It is, if we lynch the guy you have your vote on.

In addition, if RendeR is the one who is lynched, Hoops moves to 2nd Officer, does that aid him in any way (or does Telle also moving up aid him, she does have about a 20% shot at being infected)?

I think in Spawn 2 we started with 2 spawn. There are a lot of conversions in this ruleset unfortunately.

And the issue isn't are there 2 or 3. It's the fact that you were using 4 (which BK's post said was completely incorrect) in your calculations to indicate that we should lynch an engineer tonight. Now is not the time to lynch an engineer. How can you not see that?

Okay, here is my change.

unvote no lynch

vote Hoopsguy

Primarily for these two reasons:

1- A no lynch vote is starting to feel like a place where the spawn can hang out and say, "Well I didn't vote to lynch so-and-so" in the instances where we are wrong and I don't want to be left in that group.

2- I am curious by Hoops trying to turn the vote on first the engineers and then on the officers. In one sense, maybe he was trying to address the hard issue that we'll have to confront eventually but on the other hand, it was a bit strong and fairly cavalier in that there was little discussion of how strong the negative consequences could be if we're wrong.

KWhit, you are about as right on this one as you were on your Lathum strategy last game.

Look at my signature! I pretty passionately believe that a lynch is the right option every game. So don't give me "prevailing wisdom" ... that argument has zero bearing on me as good/evil in any given game. In fact, I'm kind of proud going against the prevailing wisdom when it is wrong.

Very clear post = hmm, you say it is two? Is that how clear it is? I maintain it is a big mistake to assume you understand the intent of the moderator. I think 4 is consideraly more likely than 2, no matter what the first post said.

Officers - my earlier argument "against Engineers" was about giving a free pass to four players because they are important for a day. The goal is catching spawn, right? That is mine, and that is why I agreed with the idea that taking a hard look at officers (especially with two cleared) was the better move. I know I should be scanned.

Do you not understand my point that the duplicant does not have to scan Path for us to get value out of his scans, at least for part of the game?

I have to leave soon, so I'll be leaving my vote where it is. I encourage you guys to think it through, but Hoops is as good a lynch target as any tonight.

Wrong, I would assume 2nd officer. And, I might argue, make more decisive decisions rather than 1/2 training people. But no reason to go off on that tangent now ....

The guy in your sig is an idiot. Trust me.

If Hoops is lynched, he has some pretty strong abilities. Does somebody move up in the ranks or do we have to train them or do we just lose that position?

I've been fairly on the ball with everything that has happened thus far except for this. Exactly what happened with the half-training, if somebody doesn't mind explaining it to me.

Look at my vote! I never voted for an engineer. I strongly suspect one, but I did listen to the group rather than going commando on the vote. I also pointed out in the posts that the argument was about excluding a gruop of four from review/consideration.

And the issue is 2, 3, and 4 since you say the post was "very clear". Obviously not, if you are arguing that there are two. There are a ton of roles on both sides, so the conversion stuff should be balanced out by all the special powers we have as villagers. You argued the same thing (I'm pretty sure it was you) when you said that we shouldn't lynch on Day 1!!!

You should be proud of me. I changed my vote away from No Lynch.

:)

I don't KNOW that you're a spawn. I have no idea. But you are by far the most compelling choice I have tonight because of the reasons I laid out. I could be wrong (in fact, I probably am since the odds of any one person being a spawn are pretty low), but your actions look more suspicious than anyone else.

What does the 2nd officer have to do with it? Not to fill in blanks for you, but are you suggesting he can train someone? Or assign a trainer? I don't see that in the rules.

I'm as good a lynch target as any other villager, I guess. Except that I can guard/spy and have a phaser. And that I actually bother to, you know, try to think through the ruleset in a way that helps win rather than just following the tide.

But other than that, you are 100% correct.

I'm confused, you said that we lose out on an ability if we lynch RendeR?

Once again....

I am saying that "it is very clear" that the original number of Spawn WAS NOT FOUR. You continuing to misrepresent my argument to benefit yourself only makes me more confident in my vote.

But I still love you.

Second officer definitely has impact on personnel. Of course, Path would have you believe I don't understand the rules:banghead:

I'm off to get ready for softball. I'll try to check in quickly in about ten minutes (which likely means 4 more pages of stuff) before I go.

I am waiting to put in my night action until I see if something important got damaged by slaves today. IF nothing was, then I will be working on the engines, likely with my chief engineer.

What you mean and what you post may be two separate things. But if you end up getting me lynched over this you are going to look back on it and say, "Boy, that really was a pretty stupid reason to suspect Hoops"

I always enjoy and respect your analysis and your play. Which is why I continue to be amazed that you are arguing against the validity of this statement by our game-master:


Not sure why you continue to argue this.

Do we want to consider having RendeR (second officer) using, as a day action, the reassign to try and get us one more engineer (although I guess we've picked up claph) or maybe one more security person? I know that means we sacrifice one of another position but it may be worth it.

Ditto. I don't see why hoops continues to insist that it's in any way plausible that we started with 4 Spawn.

Will it make you better if I say there are more likely to be 3 than 4? I do feel that is the case, in part because of that post.

But I don't buy at all that the game started 21-2.

I don't think we need another engineer with clap on board.

What makes you think that BK would intentionally misrepresent the # of starting spawn?

True, although security might be important, particularly if we do end up casting off Hoops.

Look, I don't get to pick and choose how people analyze the thread and make their decisions. I get that. However, at the completion of this post I'll have 128 posts in the thread. A lot of them have a good amount of content that you can either trust or distrust.

The idea that people are obsessing over me suggesting a 19-4 ratio in a game is mind boggling to me. I'm done responding to it because I'm getting closer to name-calling than I want to in an online forum where I legitimately like most of the people, including those who are fixating on this point.

Done, as of stuff after Post #1467.

What makes you think that BK would telegraph the # of starting spawn?

But you're not listening to what we're saying. It's not that a 19-4 ratio would be unfair, it's that the moderator seemingly went out of his way to mention there are no more than 3, yet you choose to fly in the face of that.

I'm ready to drop it, but you have to admit that our POV on this should hardly be that shocking.

Because my idea on moderators is that almost unfailingly they aim to make the game fair. Goodies/Baddies/Third Factions, I think almost every GM wants to see each side have a balanced shot at a win. I think a rather large part of that is not intentionally misrepresenting facts to a faction to give another an advantage.

Now if BK hadn't mentioned the starting spawn count at all, we wouldn't be having this discussion. But he did, and in a way that made it hard not to notice.

But anyhow, I won't pepper you on this fact again, I just think it strange that you seem so appalled that a great many of us think you are completely baseless in thinking there are more than 3 spawn.

And with that, I'm out, at least for a few hours, possibly until tomorrow AM.

I'm stunned that this is the rationale to vote for me today. If you vote for me because I distrust you, that I get. I don't get the rest of them, however. Particularly Path who has had a chat with me and the option to scan me every day.

And with that, I'm out for a little while to hang out with my kid until she goes to sleep. Probably 1.5 hours, give or take.

FTR, this isn't the main reason for me.

When innocent, I'm inherently suspicious of those that suspect me. Probably not the wisest tact, but when they come at me with very little (especially the multiple times before Danny said anything) I tend to think I'm being set up. A Spawn setting up an Engineer isn't a bad theory at all.

That and you've made enough minor misnomers and strange posts for it to be go time.

Ok so basically you're assuming that one of the officers MUST be a spawn and simply voting for one of the two of us not yet cleared? Correct? I just want to be clear on what you think you have against me here.

Pure guesswork. Cool.


This is my own reasoning from day 1. Scientists can be replaced and aren't needed to give orders or use actions etc etc etc at this point in the game.


Bleh. No understanding of why suddenly I'm getting flak. I'm just doing my frakin' job.

I'll vote later on, I want to see what comes of all this.

I'm going in the pool for a bit, so i will be back a littler later as well.

Dinner is on it's way, so I'm out for a little while...I'll be back about 9ish and then likely out til after deadline/tomorrow morning.

I plan on sleeping tonight if at all possible, I'm exhausted and don't want to end up shooting the wrong person in my foggy brained haze ;) If you'd rather I spy/guard someone, speak up in the next 10 minutes or so please...

i was sleeping, and oliegirl spied on me to prove it...i didnt guard because the security system was on when i put my action in

as for those voting for me, do you really think the spawn slept last night?

RendeR, I would argue that mapping out probability with "known" facts (3 of 5, when I include myself, are not spawn) is much further from guessword than a lot of others have done up to this point.

If you are coming at this as a good guy, then I would expect you to find my thought process sound, if not be pleased with the conclusion.

wow...you thought that was "quite hard"...that was a love tap in WW terms...i actually had reasons (been off the ship, exhausted, supported killing the slaves, suggested sending new people off the ship, and was the only injured person trying to use it as an excuse to to take an action today)

Starting with the last vote count post from PF, this is what I show for the votes as of Post #1481:

PackerFanatic (6) - (1090), Tyrith (1129), saldana (1136), Marc Vaughan (1153), The Jackal (1201), Schmidty (1371), Olie (1410)
hoopsguy (5) - jeheniz72 (1219), path (1414), KWhit (1431), Danny (1434), Purdue (1444)
saldana (2) - mccollins (1226), PackerFanatic (1358)
jeheniz72 (1) - claphamsa (805)
claphamsa (1) - Telle (1028)
Render (1) Hoops (1384)

No lynch (3) - Mrs. Schmidty (957), Passacaglia (1206), bulletsponge (1277)

No votes:
Alan T
Render
Telle
LoneStarGirl
Chubby

PackerFanatic will move his vote to me and I'll move mine to him. Then he will be one vote away from the minimum and I'll be two away from the minimum for getting voted off.

As my published trust list shows, there are quite a few people I trust less than PackerFanatic. I'm not 100% sure what to make of the run on me in terms of assessing him, but I guess it makes me feel a smidge better than I would otherwise in voting for him. I still think it is much more likely to be villager/villager here.

OK, kid is done with dinner so I'm out for another hour or so. I'll definitely be around for deadline.

bold is mine...i remember the star wars game, when i put in my opening post that it would be "a pretty basic game of werewolf", and then sat back and cringed everytime someone said "oh, well Sal said it was a basic game, so it couldnt have xxxxx mechanic in it"...that and watching people try to read into Lightsaber colors that were utterly meaningless... i have to agree with hoops on this one

also, i was in the Spawn I game when we had the fake scan...it is absolutely a valid suspicion...no way i am holding that against hoops.

i am much more inclinded to lean toward supporting him against render...i really didnt like his attempted ingratiation towards hoops yesterday

I'm also not set in my vote for Hoops specifically. I did want to see more than one person on the block though, so I am happy for that.

Spoken like a true spin master, however you're defending something I'm not attacking. I am attacking your presumption that there MUST be a spawn among the officers. I'm simply saying you have no way to know that, you're assuming it. You may well be right, but you're still guessing, pulling something out of your ass.

My next question has to be why? Why try to deflect the execution away from packer and onto me? You have no real reasoning outside of your assumption that there MUST be a spawn in the command group.

So why don't you explain it to us? Convince me that you have something other than gut instinct and a guess at what the GM would do to go on?



On another note: I can train privates to become Officers, it takes 2 days. I started to train Chubby on day 1, I then saw that we needed a second medic and assigned Bulletsponge to be a medic today. Tomorrow I will complete Chubby's training and on day 4 he will be available as a new Ensign.

Anyone else have questoins for me? I'll give you whatever I have.

Excuse me? what attempted...what? What did I do yesterday? I don't recall saying much of anything about or to Hoops yesterday?

PackerFanatic (6) - (1090), Tyrith (1129), saldana (1136), Marc Vaughan (1153), The Jackal (1201), Schmidty (1371), Olie (1410)
hoopsguy (5) - jeheniz72 (1219), path (1414), KWhit (1431), Danny (1434), Purdue (1444)

in all my games of werewolf, i dont think i have ever seen a run on a player in that short of span unless it was supported by a positive seer scan...especially a player of hoops' reputation.

you asked him to essentially tell you who to vote for when he was resisting the no lynch idea...it felt very much to me like you were trying to align yourself with him by following his lead, regardless of what it was.

This is very compelling...but I dont know if it sounds like hoops the spawn