VOTE NTNDEACON

I don't like the way dubb has acted lately. It seems like one of those things that is going to cause a fight eventually, and I'm afraid he might catch me in it. That is not a game concern, but a personal concern, but I would like to note that the lack of fighting lately has been really nice. That said...sigh, I'm willing to let it go for today, unless he tries to wade into it again.

My concern with ntn is that he has a history of being able to duck pressure for a long time because of the quietness. He can wind up being the kind of UTR player Alan was talking about that gets ignored because of other things or crazy whims. So if I'm not going to vote for the person I really want gone but rather to vote for the person that could cause the most trouble if he was bad, this is where it has to go.

Then we should probably start doing weekend scheduling stuff around Wednesday, to give people time to figure out everything. My main concern in all this is that it just doesn't give people time to react, if you do it Friday morning or such. There's no reason we can't do a better job about scheduling things so people can have more time to pre-plan, so why don't we do it in the future? This entire discussion is unrelated to this game, largely, but something for future reference.

This has been one weird "Day 1" in terms of ebb and flow of conversation.

My strong preference would be to have people involved in the vote run-off today that will be around with an opportunity to defend themselves between now and the deadline. Are there any known people who would not be able to do this today? I saw that Fouts and Lathum had both posted that they may not be back until much later, but that is about all I've seen related to this point. What I don't want to see happen is have someone in position to be lynched (with a key role?) and not have the ability to release information.

Here is one piece of information that I believe I hold - I think I'll be able to identify the seer if/when they come out and reveal the name of their role. I'm positive that there are others in the game who hold meaningful roles that would have a bigger contribution to add than this and I don't want to see us put ourselves in a lousy position because someone is not able to have the option to reveal information when their neck is on the line.

I still don't see the weekend schedule being that much of a problem. If LSG shows up with some story about why she was busy this weekend, everyone that has voted for her will probably pull the votes off. Missing people get placeholder votes which get removed when they show up.

Hoops, do you have a suggestion for people to be in a run-off?

Selfishly, I'm think I would include Coffee Warlord in the run-off mix as someone who cast a 2nd vote for me when I know I'm a good guy.

But no, I don't have strong feelings on who to vote for on Day 1. There is a lot of information out there - particularly in the Dubb vs the World stuff from earlier - but I don't feel like I have enough context yet to evaluate it properly.

We could throw you and CW up there. :)

To be honest, I didn't realize you already had a vote on you.

Tyrith, you have repeatedly stated that the thing you were most upset about is how Dubb was acting, and you had gone as far to say it wasn't good for the game, etc. I went back through and looked at all of his posts to try to figure which part was the really bad part that has you so upset you want to vote dubb...

All I could find was a very agressive day one play. Something that many people have done before for various reasons. Most of the times it wasn't him even striking out at someone, but instead retaliating to someone's accusations or vote in a very agressive manner.

I've already stated that I really don't get DUbb's reveal early on or the way he is using it, but can you point out the post that you felt was really over the line or where it was anything more than just agressive play? I didn't see anything close to the huge blowups we used to have that you referred to.

Just asking for you to point it out since I obviously have missed it, and it would help me be able to see things from your perspective better. Right now your arguement has felt a bit weird to me otherwise.

Tyrith's reasoning on ntndeacon is strong. He definately is the type of player who can slide-by UTR for a long long time for no real good reason that anyone can explain.

I'm open to moving this vote if we can force a duel with another vote, but at this point

VOTE NTNDEACON

This day's analysis has been almost as useless as most Day one analysis.

There's a shocker. :)

True, true;)

UNVOTE COFFEE WARLORD

VOTE FOUTS

The snafu regarding the start thing is what does him in for me. Good enough for a Day 1 Lynch.

Like AlanT said, I enjoy the weekend play but I also don't have kids etc... To me it's a double edged sword. The game becomes stagnant over the weekend but I think it's kind of crappy to hold it against someone if they aren't around.


I also think post count is the most over rated indicator in werewolf.

Since you are here enough to pile on the fouts vote, any comment regarding the question I asked you earlier this weekend?

And i voted for you becuase i hate you :)

;)

Actually, i think that was the game after the ninja game..so we both know why i voted you that game(if my memory serves me)

Something odd, if you asked me who stylistically was most similiar to ntndeacon, I would answer ... Tyrith.

lmao

dola-
the above exchange betwen Alan and Blade is the reason I think post counts are BS

I think it was more recent than that, but for the life of me don't remember which game it was though. I think you had just honestly missed where I said I was going to be gone. Later on you moved your vote off me anyways :)

tyrith seems a bit more talkative than ntndeacon to me. but just in terms of their style of play/the way they react to things, I'd agree.

Post counts give you an idea, then you have to move to content. If a person has 3 posts(LSG) and a person had 25 posts(a few of us do), there is clearly a difference there. Even if you throw out all the non-serious posts, there is a drastic difference. So while they arent 100%, they provide an idea. And coupled with content provide a solid foundation for investigation

I must have been stupid, as according to you i cant do anything in WW but go after you. All day long, Alan Alan Alan Alan Alan

Thats not quite how I usually put it, but I'll wait till our normal day 3 fun :) I definitly lost last game though as you took advantage of the many mistakes I made in my defense :)

Are we still thinking we want to provoke a duel with this vote?

You have to admit, in my shoes with the info/role i had, you would have done the same thing after all the mistakes you made. I laid a mouse trap, and you were like "YUMMY CHEESE!!!!." It didnt catch a mouse, but thats not my fault.

By the way, i didnt know we were winning and losing...do you have a count? I need to catch up prob.

I think dubb can't play without being mean. To be fair, some of this is anxiety from the way he treated Chief after his game. But his "very aggressive manner" is something I have seen turn into very, VERY nasty and personal problems latter. It's not a style of play that ever makes things more fun. There are ways to be quite aggressive in play without taking it to that kind of a level. For better or worse, his past comes into play here -- as it has with blade, fouts, all the people that have gotten into these kinds of messes. If I see signs that they're reverting into that kind of behavior I want them gone, because I fully know I can be dragged down into it.

I think it would be a good idea. If we don't have a clear target (which we probably won't on day 1), we will get a good look at the dueling mechanics. That could be helpful in the future.

Nah, don't have a count, but I think last game was one of the only times one of us actually got the other lynched directly. Usually everyone just ignores us :)

A bit more talkative than ntn is a bit of an understatement, don't you think? ;) As the wheels in my head keep on turning...

I knew the game had started at one time, but I had forgotten it was active already since I was away from the computer most of this weekend. Believe me, if I was playing a bad guy I would be involved.

If it is ok with you to kill a plain villager role, then it is ok with me.

I am going back to review all the posts in this thread by the people voting for me - Chief Rum, Alan, Jonathan and Izulde.

Id like to see a duel, so i know what to expect and how it will be handled. As well, we can learn the role of one and get a gauge on the others abilities with the sword(which i think the muskateers will all be quite proficient at)

maybe i missed something but I don't recall Dubb ever being nasty. Maybe a bit irritating but never "mean"

I haven't really seen much "analysis" going on. More just discussion about the philosophy we can take and mindless complaining (mostly mine) :)

Well my comment is probably more OOG than In game here, but to me it feels like your issues are mostly out of game about him. Or at least in regards to this current game its nothing thats happened so far this game.

I personally feel a bit bad for Chief because of last game. Hosting a game is a ton of work, and he put alot of effort into it, but i respect that everyone will have their opinions on things. I guess I don't have a good solution for you, but I would suggest trying to not let it affect your play this game.

There is always a possibility that you and him might end up being important allies that have to work together to catch the last wolf, and if you create a scenerio here where when he returns he goes very very defensive in regards to the things you said it might make things very difficult to work together and possibly very un-fun.

I think he was mean after last game towards the GM, chief...tyrith stated, much like i did at the time, it upset us how he attacked the GM unjustly...i think tyrith is still mad about it, then coupled with the fact he is the top lynchee in the small game right now. He completely missed yesterday, wasnt on the board once. So missed the vote, and then the wolves didnt kill anyone(and we have one wolf left). So i think its a combination of the two, and explains his attacks on dubb and against people using activity

(4) Fouts - ChiefRum (194), Alan (261), Jonathan (264), Izulde (314)
(2) Lonestargirl - St.cronin (195), Blade (273)
(2) Dubb - Barkeep (120), Lathum (160)
(2) Ntndeacon - Tyrith (301), DaddyTorgo (310)
(1) Hoopsguy - Coffee Warlord (271)
(1) Lathum - Dubb (170)
(1) BrianD - Ntndeacon (165)
(1) St.cronin - Anxiety (209)
(1) Chief Rum - Fouts (254)

Have I missed anybody? So, let's talk about who we want dueling. Dubb might not be a bad choice.

your vote count looks the same as mine currently Cronin.

I haven't liked this logic. If you see someone highly skilled with a sword win a duel, you're setting it up so you can paint them as a wolf regardless. What's to stop a muskateer from being average with a sword but an expert marksman? Also, I'm not really sure what information people are trying to seek from "the duel mechanics". It's possible that the way the duel is written to us will spill all the cards. It's more likely that if there is some RNG stuff going on we won't get to find out about it, and we'll just have a day one duel that will be mostly random contestants, with a slightly greater probability of the better skilled player being a wolf because they will be able to put their most proficient player out as the challenger, and not cross their wires.

That said, if someone challenges me I'll blast their eyes out.

We could also let Dubb and Tryith go at it and end their argument. I don't know why, but I am anxious to see a duel. :)

I agree with Tyrith, I don't think ability with a sword correlates with being a mouseketeer.

Not sure you understand...we mean a duel from having no majority. If no majority, the top two vote getters duel.

We dont mean from a challenge...that way we select, not the wolves, who duels

Oh, that's an idea.
:D

Dude, I don't fricking CARE about Small Game 3. That's a case where you CAN use post counts. I've said that before. I care about the last game, about the WW history of nasty confrontations involving certain people, and about people using faulty logic to back their votes. Voting for Fouts, BrianD, et al isn't voting for UTR people. If we're going to call it something, we should be honest with ourselves. I'm not going to stick to the box.

I disagree...in every story ive read about them, they were swordsman. The cardinals guard had marksmen, but the musketeers were swordsman. I, rightly or wrongly, expect the game to follow suite.

Much like i expect there to be 3 musketeers, and possibly 4 with dartanion (or whatever is name is)

I'll take a slightly different position here - I'm guessing that the muskateers will probably be at least middle of the pack, if not better, at dueling than the guards. But winning a duel, and showing competency in swordsmanship, is probably not going to be indicative of being a muskateer.

What I do think happens if someone shows particular proficiency in a duel is that person will be investigated by whatever seer role exists in the game early. That would only seem to make sense to me, as we would want to know if we should push for a majority vote on them - thus removing the duel aspect from end of day votes (hope I'm recalling the rules correctly).

Oh, well, I'm a doofus again. Sigh, now you all can lay some more insults into me :P

Yeah, I suppose that wouldn't be the worst idea ever.