way that pinged certain people's wolfdar.

Simplest way to explain it is that I read KWhit's posts as meaning "I'll vote for Jackal but I don't really want to vote for Jackal, but I have to because of the vote count." That might be reasonable 30 minutes to deadline, but at the time it just made no sense whatsoever, and seemed to be maybe a version of "I'll vote for Jackal but I don't actually want him lynched."

[PurdueBrad]

Okay, for anyone STILL at no lynch. Look at it this way:

There are 20 players, 10 on each side. I'll assume 2 wolves per side, that means 12/20 are bad. BUT take this a step further, you (if good), can assume that you are good, making it 12/19. Assuming you are trusting your partner until you have reason not to, you get it to 12 out of 18 being against you, meaning you have a 66.7% chance of hitting somebody bad. I really think it is worth the two-thirds shot to get somebody.

As for the Hoops argument, mine is simple. He is an incredibly skilled and dangerous player and there is only a 33% chance he's on my team. It's worth that risk to me to vote him off. I hate to say that he's so good I want him gone but in this game in particular, he concerns me as he's likely not on my team (since we're NEVER on the same team anyway).

The voting will be interesting given the power of the pawns and the tie-breaker. Come night two and beyond, we can lose people during the game, during votes, and to the wolves, which means TONS of deaths quickly. Chaotic and I'm worried about watching Hoops spin that chaos if he's against me.

But anyway, whoever asked about a case against Hoops, there really isn't one. I just have a healthy fear/respect of his abilities in a game like this.

[hoopsguy]

Vote count?

As it looks right now, I won't be around for the last hour leading up to the deadline. So if I'm under a lot of pressure then I think it makes sense for me to make a reveal a little too early rather than too late.

[st.cronin]

I am definitely not calling KWhit a stupid player.

[The Jackal]

I'm sorry I didn't want to risk outing my king or queen on the first day with no information whatsoever. I don't understand why out of all the people who were on no lynch, I'm the one that was targeted. Is it because clap had a meaningless vote on me in the first place?

[PurdueBrad]

Do you realize you just tied the vote?

We have no idea if it is tied due to the pawns. It could be a landslide for all we know.

[The Jackal]

hoopsguy (5) - mccollins (177), PurdueBrad (193), RendeR (197), Sonic Youth (286), Neon Chaos (289)
The Jackal (5) - claphamsa (179), Narcizo (233), Lathum (277), hoopsguy (290), oliegirl (374)
Qwikshot (3) - path12 (300), KWhit (307), Barkeep49 (314)
KWhit (2) - ntndeacon (226), st.cronin (273)
Barkeep49 (1) - Chief Rum (237)
Render (1) - Anxiety (238)

Not voted: Qwikshot, The Jackal, jeheinz72

[The Jackal]

We have no idea if it is tied due to the pawns. It could be a landslide for all we know.

This is true, but it's just funny that she said she didn't want a tie vote and she ended up tying it. I realize there are 12 extra votes floating around that we're unaware of, but still.

[hoopsguy]

Purdue, there is a better than 33% chance that I'm on your team. It is 50% that I'm on your team (Black/White).

33% only works if you are assuming that your team has no wolves and you have knowledge that there are four wolves. And even then it isn't 33%, but that isn't really the point.

I don't dislike the argument you present, per se, but I think your numbers are wrong and I'm a little bit suspicious of your logic in coming up with them.

[path12]

What does Path know?!

Very little, believe me.

FWIW, I think you've explained your rationale pretty well. Seems like folks are stretching to make cases for people day 1 a little more than usual, I suppose that is due to the pawns having extra vote power.

Now that Qwik has showed up, I'm going back to my original position. I haven't seen a worthwhile case on anybody. I'm sure this will now be looked at with either suspicion or derision, or with a mixture of scotch and Vicodin.

UNVOTE QWIKSHOT
VOTE NO LYNCH

[The Jackal]

I guess I have to do this out of self preservation (possibly irrelevant with pawns), though I see no solid case against him. And I guess his vote -is- on me.

vote hoopsguy

[path12]

As for the Hoops argument, mine is simple. He is an incredibly skilled and dangerous player and there is only a 33% chance he's on my team. It's worth that risk to me to vote him off. I hate to say that he's so good I want him gone but in this game in particular, he concerns me as he's likely not on my team (since we're NEVER on the same team anyway).

hoops drives conversation and analysis. Yes, he's a dangerous wolf, but he's a helluva villager as well. I'll look askance at anyone who votes him off day 1.

[The Jackal]

hoopsguy (6) - mccollins (177), PurdueBrad (193), RendeR (197), Sonic Youth (286), Neon Chaos (289), The Jackal (387)
The Jackal (5) - claphamsa (179), Narcizo (233), Lathum (277), hoopsguy (290), oliegirl (374)
KWhit (2) - ntndeacon (226), st.cronin (273)
Qwikshot (2) - KWhit (307), Barkeep49 (314)
Barkeep49 (1) - Chief Rum (237)
Render (1) - Anxiety (238)
No Lynch (1) - path12 (386)

Not voted: Qwikshot, jeheinz72

[KWhit]

KWhit, anyone who has played a couple of games with you knows that you are not a stupid player.

Now, that is a different matter than "are you playing fast and loose with your vote?" which was the same thing that was suggested about Jackal earlier. Which is why I find it pretty ironic that he is now working towards a case for you.

For now, my vote stays where it is at - on Jackal.

Fast and loose with my vote - I just don't see how or why people can make that claim (I'm not saying you are, just using that phrase as a jumping off point for this thought).

It's day one and I have basically NO feel for who to vote for. At this point, the wolves are most likely just sitting back quietly letting the villagers bash on each other. There's no real argument to vote for anyone at this point, so my vote is a total shot in the dark (as is everyone else's).

My vote will probably change again, as I don't think I will be voting for Qwik now that he's checked in, so there may be more fast-ness and loose-ness coming.

[The Jackal]

FWIW, I'd be open to voting no lynch again. Even though it's apparently what may cost me my life.

[jeheinz72]

What does Path know?!

:)

I'm just frustrated at basically being called a stupid player (by cronin) because I don't want to throw away my vote.

I definitely wouldn't say your stupid (see: Cruise game) but I think your route to getting where you are is a curious one.

[Lathum]

hoops drives conversation and analysis. Yes, he's a dangerous wolf, but he's a helluva villager as well. I'll look askance at anyone who votes him off day 1.

yet you toss your vote on no lynch when you could potentialy save hoops.

burn the candle at both ends much?

[PurdueBrad]

Purdue, there is a better than 33% chance that I'm on your team. It is 50% that I'm on your team (Black/White).

33% only works if you are assuming that your team has no wolves and you have knowledge that there are four wolves. And even then it isn't 33%, but that isn't really the point.

I don't dislike the argument you present, per se, but I think your numbers are wrong and I'm a little bit suspicious of your logic in coming up with them.

I figure in a game of 20, 4 wolves is a safe assumption, meaning each team would have two. And actually no, 33% works if I assume my team does have wolves. 12 (8 black pieces, 2 black wolves, 2 white wolves) out of 20 players. I know my allegiance and am willing to assume my "partner's" for now, making it really 12 out 18 unknown being against me, hence 33%.

[path12]

yet you toss your vote on no lynch when you could potentialy save hoops.

burn the candle at both ends much?

I am infinite, I contain multitudes.

[oliegirl]

Do you realize you just tied the vote?

Yeah - I do now, I thought I was caught up, but when I hit submit, there were 2 more damn pages of posts to read. I'm trying to get caught up now, have 15 minutes before I have to be back on the phones...will move my vote if I need to of course...

[KWhit]

Simplest way to explain it is that I read KWhit's posts as meaning "I'll vote for Jackal but I don't really want to vote for Jackal, but I have to because of the vote count." That might be reasonable 30 minutes to deadline, but at the time it just made no sense whatsoever, and seemed to be maybe a version of "I'll vote for Jackal but I don't actually want him lynched."

That is a gross mischaracterization of what I said.

I said that I had no feel for where to put my vote. Because it's day 1. Big difference.

[Lathum]

I am infinite, I contain multitudes.

ONION

[PurdueBrad]

but I think your numbers are wrong

Actually I'm curious where you think my numbers are wrong. With my statistics background, this is the exact way I've been taught to look at this situation and I had one of our math teachers just look at this as well. So...where am I wrong or are you trying to steer suspicion?

[PurdueBrad]

I figure in a game of 20, 4 wolves is a safe assumption, meaning each team would have two. And actually no, 33% works if I assume my team does have wolves. 12 (8 black pieces, 2 black wolves, 2 white wolves) out of 20 players. I know my allegiance and am willing to assume my "partner's" for now, making it really 12 out 18 unknown being against me, hence 33%.

BTW, this is working under the given assumption that we're generically the white team according to the rules until we hear otherwise.

[KWhit]

I definitely wouldn't say your stupid (see: Cruise game) but I think your route to getting where you are is a curious one.

This is another situation that feeds into my hypothesis that the more you say in a game, the more likely you are to be lynched.

I think I wouldn't have gotten any suspicion had I just posted my vote and kept my mouth shut.

:)

[hoopsguy]

OK - here comes the reveal (pretty sure I need to do it):

I'm a rook and I have a "block wolf attack" option. One of the nine members in the thread right now can vouch for this. FWIW, this person does not have their vote on me right now and I believe they have some level of trust for me based on our Day 1 PM conversations.

So if you lose me to the lynch then there will be one other person out there with this ability, but I do think that my role has a decent amount of value to the team. Also, by revealing I'm putting a bullseye on me in terms of location - so the knights can come scan me to validate I'm not a wolf over the course of the next turn or two.

[oliegirl]

hoopsguy (6) - mccollins (177), PurdueBrad (193), RendeR (197), Sonic Youth (286), Neon Chaos (289), The Jackal (387)
The Jackal (5) - claphamsa (179), Narcizo (233), Lathum (277), hoopsguy (290), oliegirl (374)
KWhit (2) - ntndeacon (226), st.cronin (273)
Qwikshot (2) - KWhit (307), Barkeep49 (314)
Barkeep49 (1) - Chief Rum (237)
Render (1) - Anxiety (238)
No Lynch (1) - path12 (386)

Not voted: Qwikshot, jeheinz72

Looks like this is the current vote count, I really think voting Hoops off at this point is a bad idea. Yes, he is a great wolf - but he is also a great villager, and the fact that he voiced his opinion against a No Lynch is a pretty bad reason to vote him off. No where I can move my vote to help Hoops so for now it's going to stay where it is.

[hoopsguy]

BTW, this is working under the given assumption that we're generically the white team according to the rules until we hear otherwise.

Your rationale with the numbers make more sense now that you spelled them out, although I think counting your chat partner as a lock is probably a mistake.

I was working off of 20 players, not 18. As you have noted, you should clearly be working off at least 19 players.

[KWhit]

Unvote Quikshot
Vote The Jackal

[mccollins]

In the thread at 1:08 pm:

mccollins (http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/member.php?u=6016), Anxiety (http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/member.php?u=1734), hoopsguy (http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/member.php?u=253), jeheinz72 (http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/member.php?u=4761), KWhit (http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/member.php?u=2592), Lathum (http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/member.php?u=1697), Neon_Chaos (http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/member.php?u=3848), oliegirl (http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/member.php?u=3057), path12 (http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/member.php?u=2700), PurdueBrad (http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/member.php?u=5686), Qwikshot (http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/member.php?u=1873), The Jackal (http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/member.php?u=5913)

[Abe Sargent]

I never like voting forthe best players on Day One just because, because it seems like we are doing the wolves work for them.

[The Jackal]

hoopsguy (6) - mccollins (177), PurdueBrad (193), RendeR (197), Sonic Youth (286), Neon Chaos (289), The Jackal (387)
The Jackal (6) - claphamsa (179), Narcizo (233), Lathum (277), hoopsguy (290), oliegirl (374), KWhit (405)
KWhit (2) - ntndeacon (226), st.cronin (273)
Barkeep49 (1) - Chief Rum (237)
Render (1) - Anxiety (238)
Qwikshot (1) - Barkeep49 (314)
No Lynch (1) - path12 (386)

Not voted: Qwikshot, jeheinz72

[oliegirl]

Looks like this is the current vote count, I really think voting Hoops off at this point is a bad idea. Yes, he is a great wolf - but he is also a great villager, and the fact that he voiced his opinion against a No Lynch is a pretty bad reason to vote him off. No where I can move my vote to help Hoops so for now it's going to stay where it is.

Believe in this even more now since Hoops reveal...we must have been typing at the same time. Definitely think we need to do things today:

1. Keep Hoops around at least one more night
2. Make sure a knight scans him and gives their results, we have enough bg's/rooks in this game that anyone who needs to be protected can be.

[The Jackal]

I guess I just have to hope that someday people will say "I don't want Jackal off, he's a good villager".

I have been living to the end of almost every game here so I guess this was inevitable.

[Qwikshot]

OK - here comes the reveal (pretty sure I need to do it):

I'm a rook and I have a "block wolf attack" option. One of the nine members in the thread right now can vouch for this. FWIW, this person does not have their vote on me right now and I believe they have some level of trust for me based on our Day 1 PM conversations.

So if you lose me to the lynch then there will be one other person out there with this ability, but I do think that my role has a decent amount of value to the team. Also, by revealing I'm putting a bullseye on me in terms of location - so the knights can come scan me to validate I'm not a wolf over the course of the next turn or two.

Vote the Jackal (not to be confused with that crappy band Jackyl with a Y

[PurdueBrad]

I am so high rite now

Oooooh, oooooooh, you're the herbalist, aren't you?!?

[jeheinz72]

Vote KWhit

I'm not sure I like the alternatives and something just seems "up" about you KWhit. It's like I get your reasoning, but that reasoning seems retroactively contrived.

[mccollins]

Oooooh, oooooooh, you're the herbalist, aren't you?!?

HA

[Neon_Chaos]

Unvote hoopsguy
Vote The Jackal

[Abe Sargent]

hoopsguy (6) - mccollins (177), PurdueBrad (193), RendeR (197), Sonic Youth (286), Neon Chaos (289), The Jackal (387)
The Jackal (6) - claphamsa (179), Narcizo (233), Lathum (277), hoopsguy (290), oliegirl (374), KWhit (405)
KWhit (2) - ntndeacon (226), st.cronin (273)
Barkeep49 (1) - Chief Rum (237)
Render (1) - Anxiety (238)
Qwikshot (1) - Barkeep49 (314)
No Lynch (1) - path12 (386)

Not voted: Qwikshot, jeheinz72

For future reference, it's RendeR, not Render

[The Jackal]

I understand people are voting for me as an alternative for voting for hoops, but there's honestly no case against me. This is silly.

[mccollins]

I never like voting forthe best players on Day One just because, because it seems like we are doing the wolves work for them.

But we also have an opposing chess team against us.

[jeheinz72]

I guess I just have to hope that someday people will say "I don't want Jackal off, he's a good villager".

I have been living to the end of almost every game here so I guess this was inevitable.

That seems like you're trying to invent a reason to not be voted off. I mean, it's not that I don't think you're a good villager, I do, but this isn't typically something that would be brought up by oneself

Unvote KWhit

Vote Jackal

[hoopsguy]

FWIW, I'm more suspicious of the people who voted for me as a result of the "No Lynch" position than I am of Jackal. That, and the people who were "tying so we can see movement".

On that list:
mccollins, render, sonicyouth, neon

In order, my suspicion right now is:
1.) SonicYouth
2.) Mccollins
3.) RendeR
4.) Neon (the guy in the group I'm not looking to vote for)

Since none of those three have votes I'm not sure what the chances are of getting a move towards one of them, but those are the guys that I felt were positioning me most aggressively to take a fall today.

[PurdueBrad]

Your rationale with the numbers make more sense now that you spelled them out, although I think counting your chat partner as a lock is probably a mistake.

I was working off of 20 players, not 18. As you have noted, you should clearly be working off at least 19 players.

Hoops, appreciate it. Sorry if I came off snippy, having a long day at school. I agree whole-heartedly about my partner, just going for trust until I have reason to believe otherwise, especially since my partner is guaranteed on my team (if I read the rules right) although they still could be a wolf.

Your reveal has me re-thinking strongly although I'll kick myself if we're on opposite teams and I could have voted you out with that power! :p

[The Jackal]

Clap voted for me for no reason. He said it was because i'm his "love sheep".

Narc voted for me because I flip flopped to no lynch from clap, maybe? But my vote on clap was just a joking response. I'd always intended on voting no lynch.

Lathum voted for me for voting no lynch after he voted no lynch himself.

Hoops voted for me out of some self preservation.

Olie voted for me to try and save hoops.

The other three.. because of this reveal.

[claphamsa]

I understand people are voting for me as an alternative for voting for hoops, but there's honestly no case against me. This is silly.


welcome to my wolrd :(

[Abe Sargent]

But we also have an opposing chess team against us.

And that's true, I admit. Every WW game is different. Still, I try to imagine what I would do if I were a wolf. I'd go after the top tier three players (Lathum, BK, hoopsguy) the first few nights, leave one around to draw suspicion (why are you still alive) then hit the good second tier players. (Like Chief Rum or stcronin). That's my general strategy as a wolf. So axing one of the big three on Day One, even with the altered game, just seems like it helps the wolves for sure. Yes, there is a 50/50 chance he has a different color than me, and thus is a sort of enemy, but even the other color is sort of an ally against the wolves.

[hoopsguy]

To be a little more clear, I want Jackal in a showdown today - but I would prefer it is with one or two other candidates. A runaway on him is brutal if he is a villager and doesn't yield maximum information if he is a wolf. The guys I listed in Post #420 are the ones that I would like to see as part of a showdown scenario.

[PurdueBrad]

unvote Hoopsguy

vote St. Cronin

We're all playing a bit aggressive for a day one but none more-so than St. Cronin. This isn't locked in stone, particularly because I'll be the only one here but it's a bit of a ping. I'm looking through Jackal's posts as well as a few others although I think Jackal asked an important question, why him?

[st.cronin]

I'm a second tier player? That cuts.

[Abe Sargent]

I'm a second tier player? That cuts.

;) I consider myself a second tier player as well, if it helps.

[jeheinz72]

I'm a second tier player? That cuts.

If you're a 2nd tier player I'm an Elventy Billionth tier player. ;)

[The Jackal]

I guess I'll reveal as well. I'm a knight. I realize this puts a huge bullseye on me because the wolves will most likely be looking to kill knights quickly, but maybe a rook can save me (if I somehow survive this lynching). My partner knight may or may not be on me, I refuse to divulge that information because it'd make the pool of players the wolves target much smaller.

I'm voting no lynch. Lynch me if you want.

unvote hoops

[b]vote no lynch[b]

I can only hope that some people see some merit in this, and that maybe I have a couple friendly pawns.

[PurdueBrad]

I'm a second tier player? That cuts.

I don't think you are but that earned a vote from me on you, so I guess it's good one way, bad another.

St. Cronin, have you been more 'out there' this day one than usual? If so, why?

[jeheinz72]

I'm so friggin confused right now.

[st.cronin]

;) I consider myself a second tier player as well, if it helps.

It was mock indignation. You have me way overrated.

[The Jackal]

My bad.

vote no lynch

[Qwikshot]

(Puts on Sherlock Holmes cap and puffs from a pipe)

Question 1:

If a player is voted off and he's a pawn, do all his pawns go?

Observation 1:

It is probable that partners could be both villager and wolf.


(more later - puff puff puff)

[PurdueBrad]

Can someone answer this quickly w/o me having to refer to the rules. Can we get a minor victory for beating the wolves and not worrying about the chess game?

[The Jackal]

The Jackal (9) - claphamsa (179), Narcizo (233), Lathum (277), hoopsguy (290), oliegirl (374), KWhit (405), Qwikshot (411), Neon Chaos (415), jeheinz72 (419)
hoopsguy (3) - mccollins (177), RendeR (197), Sonic Youth (286)
KWhit (2) - ntndeacon (226), st.cronin (273)
No Lynch (2) - path12 (386), The Jackal (430)
Barkeep49 (1) - Chief Rum (237)
RendeR (1) - Anxiety (238)
Qwikshot (1) - Barkeep49 (314)
st.cronin (1) - PurdueBrad (426)

[path12]

Oooooh, oooooooh, you're the herbalist, aren't you?!?

:D

[The Jackal]

[quote=Qwikshot;1722188]Question 1:

If a player is voted off and he's a pawn, do all his pawns go?/quote]

Yes.

[PurdueBrad]

Can someone answer this quickly w/o me having to refer to the rules. Can we get a minor victory for beating the wolves and not worrying about the chess game?

NM, found it myself. Doesn't seem like it as it would still come down to the kings.

[The Jackal]

vote no lynch

[PurdueBrad]

:D

Hehe, I knew that you or anyone I was a wolf with would appreciate that!

[The Jackal]

what in the hell, how did that happen

[Qwikshot]

Intersting...

so now there are two reveals...

If The Jackal is a knight, then my suggestion is that he scan hoops this evening and reveal what the scan is...

we may just have two key pieces to start the puzzle...and find out who is who and then who is wolf...

(puff puff)

[Abe Sargent]

(Puts on Sherlock Holmes cap and puffs from a pipe)

Question 1:

If a player is voted off and he's a pawn, do all his pawns go?

Observation 1:

It is probable that partners could be both villager and wolf.


(more later - puff puff puff)

Absolutely. I mean, I trust my partner, and he's cool and all, but I'm still watching for any slip, you know?

[Neon_Chaos]

Can someone answer this quickly w/o me having to refer to the rules. Can we get a minor victory for beating the wolves and not worrying about the chess game?

NO.

Which is why No Lynch was the BEST VOTE. We play the chess game, and let the Wolves figure out who's who, without helping them trim our numbers down.

But nooooooo people wanted to crap on the no lynch vote. Get some information. See voting patterns. No Lynch is stupid.

Well, we now have two reveals on day one.

Whaddya know, we got information afterall.

Unvote Jackal
Vote No Lynch

[The Jackal]

I'll scan hoops, sure. But I'm not going to last until this evening unless people trust me a little here.

[st.cronin]

I don't think you are but that earned a vote from me on you, so I guess it's good one way, bad another.

St. Cronin, have you been more 'out there' this day one than usual? If so, why?

I don't think so. Normally on day 1 I place a vote fairly early for whatever reason (sometimes its random, sometimes its genuine suspicion), and then leave it there regardless of what develops. Usually if I have a role I use my day 1 vote as a way of planning some kind of strategy. I used to be very suspicious of people who changed their vote on day 1, but the werewolf culture on this board tends to lead to multiple unvotes on day 1, so I've gone away from that lately.

By the way I just want to point out that neither reveal rules out those players being wolves - they could be truthful reveals, yet still come from a wolf.

[Abe Sargent]

Now I'm just confused. I need air! I'm leaving for a while. be bak in an hour ro so. I've been here too long.

[Abe Sargent]

Everybody's role revealing, and I'm not sure what that means and all of this stuff, so wow.

[Qwikshot]

unvote the jackal

vote no lynch

[st.cronin]

I'll change my vote to hoopsguy to prevent a no lynch, I mean it.

[path12]

Intersting...

so now there are two reveals...

If The Jackal is a knight, then my suggestion is that he scan hoops this evening and reveal what the scan is...

we may just have two key pieces to start the puzzle...and find out who is who and then who is wolf...

(puff puff)

Assuming they're the same color and he's on the same side of the board that hoops is.

[mccollins]

Can someone answer this quickly w/o me having to refer to the rules. Can we get a minor victory for beating the wolves and not worrying about the chess game?

Nope:

The game ends in one of four ways:

1. If the White King dies, Black wins.
2. If the Black King dies, White wins.
3. If only the two Kings and wolves are alive, the Wolves win.
4. If only the two Kings are alive, the game ends in a stalemate.

[hoopsguy]

I'm fine if all four knights want to scan for me tonight. One of them is going to be right next to me.

It isn't going to get us a wolf out of the chute, it isn't the way that I would prefer everyone act (since I want them to, you know, catch wolves) but I'm not going to tell the knights who to scan.

[Qwikshot]

I'll change my vote to hoopsguy to prevent a no lynch, I mean it.

(puff puff)

Let's assume that hoops is a rook. Rooks rarely can move first night. There are four knights...let's assume then now that hoops has made his claim (and Jackal his) that the knights decide to scan hoops...realize regardless of friendly/unfriendly...knights can scan...knights are adjacent to rooks...

Now I would think in the Jackal's case, this is a fine measure of self preservation as hoops can defend against a wolf attack...so...hoops could protect jackal, jackal scans hoops, both are clear and alive in the morning (heck have the other rook protect hoops then from attack as well)...

Now in the morning, please don't say you'll love me, cos I'll only kick you right out the door....BUT you can have at least a measure of understanding whether hoops is telling the truth, jackal is telling the truth, and you can build off of that...

least that's my measure of thinking...now if hoops is not near jackal, hoops would be near the one of the other three...

so in short (too late)...I think there is something to be learned by this, and allow for a no-vote for this evening...

(puff puff puff)

[hoopsguy]

I'll change my vote to hoopsguy to prevent a no lynch, I mean it.

I'm pretty much of the same opinion, Cronin. No Lynch makes even less sense to me now than it did last night.

[hoopsguy]

I'll change my vote to hoopsguy to prevent a no lynch, I mean it.

I'm pretty much of the same opinion, Cronin. No Lynch makes even less sense to me now than it did last night.

[st.cronin]

(puff puff)

Let's assume that hoops is a rook. Rooks rarely can move first night. There are four knights...let's assume then now that hoops has made his claim (and Jackal his) that the knights decide to scan hoops...realize regardless of friendly/unfriendly...knights can scan...knights are adjacent to rooks...

Now I would think in the Jackal's case, this is a fine measure of self preservation as hoops can defend against a wolf attack...so...hoops could protect jackal, jackal scans hoops, both are clear and alive in the morning (heck have the other rook protect hoops then from attack as well)...

Now in the morning, please don't say you'll love me, cos I'll only kick you right out the door....BUT you can have at least a measure of understanding whether hoops is telling the truth, jackal is telling the truth, and you can build off of that...

least that's my measure of thinking...now if hoops is not near jackal, hoops would be near the one of the other three...

so in short (too late)...I think there is something to be learned by this, and allow for a no-vote for this evening...

(puff puff puff)

I understand. On the other hand, BOTH reveals were made by players who legitimately thought they were going to be lynched today. If hoopsguy is a wolf, he would rather be scanned by a knight who outs him as a wolf on day 2, as opposed to being lynched on day 1. Plus who knows what the knights are going to do.

[jeheinz72]

I'm definitely not going No Lynch. Nuh-uh. I still think it makes little sense.

Whether or not I'm switching from Jackal I don't know. I'm still of the ilk that he could be a knight who is a wolf.

[mccollins]

With people revealing, let's take a step back and think about roles:

2 Kings, 2 Queens
4 Rooks
4 Knights
4 Bishops
4 Pawn-holders

Now, there's no expendable vanilla villagers there. Everyone has a decent power.

If anyone reveals are people just going to pull votes off?

[mccollins]

Based on all the information in the thread, I don't think any 100% case can be made that anyone is a wolf. Thus, any vote is somewhat a stab in the dark.

However, I know that 12 or so people aren't on my team. There's a good chance I'll be lynching someone who is unfriendly to me.

[Lathum]

what did jackyl reveal as?

[The Jackal]

No, and I realize all roles have some use, MC, but only the rook and knight can block and find wolves.

[The Jackal]

Ill be back in a few minutes after I shower. Then I'm gonna be on the subway till the deadline, probably.

[The Jackal]

what did jackyl reveal as?

i'm a knight

[Narcizo]

I'm not liking the total flock from Hoops to Jackal, I have to say. That looks like a landslide to me, and I'm willing to bet there's a wolf moving in there. Leans me towards thinking the Jackal is a villager.

Jackal, this morning I was of the opinion that I was going to be fighting against a no lynch vote. To my mind that left me with the option of voting you or hoopsguy. Despite what st.cronin says I think that often you do have to vote for someone other than your top suspect. However the impression I got made me slightly suspicious of you (as I posted - most suspicious was the "I'm leaning towards" comment, which sounds like someone trying to gauge the consensus for something). Not as suspicious as KWhit, mind, but KWhit didn't seem to be a valid option at the time.

Now with no lynch (hopefully) out of the way and hoops apparently safe with his reveal, which is as it should be as, to my mind he has one of the most important roles in the game - however it's important not to lose sight of the fact that hoops being a bodyguard doesn't actually clear him from being a wolf. I'm also interested in hearing exactly why he would feel his partner has more than average trust for him not being a wolf and vice versa. Can't see any reason why you would trust your partner at this stage.

Anyway

Unvote Jackal
Vote KWhit

I think the way KWhit has been playing and voting is seriously suspicious. Something doesn't sit right with the way he's playing and I'm going to go back and see if I can figure out what the problem is (more than the, in my opinion, good points st.cronin has made.

[Narcizo]

Oh! Right. I'm used to the pace of things on my day time. THings move a bit more quickly around here now. Well Jackal being a knight fits into my scheme of people who should be saved by a reveal so I'm happy to keep a vote on KWhit. (Who, presumably, will now reveal as a queen).

[Barkeep49]

So a knight is far more valuable in the WW game than hoops.

However, in Chess a rook definitely trumps the knight.

Sorta seems like a wash.

[Narcizo]

With people revealing, let's take a step back and think about roles:

2 Kings, 2 Queens
4 Rooks
4 Knights
4 Bishops
4 Pawn-holders

Now, there's no expendable vanilla villagers there. Everyone has a decent power.

If anyone reveals are people just going to pull votes off?

My scale of expendability

Wolf-protection rook
Knights

Queen (? still not sure about this one)

Other rook/pawns/Bishops.

There you go. As I've pointed out everyone has powers but we're only really interested in preserving the powers that have anything to do with the wolves as we've no way of knowing if the other roles are on our side or not. Thinking about it I'd probably put the pawns at the bottom because their vote-distorting power would be very useful for a wolf to have.

[mccollins]

No, and I realize all roles have some use, MC, but only the rook and knight can block and find wolves.

So if someone reveals as a bishop or pawn, they should realize they're not worth saving? ;)

[mccollins]

dola, dang more talk on that subject before I responded.

[hoopsguy]

1. Do we have a vote count?
2. Hi, Alan! Going to join the party at some point? Would love to hear your thoughts (you are in this game, correct?)

[The Jackal]

So if someone reveals as a bishop or pawn, they should realize they're not worth saving? ;)

Not at all, it just matters if you're more interested in winning chess or killing wolves. :)

[The Jackal]

The Jackal (6) - claphamsa (179), Lathum (277), hoopsguy (290), oliegirl (374), KWhit (405), jeheinz72 (419)
No Lynch (4) - path12 (386), The Jackal (430), Neon Chaos (446), Qwikshot (451)
hoopsguy (3) - mccollins (177), RendeR (197), Sonic Youth (286)
KWhit (3) - ntndeacon (226), st.cronin (273), Narcizo (467)
Barkeep49 (1) - Chief Rum (237)
RendeR (1) - Anxiety (238)
Qwikshot (1) - Barkeep49 (314)
st.cronin (1) - PurdueBrad (426)

[The Jackal]

These pawns are like snakes in the grass, it's pretty exciting.

[mccollins]

Not at all, it just matters if you're more interested in winning chess or killing wolves. :)

Well, based on the win conditions, we can only be concerned with both! Just focusing on the chess game could get us all night-killed and just focusing on the wolves could leave us with no realistic way to kill the King.

[st.cronin]

I actually think hoopsguy might be bluffing about being a rook, yet still be not-a-wolf.

[Narcizo]

I just mean that our win conditions are not at all tied to the wolves, so focusing on them more than the chess game seems backwards to me.

I think at that point you try to lynch the players who aren't on your team.

In fact, I'd say that's a good strategy from the start.

As I think about this more, I wonder if I have been making an invalid assumption.


Ok here we go. Both the first two comments sound pretty wolfish to me. Of course the wolves want us to concentrate in the black vs white battle even in the thread because it gives them a free hand here. And then the last one sounds like he's talked it over with someone and then he's backing down and trying to cover his tracks.

I know everyone is allowed to change their mind and can misunderstand things (I'm sure I have as well) but I still think it looks pretty suspicious.

[Narcizo]

Not at all, it just matters if you're more interested in winning chess or killing wolves. :)

Only agree if you have reason to believe that the bishop or pawns are on your side. Otherwise you shouldn't be worried about it one way or the other.

[RendeR]

Wow, I don't even know how to correlate all this right now. my vote on hoops really means nothing, I don't want to move to jackal as that would prety well lock him up, I don't want to vote no lynch either.

I'm going to move to the only viable alternative that MIGHT get us a bit of a runoff vote here at the deadline:

UNVOTE HOOPSGUY
VOTE KWHIT

[Narcizo]

I actually think hoopsguy might be bluffing about being a rook, yet still be not-a-wolf.

That's actually a possibility as there's no way anyone can contradict him, except his PM pal. No matter what hoops has said to that person I'd suggest them come out and say if they know that hoops is lying.

Anyway, looks like I'm going to be turfed off the computer until after deadline. See you all, hopefully.

[oliegirl]

Jackal, why did you wait so long to reveal? Why did you wait until after Hoops revealed?

[The Jackal]

Jackal, why did you wait so long to reveal? Why did you wait until after Hoops revealed?

I didn't wait that long, really. I didn't want to reveal because I'm a huge night-kill target for the wolves, being that I'm one of the four pieces that can identify them. But once it became clear that I was going to be the lynch candidate (I think it was up to 9 votes on me?), I had to do it. Hoops' reveal really just encouraged me that there was no real choice anymore.

[Abe Sargent]

Ah hell. I hadn't expected to stick on RendeR because I voted for him simply because he joked about my home state. But I'll be if I can figure out who is who and what is going on. hoops? Jackal? Now KWhit?

I keep holding off and making a move, hoping that something will come out of the bushes and be a better choice, or give me some info.

Of course, any wolf can role reveal as a piece, so that doesn't matter.

Still, I have no inclination that anyone is a wolf today. Makes my vote on RendeR just bad as moving to hoopsguy or KWhit or The Jackal. Feh. Day One, and I am hoping for a reprieve. I doubt I'm the only one.

[The Jackal]

Clap, why are you still on me? out of all the votes on me, yours is the only one that had no basis, really.

Baa.

There, happy?

[claphamsa]

Clap, why are you still on me? out of all the votes on me, yours is the only one that had no basis, really.

Baa.

There, happy?

im here, and I havent moved becasue i see no probable alternative.. I belive hoops... and I think were better off lynching someone that no lynch. if there is a reasonble alternative then ill move...

[The Jackal]

I have to run, Ive stayed around way too long. I'll be back after my physical therapy to see if I'm still alive.

[Qwikshot]

Ok here we go. Both the first two comments sound pretty wolfish to me. Of course the wolves want us to concentrate in the black vs white battle even in the thread because it gives them a free hand here. And then the last one sounds like he's talked it over with someone and then he's backing down and trying to cover his tracks.

I know everyone is allowed to change their mind and can misunderstand things (I'm sure I have as well) but I still think it looks pretty suspicious.

(puff puff) so the object of the game is to win...I would say this much, if a wolf is partnered as a rook, knight, bishop - then they have an extreme advantage...because not only can they communicate with their partner but also their wolves...and they would know the layout of the board before anyone...that's disconcerting...

[The Jackal]

im here, and I havent moved becasue i see no probable alternative.. I belive hoops... and I think were better off lynching someone that no lynch. if there is a reasonble alternative then ill move...

i guess the only other option really is KWhit since I have no reason to doubt hoops, and I'm certainly not lying

[The Jackal]

and i'm gone

[jeheinz72]

I just can't take the risk of Jackal being good and a seer. This is the only vote that makes much sense to me at this point.

Unvote Jackal
Vote KWhit

[Barkeep49]

2. Hi, Alan! Going to join the party at some point? Would love to hear your thoughts (you are in this game, correct?)
He's not. It was between the two of us to step in and replace ITC.

[oliegirl]

Vote count?

[claphamsa]

unvote jackyl
vote kwit

[claphamsa]

Ill bite now. should be a 6-6 tie.

[claphamsa]

I hoep someone scans jackyl....

[RendeR]

should br 5-5 jackal and kwhit

[jeheinz72]

I hoep someone scans jackyl....

I don't think anyone necessarily can, since he's a knight there isn't one "on his side" this turn.

[RendeR]

err, well I dunno now with all the shuffling.